Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 8/27/25: Trump Floats Nationalizing War Machine, Alex Jones Dire Trump Health Warning, Charlamagne Calls Jeffries 'AIPAC Shakur', PBD Bibi Interview

Episode Date: August 27, 2025

Ryan and Emily discuss Trump floats Lockheed Martin buy, Alex Jones dire warning on Trump health, Charlamagne calls Jeffries 'AIPAC Shakur', PBD cozy Bibi interview.   To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.comMerch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. Hello, it's Danielle Fischel. Rider Strong. And Will Ferdell from PodMeets World. We are back in Las Vegas and giving the people what they want. A full week of Y2K content. Tell me why. Well, for the Backstreet Boys residency, it's fear, of course.

We joke and say this is our second marriage. But it takes a lot of communication. Plus, it's carrot top, baby. And finally, Ashley Simpson-Ross joins us to talk about her upcoming sold-out Vegas residency. Listen to PodMeets World on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. December 29th, 1975, LaGuardia Airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage, kids gripping their new Christmas toys.

Then everything changed. There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal. Just a chaotic, chaotic scene. In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged, terrorism. Listen to the new season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, I'm Jay Shetty, and I'm the host of the on-purpose podcast, and today I'm joined by one of the greatest athletes of all time, Novak Djokovic.

He's won 14 grand slams in a glittering career. Novak Djokovic! you reach your 30, you start counting your days to your retirement. I'm 38 this year. How long can I push my own limits? Listen to On Purpose with Jay Shetty on the IHart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here. Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show. This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.

So if that is something that's important to you, please go to breakingpoints.com, become a member today, and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad-free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox. We need your help to build the future of independent news media,

and we hope to see you at breakingpoints.com. Good morning and welcome to Breaking Points. Emily, how you doing? Good, we've got two of the most famous tailors to cover on the show today. That's right. Taylor Lorenz and the other one. That's Swift.

Taylor Swift. That's right. We were going to lead the show, of course, with the biggest news in the country, which is that Cracker Barrel is going back to its original logo. And they called the White House. And called the White House. And we're all happy about this, right? This is a big win for the country. It's a big win for me, personally.

I prefer the old Cracker Barrel, but I'm not sure that it warranted the president's attention. But then that got pushed aside because bigger news. Yeah, you can't waste oxygen on Crackerboro when Taylor Swift is getting engaged. Yeah. In all honesty, we have a massive show today. If you look at the bottom bar and you're watching this, yes, that is accurate. We have that many blocks to get through. We did sort of twist producer Griffin's arm to let us talk about the Taylor Swift engagement because Ryan was checking his DMs last night and the people were demanding. People want to know what Emily thinks about Taylor Swift. And your background is in like culture and how this is supposed to be. important stuff and tells us things about things. Oh, I've spilled a lot of... So what's your take here? We've got to get to Charlie Kirk.

Do you want to do that first? Well, let's get through the intro to the show. Oh, okay. People can just guess. It's basically the same show that we do every day. That's true. Howard Lutnik, back on the circuit, talking about China, talking about university and university grants, research grants, all of that.

And that comes on the heels of the Fed. He's talking about Intel, very uncertain economic climate, to say the least. So we'll get into updates on that. We're going to talk a little bit about Alex Jones, thinking Donald Trump is in a seriously bad state health-wise. And you know what? It's important to know what Alex Jones thinks here. It's important to know what Alex Jones thinks. But Trump obviously has been visibly bruised, and so we're going to break all of the information that we have on that down.

Ryan, we're talking about Wesley Bell and Israel's influence in her. American politics. We have a new nickname for Hakeem Jeffries from Charlemagne. Oh, boy. Called him A-Pak Shakur. A-Pak Shakur. That's one's going to leave a mark. It hurts. It auto-corrected from producer Griffin to A-Pak Shakura, which I thought was pretty good to. Apak Shakur is just brutal. That is brutal. And, Ryan, you're also walking us through somebody reporting on money. Yes, in Maine. So Graham Platner will be here tomorrow. He's the now Bernie endorsed working class. Oisterman running for Senate in Maine in the Democratic primary, there is an existing candidate in

that race who has already raised $2 million. I'm going to help you figure out how it is he raised $2 million this quickly. It's quite an incredible story. Yeah, I'm looking forward to that. And then Taylor Lorenz will be with us for, I think, what's definitely going to be a debate about cell phones in high schools. It's back to school season. So a lot of kids have new cell phone bands or yonder patches that they're walking into school with this year but other people like your kids are used to it at this point right well what when my daughter found out that i would be arguing for the ban on phones in schools she basically wanted to disown me she just what's wrong with yeah which is like you're going to get death threats it's a good argument i was like that that this is going to be the

thing yeah yeah of all of the things she's like genuinely worried now it wasn't before now she's like, wow, okay. But once again, that is an argument in... She's not helping me out if it comes to it. You're on your own. Yeah. And Ryan, you have some new reporting on Serbia that we're going to be sharing with the audience as well. Yeah, some drop site report from on the ground there. And as a reminder, breakingpoints.com, that's where you can go to get a subscription. We also want to make sure we give a shout out to intern MJ, who's been super helpful and just we're very grateful to MJ for all of her help.

Intern, MJ, she's been helping out DropSite as well. So it's, it helps to, like, get the drop site reporting that we've been doing and kind of help, help fuel the reporting of the program here. Yeah, no, the original reporting is, yeah, it's super helpful. So thank you, MJ. Now, without further ado, let's get into the celebration, the nationwide celebration over the Taylor Swift, Travis Kelsey engagement. And the first question that people had for you was, will Blake lively be invited to the Taylor Swift Trevor Kelsey Wally?

We all know the answer to that and it's absolutely not. Barring some unforeseen reconciliation, Blake Lively will not be at that wedding. Now, the Blake Lively story, if you haven't been following the Taylor Swift-Blake-Lively feud, it's actually a very interesting story

of how tabloid reporters are used to manipulate narratives and how those can have sweeping little... You can't trust tabloid reporters is now? You can't trust the tabloids. Who can you trust? You can't trust Blake lively either. Can't trust Blake. And that's hard. That's hard for people to wrap their heads around. Can't trust Blake lively, apparently. But anyway, it's an interesting story of how celebrities can weaponize the media to protect their bottom lines or pad their bottom lines. But Taylor Swift,

America's sweetheart, I usually say that sarcastically. I think it's probably accurate in this case. She's upset some men by showing up at NFL games. But Ryan, you've been okay with it. Any guys that are upset about that are fooling themselves. I will say when she first started going to the Chiefs games, they cut away to her so much that it did become laughable. That's on the NFL. It was pretty fun. Yeah, it was not Taylor's fault.

If I went to a game and they cut away to me every like five seconds, people would rightly be upset, but not at me. Yeah. That's not my fault. It's too magnetic. You're too magnetic. Now, most people were busy. I'm telling you Instagram last night.

I am in Taylor Swift's like Target demographic. came out when I was a teenager, all of that. Like, she was huge when I was a teenager. Her music was her coming out when I was a teenager. And my Instagram last night was full of people who genuinely were reposting this Instagram, like it was one of their friends who had just gotten engaged. It was like, I'm clicking through it. And, like, another tale, another tale.

It was just like everyone's best friend. People have been rooting for her. They've been rooting for her for, like, it's like if the Dallas Cowboys made it to the Super Bowl. But ruining for him for decades. I mean, I wouldn't be rooting for them, but, yeah, I was going to say, you're an Eagles fan. But that's, but that's how miserable her experience has been. She's basically been the Dallas Cowboys of dating.

Well, so this is where it gets, this is where the conversation becomes political in a way. And I've written a ton about Taylor Swift over the years, but most people were wishing Taylor Swift well. Most people have been wishing Taylor Swift well. This is not a particularly controversial couple. I think everybody likes the pairing of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelsey. They seem to be very happy together. They did their podcast a couple of weeks ago and seemed to be very happy together. But Charlie Kirk, enter Charlie Kirk, who had some thoughts yesterday,

even though lots of people on the right saying, Taylor, happy for you. Lots of the left saying, Taylor, happy for you. The president of the United States said that he was happy for her. Here's what Charlie Kirk had to say. But maybe one of the reasons why Taylor Swift has been so just kind of annoyingly liberal over the last couple of years is that she's not yet married and she doesn't have children. I say this non-sarcastically. I say this as a husband and a father.

Having children changes you. Getting married changes you. And I hope that America's biggest pop star marrying the pharmaceuticals, spokesperson, ends up conservatizing them. Taylor Swift might de-radicalize herself, engage in reality more and get outside of the abstract clouds. Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. Okay. The camera should really be on Ryan. He's losing it right now. But whenever you do

the Ephesians 5 verse, submit to your husband and don't continue with the rest of the verse. Yes, it says, wives submit to your husbands, submit yourself to your husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands and everything. Husbands love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word and present her to himself as a radiant church without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless in the same way husbands ought to love. their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. I had to have that one

ready to go, Ryan, because if you don't complete the verse, it's not that the first part is wrong. It is that the implication is incomplete. And the full verse is basically, it was very radical at the time. It was very radical in Rome, is that it's a relationship of equals. There is no Jew or Greek or male or female. There's only one. I don't even know why I'm getting into this. Taylor Swift segment. Like, why am I doing it? Yeah, I like that line. There's no male or female, no Jew or Gentile or Greek or whatever.

Yeah. Hey. So, but Charlie Kirk read, submit to your wife and just put the book down. He's like, this is good stuff. What's the message to Travis? I'm sure Charlie would endorse the rest of the verse, but anytime it's used, it's a, without the rest of it, it's a little bit of a red flag. Now, that is the...

It's good to know which Gospels have been endorsed by Charlie. You've got to keep your tracker. Now, but that is the sort of question about Taylor Swift. Now, we could do, I think, Ryan, I think you and I could probably go for a couple of hours on the question of whether being unmarried and childless into your 30s is a liberalizing force. There's some social science evidence that suggests that's the case, and people could understand, by the way, why that would be the case. So it's not an insane point, and I think Taylor Swift has been fairly open about, as you pointed out earlier,

in the segment being miserable. I don't think she's about to be conservatized by bearing Travis Kelsey, though. Hey, that's why we have this news program. We can follow this developing story for years to come. And we can, and we'll report on those developments. I was going to say we were talking about DropSites' original reporting earlier, but this is a glaring hole in DropSites coverage.

Well, MJ is going to get on it. Fantastic. Hello, it's Danielle Fischel. Ryder Strong. And Wilfredel from PodMeets World. And we're bringing you Viva Las Content. That's right. We are back in Las Vegas, the city of sin,

and giving the people what they want. A full week of Y2K content. Wait, we're back in Vegas? Tell me why. Well, for the Backstreet Boys residency at Sphere, of course. We sat down with Kevin Richardson and A.J. McLean just minutes before they took the stage and our very own Wilfredel basically became the newest member of the band.

Boy band, please. Plus, the man who has the longest running comedy show on the strip joins us and gets his props. It's carrot top, baby. And finally, we all L-O-V-E-Hur. Ashley Simpson-Ross joins us to talk about her upcoming sold-out Vegas residency. It's a full week of nostalgic interviews you don't want to miss.

Listen to PodMeets World on the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. December 29th, 1975, LaGuardia Airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage, kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then, at 6.33 p.m., everything changed. There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal. Apparently, the explosion actually impelled metal, glass. The injured were being loaded into ambulances, just a chaotic.

chaotic scene. In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged, and it was here to stay. Terrorism. Law and Order Criminal Justice System is back. In season two, we're turning our focus to a threat that hides in plain sight. That's harder to predict and even harder to stop. Listen to the new season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System on the IHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Hey, I'm Jay Shetty, and I'm the host of the on-purpose podcast, and today I'm joined by one of the greatest athletes of all time, Novak Djokovic. The world's number one male tennis player. He's won 14 grand slams in a glittering career. Novak Djokovic! You've been through so many injuries, losses. Oh, I always showed himself. What has Novak Djokovic done?

What goes through your mind when you lose? I just want to be left alone. What has it taken to become Novak Djokovic? It's a consistent practice. It's prayer work, mindfulness, meditation, conscious breathing. It requires more responsibility from you on a daily basis to prepare yourself for the biggest battle. When you reach your 30, you start counting your days to your retirement. I'm 38 this year.

How far can I go? How long can I push my own limits? Listen to On Purpose with Jay Chetty on the IHeart Radio, app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Let's move on to the economy, the second most important story. Well, the third most important story. First, it's Crackerbril. That's Taylor Swifton. Then we have the economy. So Howard Lutnik was, he's like been, he's always on every show, it seems like. But he's, he loves it. He's been on every, every show over the last couple of days in the wake of the Intel deal. So let's start off with this clip of Howard Lutnik talking

about how the Intel deal could potentially spiral into something else in the defense industry. Here's A1. Didn't the U.S. government say, you know what? We use Palantir services. We would like a piece of Palantir. We use Boeing services. We would like a piece of Boeing. There are a lot of businesses that do business with the U.S. government that benefit

by doing business with the U.S. government. I guess the question is, where's the line? Oh, there's a monstrous discussion about defense. I mean, Lockheed Martin makes 97% of their revenue from the U.S. government. They are basically an arm of the U.S. government. They make exquisite munitions. I mean, amazing things that can knock a missile out of the air when it's coming towards you. But what's the economics of that?

I'm going to leave that to my Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense. These guys are on it and they're thinking about it. But I tell you what, there's a lot of. talking that needs to be had, about how do we finance our munitions, acquisitions? I think a lot of that is talking. And now you have the right people in the jobs and Donald Trump at the head. Okay, Ryan, this I think is well worth considering in the context of the Trump administration right now trying to build towards a sovereign wealth fund, right?

He has said, they said this is a step toward a sovereign wealth fund. Right. And so that's, I mean, actually, Andrew Ross Sorkin's question about. Palantir. It's kind of like it does sound. I mean, it's just abnormal for the United States. And so his question being like, this is ludicrous may not look so ludicrous in a few years when we look back and we're like, well, that was the beginning of the sovereign wealth fund. Right. Yeah, you have Sorkin there who's putting this out there in a way where he's saying, isn't this going to sound absurd to everybody? Exactly. And Howard Lutnik's like, yeah, actually, good point. Why are all of

these people getting fantastically rich from Lockheed. And that's just, that's just, don't just, not just lockid, all of the parasites around Lockheed, all of Northern Virginia stretching from miles. Except he doesn't really even use the word parasites. He's acting now. Like it's, it's, but that's the thing, right? Like, if you think it is a parasitic relationship, then you can either go in one of two directions. You can try to say that this is going to be a parasite relationship that is also synergistic and nationalize to some degree. or you can say, this is crony capitalism.

Well, if it's crony capitalism, make it actual strategic crony capitalism where you're putting the cronies in place and you're developing your industrial policy from the top down rather than just enriching people. Sager has been on a role on Twitter lately. Comrade and Jenny. Go check out Brother Sager's response to this. He's pointed out that, say, Intel's, New York Stock Exchange is way up

in the last 20 years. 20 years, China's is not. Yet China has developed an actual kind of economy and manufacturing base. He points to Intel stock, which is like doubled in the last 15 years or whatever, while Intel itself is like hollowed out. We have a system that extracts wealth from our economy to the rich. And to financialization. What Sagar, myself, Howard Lutnik, and President Xi want to see is an economy that creates wealth and for the society itself. On that point about Chairman Xi,

apparently your comrade, let's rule A2 because Howard Lutnik talked about China as well. Mr. Secretary, I'm really interested in how you personally would see it if another country did something of this ilk back because I know how much you don't like non-tariff barriers. You mean like China does it every day?

Yeah, yeah. It does it every single day? That's exactly what I want to ask about, because I totally get that perspective on China, and it's obviously led to so much of the last year's policy towards China and the last decade since President Trump came in. But what about from a UK perspective? What if the UK started to take stakes in domestic companies that kind of act as a China-like approach to this? No, no, but does that count as a non-tariffarian?

I mean, you don't, you're not really thinking about the fact that the UK government, nationalized British steel a couple of months ago? Yeah. I mean, really? No, no, but I'm genuinely asking about that. Do we get punished for that now? Do we deserve to be? No, you don't get punished for it because what they did is what happened is the Chinese,

a Chinese company bought British steel, put British steel out of business and was just importing, you know, subsidized Chinese steel, put the British steel industry out of business. and the British figured out, along with the Trump administration, teaching them that you need steel to be a real country to be able to defend yourself. And the British figure that out. They nationalized British steel. And now, because they nationalized British steel, America can do a deal with Britain on steel because otherwise we would just be inviting the Chinese in. Imagine British steel was really Chinese steel. And, Ren, there are no libertarians on the show so we can treat the argument as foolish as it actually is because you can't have national defense without industrial policy. Without national.

Yeah. You can't actually have a military without industrial. You can't have a strong military without industrial policy. And so it's obvious. And the point Howard Lutnik is making is also obvious. And what the Trump administration is doing right now is just sort of put. the lie to all of the rights pretenses for years, and not just the rights or the centrist Democrats as well, that this is some type of, like, efficient, free market, middle ground. Who's been calling this capitalism with American characteristics? I forget who coined that, obviously, in reference to socialism with Chinese characteristics, which is what Xi Jinping refers to the Chinese system as. But I don't understand the moral panic because this is not worse than the status quo.

Like, that's my perspective. I think it comes with all kinds of disadvantages and baggage, but the status quo does as well. So it's like, right. Well, you don't understand the moral panic because it's not even that different. It's not coming for you. It's coming for that guy. Yeah. Guys who wear cufflinks on a Tuesday and sit on CNBC and there's starch white shirts as avatars for this industry, Wall Street, that has spent the last 40 years hollowing out the country.

It was so instructive the way he said, but why should we be punished for this? What he wants is to be able to continue to hollow out our economy, put a giant funnel into the economy, suck all the wealth out of it, distribute it up to the very top, wear cufflinks on a Tuesday, watch the standard of living of the middle class erode, destroy unions, that was the goal, but then after that they went just hog wild afterwards. saying, why should we be punished for this? Like, why do you think you should be punished for this? Like, what you represent should not exist. But I don't even know to what extent this will actually be punishing them, because... Well, it's punishing them in the sense that they don't get to commit crimes against the American people forever. They might have to actually make something that makes the country,

and the world a better place. I hope so, but it's just also like a 10% and they would see that, like they would definitely see that as a punishment. Yeah, oh, absolutely. Now, we can set aside like... Because it takes away money from the hedge funds that need to be used to make us all better.

You need to have that little extra money to trade on and put it into the hedge funds and have some fun with. And I don't want to stand in the way of Comrade Trump when he's like on his way to nationalizing the economy here, But I would point out, like, if you want to share on the upside of corporate America's wealth creation for itself, the way to do that is you tax them when they actually make income, like you actually tax them, buying 10% or just taking 10% of Intel without taking any controlling share of it is kind of a dead end because it's like, okay, what are you going to do with that 10%? Well, let's say Intel doubles in another five years. Now, your 10% that you had is now worth, you know, was worth $10 billion now, it's worth $20 billion. You sell it?

Like, what are you doing? Like, what are you doing with this 10%? The point of, you know, government involvement with these companies and when it comes to China or the UK or anywhere else is to tell them what to do. Direct them like, hey, we think actually it would be good if we made these chips somewhere in the country. So we're going to, as a policy, tell companies that we're involved with, go do that. Like, that's the point, not so your portfolio kind of goes up. Because then you have the problem, well, then what? Yeah, 100%.

You just go on Ameritrade and sell your shares. Like, is Trump day trading Intel shares? Yeah, so the, I see this as a really pathetic statement on Congress and our ability to make any law. Like, the conservative movements, consensus on what tax policy should. should look like is not what any of the Republican tax bills from 2017 to the One Big Beautiful bill have looked like. The One Big Beautiful Bill is not what the American people would say they want their tax policy to look like.

And there's actually a way that you can write tax policy without taking a 10% stake in Intel and a board seat that makes Intel a better company. You can close myriad tax loopholes. You can do all kinds of different things, carrots and sticks, to make Intel a better company, but we don't legislate anymore. We actually do not legislate anything that isn't a gargantuan, you know, omnibus. So we have no smart policies, and you end up then with a strong man in power.

And that's basically, I'm not saying it's authoritarian. I'm just saying that it's like because we are now so desperate to have companies like Intel that are getting the privileges of incorporation in the United States, And all kinds of benefits from the taxpayers, because we can't even have them operating in a, like, basically moral way, we have to try to force them through executive authority, which is, I mean, that's where we are. My disagreement there would be that the Inflation Reduction Act was actual industrial policy. It said, and they called it this just a satisfying mansion, it was basically the clean energy bill. Yeah. And it said, we as a country believe that going forward, we need to move away.

from fossil fuels and we need to pivot to clean energy. And we need a lot of energy. And so we need to invest in transmission. We need to invest in moving the energy from where it's produced to where it's then consumed. And we need to innovate in how we create that energy. And that was basically uprooted by Trump. But that was also a giant, I mean,

that bill was a hulking mess too. And some parts of it had to be, like a lot of the stuff made it hard for people who were trying to build factories because there's all kinds of like this one, there's a, I think a pretty legitimate abundance argument about some parts of that bill. But either way, yes, I agree that that was industrial policy. And I think there was a little bit of industrial policy and the one big, beautiful bill too. There is. Yeah, there's attempts at it. Hello, it's Daniel Fischel. Writer Strong and Wilfredel from PodMeets World.

And we're bringing you Viva Las Contents. That's right. We are back in Las Vegas, the city of sin, and giving the people what they want. A full week of Y2K content. Wait, we're back in Vegas? Tell me why? Well, for the Backstreet Boys residency at Sphere, of course. We sat down with Kevin Richardson and A.J. McLean just minutes before they took the stage, and our very own Wilfredel basically became the newest member of the band.

Boy band, please. Plus, the man who has the longest running comedy show on the street. Strip joins us and gets his props. It's Carrot Top, baby. And finally, we all L-O-V-E-Hur. Ashley Simpson-Ross joins us to talk about her upcoming sold-out Vegas residency. It's a full week of nostalgic interviews you don't want to miss. Listen to PodMeets World on the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

December 29th, 1975, LaGuardia Airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage, kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then, at 6.33 p.m., everything changed. There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal. Apparently, the explosion actually impelled metal glass. The injured were being loaded into ambulances. Just a chaotic, chaotic scene. In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged, and it was here to sleep.

Day. Terrorism. Law and order criminal justice system is back. In season two, we're turning our focus to a threat that hides in plain sight. That's harder to predict and even harder to stop. Listen to the new

season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, I'm Jay Shetty, and I'm the host of the on-purpose podcast, and today I'm joined by one of the greatest athletes of all-time Novak Djokovic. The world's number one, male tennis player. He's won 14 grand slams in a glittering career. Novak Djokovic! You've been through so many injuries, losses.

Oh, I always heard himself. What has Novak Djokovic done? What goes through your mind when you lose? I just want to be left alone. What has it taken to become Novak Djokovic? It's a consistent practice. It's prayer work, mindfulness, meditation, conscious breathing. It requires more responsibility from you on a daily basis to prepare yourself for the biggest battle. When you reach your 30, you start counting your days to your retirement.

I'm 38 this year. How far can I go? How long can I push my own limits? Listen to On Purpose with Jay Shetty on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. Meanwhile, this all goes hand in hand with Trump's continued push to take over the Federal Reserve. You put up A4 here. Breaking Voids talked about this earlier this week. This is probably the biggest news in the country at the moment.

Lisa Cook is a member of the Board of Governors, and Trump wants to not just replace Powell when his term is up later this year, but to have a majority of basically pro-Trump doves. And in order to do that, he needs to get Lisa Cook out of the way. Lisa Cook has last night said she's going to sue to keep her position, arguing that Trump doesn't have the power to remove her for policy reasons. We all know that Trump is removing her for policy reasons because he wants to take control of the Federal Reserve. They combed through her records to try to find some justification for that. I asked, I actually reached out to Bill Pulte's office yesterday to ask how they stumbled upon the mortgage records. Because Georgetown professor wrote an interesting blog about how, in order to do that, you're basically, it's not like you're using the federal government to dig up the record. It wasn't as if somebody dropped them in their lab.

Right. There is a reasonable case to be made that Pulte himself broke the law. And there's privacy records around what executives at the FHAFA are able to look at when it comes to American's personal data. If the FBI or, let's say, you know, Atlanta Police, which is where one of her places was, condo, wants to, you know, gets a tip on some mortgage fraud, then there are ways that we investigate mortgage fraud. you can do you can you know file a subpoena you can get a warrant you can go you know look into this stuff you're like wait i don't think i've ever seen a criminal referral from the f f a before yeah that that's odd i'm sure i'm sure this is just a run-of-the-mill criminal case going on oh they went fishing through all of lisa cook's information yeah and and they found if people are not familiar, that she bought a place in 2021 and called it her primary residence in Michigan

or wherever it was. Two weeks later, bought another one, a condo and also called her primary residence, which meant that she got a lower interest rate on one of them than she would have gotten if she would have called it her like vacation condo. It's pretty. Now, 2021, by the way, last point, interest rates were like zero. Yeah. So like the difference between why bother what she was going to pay as a vacation home versus a primary with her income and her like you're going to get a especially in 2021 you're getting a two-something interest rate no matter what so did she corruptly save a few hundred dollars a year on one of those mortgages probably yeah i mean is it corrupt looks that way yeah yeah it does what about if it's two-hour parking and you park

for four and you know you did but you don't pay I mean that's that's corrupt it's corrupt it's corrupt as corrupt if you sit on if you're a governor on Federal Reserve Board like that's should like yeah and and if if this emerged any other way like you know what hey she should suffer the consequences of her actions whatever those would be but but it emerged because he wants to take control of the Fed so that he can personally, so that he can do his tariff policy and then monkey with interest rates at the same time to try to balance that out, which you could argue the president should be able to do. And we shouldn't have these like technocrats over there controlling this. So I think that's a good point. That's a separate argument in some ways.

It's obviously true that the administration or that Donald Trump himself wants a full takeover of the Federal Reserve. So this would give him if his nominees are confirmed four out of the seven seats. He has trying to fast track the man who's already been nominated for the third seat to get him confirmed quickly and is mulling right now whether to nominate someone to put in Lisa Cook's place right away, even though this is going to be tied up in the courts, maybe kicked actually to the Supreme Court. And actually, Ryan, you'll love this, could put Humphrey's executor back in the spotlight because this is like actually. the history of Humphrey's executor playing out the question of unitary executive theory that

the Trump administration or the theory that the Trump administration has of what executive power should look like is more in line with Franken Delano Roosevelt than it is with basically any other, certainly any other Republican president. But that's what the question is whether this is truly independent? Is it different from some of the other independent agencies that the Trump administration has been saying should be brought to heal by a president, whether the Republican or Democrat, is it different because it's the Federal Reserve? That's something that's also been argued in the courts. So this is a really significant move because it is going to test some fundamental questions.

And as we look back on the first seven months of the Trump administration, seven and a half months of the Trump administration, it is remarkable how many fundamental questions of governance are being kicked to the Supreme Court for, like, foundational constitutional tests. And it's going to test my theory of the court. I'm curious what you think will happen because my theory of the court has always been that it is a radical far right wing court, but it has deep ties with the Reagan business wing of the Republican coalition. And therefore, we'll push back on Trump's more populist efforts when it comes to undermining what they see as the integrity of the kind of neoliberal economy. And this goes right to it. You can put up A5. Markets already. So on the one hand, markets are responding in a schizophrenic way because on the one hand, they're like, whoa, this could mean even deeper interest rate cuts, which could mean asset price bubbles. And so therefore, we need to buy. On the other hand, it looks like Argentina and Turkey models are being applied here in the United States, which means we're going to get runaway inflation.

And so the 10-year note plummeted, which means interest rates that the U.S. has to pay for its debt went up significantly around these inflation concerns. Because the idea is that whether it's Bernie Sanders or Trump or whoever, if they control interest rates, then one of the checks on what they can do, the bond market, is not as immediate a concern. So if Trump's doing tariff policy and is destroying the economy, he can just dial down, he can just print a whole lot of money, basically, to try to like paper over, literally paper over, the problems that his policies are creating. And so then, yeah, thinking from Wall Street is, well, then they're going to do a lot of these problematic things. They're going to bust all the budgets.

In the short term, they'll cover it up with, by printing money, then in the long term, you'll get inflation like an Argentina or Turkey or wherever else. And so that's what's driving the other Wall Street moves. But they're sort of confused. So the idea, my idea of the court would be that their Reagan instincts will take over. It'd be like, we don't actually want this much of a populist revolution to the point where the president is just setting interest rates. What's your read on the court?

You know these jackals better than I do. I think your read is correct on that. It would be, it's not just a Reagan instinct necessarily. It's also, I mean, you're looking at the full picture of the administration's moves here. I'm curious how the process question plays into this because I referenced earlier the Georgetown Law Professor Adam Levitton, who wrote a blog post that said, quote, the only way anyone would have noticed a problem with Cook's loan application is that Pulte as head of FHAFAA directed Fannie or Fetty to pull.

Fannie or Freddie to poll her application, and that is unheard of. Does that also factor? And by the way, I sent that to the FHFA and asked if that was true, didn't get a response back. But I'm curious if that plays into the broader question of how this played out legally. Is there a legal, you know, if you're a cop and you don't read the Miranda rights, you've got a problem in your prosecution? Is there a question of how all of this happened that would also kick in? And so somebody even like, Justice Alito, is uncomfortable with the decision. I don't know.

But I think your instinct is correct, that it wouldn't necessarily even just be a Reagan instinct so much as a normie instinct. I don't know if that makes sense, but just discomfort with the... Right, they're normies too. Yeah. Right. And they're also probably like, ooh, when I bought that boat, what did I put down as my income? Right. Like, uh-oh, am I in trouble now, too?

Well, and there's this divide that has never been... Clarence Thomas is still in the Supreme Court? Clarence Thomas still there. She's flagrantly corrupt. Oh, come on. Are you, like, joking? Like, the guy, he forgot to disclose, like, enormous amounts of bribes and his, like, rich friend bought his, like, mom's house next to say...

I agree all of that was bad. Yeah. I mean, I agree all of that was bad. I don't think it was, like, evidence of significant corruption. he was if you're taking gifts they're all vacationing with rich people and the RV loan I'll say it was bad the forgiven RV alone was

that was bad stuff yeah well I think I mean everyone in general there's just just friends had nothing to do with the fact that he's a Supreme Court justice it's very clear as soon as he said that he was broke and was thinking about retiring

and they're like oh my God we're going to lose this seat the money started flowing to him that's that's a timeline He wrote a letter to Congress saying Supreme Court justices aren't paid enough. I can't keep Ginny in the RVs that she needs. This was like 15 years. Yeah, way back. So he said this to congressional Republicans.

You need to give more money to Supreme Court justice. It's not fair. Or I'm going to quit, basically. That was the message of the letter that he sent out. I think he's probably right about Supreme Court justices, by the way. Yeah, but they found another way to pay him. Yeah. The money just started flowing in all of a sudden.

Not so he would rule any differently, but so that he would stay on the best. bench. So anyway, that's a good point, but I think the primary narrative is that he's being bribed by like Harlan Crow to rule differently in the court. And I think the only reason he was, he was bribed to stay on the court. The reason they're friends. We'll take care of you. Because they agree. Right. We'll hit you in whatever RV she wants. Ideological compatriots. Yeah. Right. And the RV loan was, I think the last part of it was forgiven, something like that. Yeah. So anyway, all that is to say, Clarence Thomas actually might be the, the interesting one on this question because what I was just about to say was the salience of the unitary executive theory

hasn't been strong in the conservative movement for a long time because you have this group of people who really wants to be critical of FDR and the line of the conservative movement has been FDR governed like a king but then they're same thing with Obama and then there's this also argument that's existed since Nixon that the president should have power over the or deep state executive agencies. And those two things are kind of in conflict. And I'm actually curious how Clarence Thomas would rule on that because there is no consensus

among the Reaganite federal society world on that. MAGA tends to be more FDR, obviously, more pro-governing like FDR than old-school Republicans. But at the same time, it's an argument that old-school Republicans could get behind too because some of them went through it with Nixon. Now, we were going to talk briefly about this crazy person in the White House talking about how how gas is under $2 in some places, but like, why?

We're tight. Shows getting tight. Let's move on to his cancels. Well, let's say, Trump did say gas was below $2. Gas buddy says, we're not seeing any stations reported to us below $2 account this morning. No, of course not. No, nobody's seeing that. So, yes. Anyway, let's move on then to what did you say is?

It's cancles. Just cancels. Hello, it's Daniel Fischel. Writer Strong. And Wilfredel from Podmeet's World. And we're bringing you Viva Las Content. That's right. We are back in Las Vegas, the city of sin,

and giving the people what they want. A full week of Y2K content. Wait, we're back in Vegas? Tell me why. Well, for the Backstreet Boys residency at Sphere, of course. We sat down with Kevin Richardson and A.J. McLean just minutes before they took the stage and our very own Wilfredel. basically became the newest member of the band.

Boy band, please. Plus, the man who has the longest running comedy show on the strip joins us and gets his props. It's carrot top, baby. And finally, we all L-O-V-E-Hur. Ashley Simpson-Ross joins us to talk about her upcoming sold-out Vegas residency. It's a full week of nostalgic interviews you don't want to miss. Listen to PodMeets World on the I-Heart Radio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. December 29th, 1975, LaGuardia Airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage, kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then, at 6.33 p.m., everything changed. There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal. Apparently, the explosion actually impelled metal, glass. The injured were being loaded into ambulance. is just a chaotic, chaotic scene.

In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged, and it was here to stay. Terrorism. Law and Order Criminal Justice System is back. In Season 2, we're turning our focus to a threat that hides in plain sight. That's harder to predict and even harder to stop. Listen to the new season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your

podcasts. Hey, I'm Jay Shetty, and I'm the host of the on-purpose podcast, and today I'm joined by one of the greatest athletes of all time, Novak Djokovic. The world's number one male tennis player. He's won 14 grand slams in a glittering career. Novak Djokovic! You've been through so many injuries, losses. Oh, I've showed himself.

What has Novak Djokovic done? What goes through your mind when you do? I just want to be left alone. What has it taken to become Novak Djokovic? It's a consistent practice. It's prayer work, mindfulness, meditation, conscious breathing. It requires more responsibility from you on a daily basis to prepare yourself for the biggest battle. When you reach your 30, you start counting your days to your retirement.

I'm 38 this year. How far can I go? How long can I push my own limits? Listen to On Purpose with Jay Shetty. on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. So is Donald Trump going to die? Well, we're all going to die. Is Donald Trump going to die today?

Doubtful? No. Soon? Maybe. He is 79 years old. And Alex Jones, one of his preeminent supporters in the new media ecosystem, although Alex Jones is kind of a new media pioneer if you think about it. He's been around, yeah, exactly.

I knew me for 30 years, but one of Donald Trump's preeminent backers is deeply concerned, actually, about the state of Trump's health because of the images, because in part of the images that continue rolling out of Trump with bruised hands and very swollen ankles. So this would be one. We can roll through some of this. Trump reappeared on Monday after questions had been raised. He reappeared on Monday with the bruises on his hands. Again, we've seen sort of splotches of. foundation rubbed over the bruises at different points too. So sometimes you see the bruising visible and then sometimes you see the foundation like right there. If you're listening to this, it's exactly what you think it is. You've probably seen the pictures already on your own. But that's what Alex Jones is going to be reacting to here in this clip. And again, Ryan Trump, 79 years old, probably not surprising to anybody that he might have. Some health complications. Let's rule Alex Jones B2.

because you can see him declining faster and faster. It's not super bad yet. I predict Trump is going to have some type of collapse from the next 12 months at the current trajectory. I'm not saying he's going to collapse.

I'm saying if he doesn't take his foot off the gas pedal, I guarantee you, and I've got stamina, way better than most people. If I had Trump's job at 51 for a month, I would have a nervous breakdown.

I've seen a lot of signs of Trump declining. The fear that he's getting sick, that who knows what's going on. His ankles are giant. That usually means serious heart decline. I mean, liver failure too, but his eyes aren't yellow. So he's saying, I don't know if I'm doing a good job. I don't know if I'm going to get into heaven. I hear I'm not doing a good job.

This is the President of the United States calling into Fox News in the morning saying this. Okay, so what Alex Jones was just referring to, let's skip ahead to B5. This is Trump talking about how he will ask him whether he will go to heaven in regard to ending the conflict in Ukraine. If I can save 7,000 people a week from being killed, I think that's a pretty – I want to try and get to heaven if possible. I'm hearing I'm not doing well. I hear really at the bottom of the totem pole. But if I can get to heaven, this will be one of the reasons. And finally, here's what the White House has said about the bruising and the ankles. We'll start with B3. Recent photos of the president have shown minor bruising on the back of his hand. This is consistent with minor soft

tissue irritation from frequent handshaking and the use of aspirin, which is taken as part of a standard cardiovascular prevention regimen. is a well-known and benign side effect of aspirin therapy. And the president remains in excellent health, which I think all of you witness on a daily basis here. And then we can go ahead and move right on to the next clip about the ankles. In recent weeks, President Trump noted mild swelling in his lower legs. In keeping with routine medical care and out of an abundance of caution, this concern was thoroughly evaluated by the White House medical unit. The president underwent a comprehensive examination, including diagnostic vascular studies. Bilateral lower extremity venous

Doppler ultrasounds were performed and revealed chronic venous insufficiency, a benign in common condition, particularly in individuals over the age of 70. Importantly, there was no evidence of deep vein thrombosis or arterial disease. So a benign condition in people over the age of 70, two things, Ryan, one, I think we've learned it's important to pay attention to this in the last four years that the executive, I mean, I guess we didn't have to learn it. I don't know if the media actually learned it, but I think we've had a, let's just say, a lesson in why it's important. A real world example, as they say when you're in elementary school of why these things are important over the last four or five years with Joe Biden. Secondly, Alex Jones is

known, especially on the right, for being something of a, hmm, what's the right way to put it, a Nostradamus-like figure. Canary in the coal mine? Well, like, Tucker Carlson, for example, will say everything Alex Jones claims comes true, basically, right? Like, that's the mean. So if he says something, it's people are like, oh, they're getting nervous. It's like the opposite of Jim Kramer. It's the opposite of Jim Kramer.

When he makes predictions, people have said, now you really got to listen to Alex Jones because he predicted X, Y, and Z. On the left, we have a hard time even understanding that you guys take him seriously. but he seems to have almost had a renaissance or did he never go away? No, I think he did have a re-I-I-I think the post-Sandy Hook trial he's quite literally sobered up but also just, I don't know, he's, it's... This is for people who didn't follow,

he said the whole Sandy Hook thing was completely made up. It was all... It was insane. It was horrible. Yeah. Yeah. But anyway, he does get taken a bit more seriously now. And in part because people feel like they've looked back.

and realize that Alex Jones said things they felt were true. Not that. All that is to say, Ryan, people are going to take that seriously coming from Alex Jones. And people, like, MAGA is going to take it seriously coming from Alex Jones. So what do you make of the White House saying benign, okay, everything's fine? I mean, I'm not a doctor. I do know it's not good when your ankles are swelling. That's suggestive of, yes, circulatory or heart problems.

Because the blood's going down. It's not coming back up. Like, that's, I mean, there can be other things that cause swelling other fluid issues. But in general, that's why they rushed him to get that looked at. Now, certainly, like, he is shaking hands with, like, alpha dudes and alpha women. Howard Lutnik. All day long, yeah, who, this is their chance to shake the president's hand. They're coming with their A game.

And I'm sure every time he's like, oh, God. Oh, Jesus Christ. Like, do you see my hand? You still had to do that? Macron almost like ripped his fingers off you remember yeah but then didn't he almost rip McCrone's fingers yeah right and so now everybody knows that it's going to be like a handshake off so there's nobody but himself to blame yes really uh well you heard here first rangram not a doctor but we do have some comments uh from someone a soft is also not a doctor is he a doctor

uh I think he's what let's just work with doctors B6 B6 the president's congestive heart failure is getting worse I'm a home health physical therapist with a doctorate in my field, I see congestive heart failure patients on a daily basis. The reason I know that he has congestive heart failure is because of the swelling in his feet and ankles. The reason I know it's getting worse is because he's sitting behind the desk on camera now. He lashed out against MSNBC for giving him hash about his ankles. This is how we know that something is true, because it gets to Trump. Remember recently where he was talking about going to heaven for some fucking reason?

He says, people said, I'm not doing very well. I don't think he's talking about the media. I think he's talking about the doctors who are treating him. The only reason his health has been maintained at all is because he has the privilege of getting IV diuretics, spirinalactone, Lasix, Bumex, something like that. That's why his hands have been bruised and covered with makeup. Badly, I might add.

We know that it's getting worse because he knows he cannot hide the degree of swelling. That's why he's sitting behind the desk. Oh, he also has chronic kidney disease, which is also contributing to the swelling in the feet and ankles. I can't tell you how many times I have seen a patient in their home because they were hospitalized for A.K.I. Or acute kidney injury.

And the kidney injury was caused by nephrotoxic medications, namely diuretics, spyrinolactone, Bumex, Lasix. The president is definitely getting sicker. And we know he's not going to change his diet because he's such a fucking idiot. I think he's going to be around for six to eight months tops. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Ryan was losing it during that clip. It's Blue and Ono Horseshoe Theory with Alex Jones.

Yeah. My favorite part is I'm a home health aide with a doctorate in my field. It's a doctorate in my field. Wait, wait. In your field. So he has a Ph.D. in something. Could mean a lot. Yeah. There's a great moment in friends where they ask for... But this is a viral. Like, we're not just picking any random. Oh, yeah. No, this one's very viral. This clip is going everywhere. Yes. There's a great moment in friends where someone asks, Ross is trying to insist that he's a doctor because he's a PhD in like paleontology. and Rachel's like, yeah, yeah, yeah, Ross, if I'm having a heart attack,

what I need is you there with your fossil brush. That's the equivalent of what we just watched. Although at least that guy works with old and dying people. So, like, if he was a friend of mine, I would, I'd be like, yeah, let me hear your experience in life of, like, dealing with old and dying people. And then you'd come on here and say a source.

It'd be like a medical source with a doctorate in his field. Says to me that he has six to eight months. Listen, Trump was Twitter. tweeting at like I think he was tweeting at like one in the morning just about I'll have to go back I want to say it was about cracker bro I think we got an early morning treat about true social posts about cracker like the guy sleeps five hours then again he then he'll golf 18 holes Saturday golf 18 holes Sunday he seems to eat whatever the hell he wants so I don't know if he's in great health or horrible health it could be one of the two we know he will not die in his sleep because he doesn't sleep the odds are low uh Yeah, so J.D. Vance, I don't know if he's getting ready. Get lacing up. I don't know. Trump's life force is attention. So I find it very hard to believe that whatever diseases he has in his body can overcome the power of that life force. He's going to live forever. Well, throughout at least until he's no longer president because, you know, once he's back and sitting around with like real estate guys again. then he could decline quickly.

Like when somebody leaves the Senate. It's like, you know how when old folks, one of the spouses dies and the other one dies within six months, that's what happens to senators when they leave office. Within six months. They leave their real spouse, yeah. Within six months, they just wear it because they're not getting that energy, that life force anymore,

which is the adulation. You lose your access to the Adrenna Quorum and the kids' blood when you leave the Senate. I've heard people make actual medical arguments that around this, like, life force-creating sense that some, that, and some people in particular are particularly able to, like, suck it up. And Trump is definitely one of them. He's the first president in his first term, who not only didn't age, he left office, like, looking better than it came in. So finally, maybe gravity is catching up with him. But that gravity has a lot to work against because he absolutely loves the spotlight and thrives in it. Like a lizard on a rock. Like a lizard on a rock. Let's move on to Apex Shakur.

We went from a lizard on a rock to Apaq Shakur. This is the new nickname that Hakeem Jeffries has gotten from Charlemagne. We should just take a look at this clip because describing it doesn't do it justice. Let's roll C-1. I love having the speaker. Maori speaker, Hakeem Jeffries. Because, you know, I'm a political nerd. Like, I love talking about things.

Salomey hates him. You do? I don't hate him. I just don't think he stands for anything. Well, I think that he's, I call him Apex Shakur. Well, he definitely, we did talk about messaging. And I actually went to the Capitol and had a meeting with him. And we talked about messaging and how I was like, the frustration with the party is,

y'all have to get more gang-to. Like, stop going by the politics of the late 2000s, you know, in 2010. And you have to, like, rise to the occasion in the messaging. And he did, I saw him do more afterwards. Hakeem is a puppet. Hakeem's not doing anything if Shuck Shulman, don't tell him to do it. And it's simple as that. But I was very happy that he came on our little podcast, though.

Oh, yeah. Because we can, like, have these conversations. And I feel like, you know, a lot of people don't press these folks. You know what I mean? And we do. And we need to do that. We need to be pressing all of them. For people not steeped in their Hakeem Jeffrey's lore,

he loves to rap. Like, he had fundraisers, at major events. Like, he will spit bars, as the kids say. It's like watching someone do that at a bar mitzvah. Right. Like, it's so bad. So Apex Chikora, I think that one's going to stick. It hurts.

It's like when some kid is at their, like, middle school talent show, that's what it's like watching Hakeem Jeffrey's rap. It's like, everyone gives him a pat on the bat. I'm critical of Hakeem Jeffries. You give it to him in the rapping. I mean, he's not going to, like, get on a lot. label or anything but like I think he's better than like a bar mitzvah guy it's a low bar but like I think he's like I'm like this is decent like you know it's not nothing original he's just

sticking to the you know the old beats and it's like 90s kind of beats but you know I'm a 90s kid so that's true it's all I need well this comes out of the heels of the DNC vote and Ryan I'm very very curious to get your breakdown of everything that happens so C2 we can put up the screen, on the screen, this is the DNC vote. There was an amendment at the DNC, urging the support for recognition of Palestine as a state and then also ending all military aid to Israel, ran into some trouble. You may be shocked to learn. Hit a few snags, Ryan. Tell us what happened. And speaking of APEC Shakur, we'll start with this. DMFI, Democratic majority for Israel, which is an offshoot of APEC, put out this statement because AAC is too toxic in the

Democratic Party, so they made DMFI. They said today the Democratic Party sent a clear and resounding message by defeating a reckless and divisive resolution. We stand with the people of Israel and will continue to do so. For more than 75 years, the U.S.-Israel relationship has been strong because it's grounded in shared values on mutual security interests. We cannot forget how we got here. Hamas started this war and continues to hold 50 hostages passing this resolution. Would have been a gift to Republicans further divided our party and rewarded Hamas's brutality because Hamas is very closely following the DNC, you know, bylaws and platform creation, no doubt. In this critical moment,

Democrats stood firm, rejected this dangerous effort and sent a message that they remain united in our commitment to Israel's security and our longstanding alliance. And so the meeting began with Ken Martin, the new head of the DNC, putting forward a resolution that was, as milkedost as could be while still being offensive to some pro-Israel members of the party, all it said was that basically the land of Israel is a place where, you know, two peoples have, you know, historical roots, which is undeniably true. Yet still, there is a whole strain of pro-Israel argumentation that says that Palestinians are made up and didn't don't actually exist and didn't even exist before like the 1970s or something even though they're mentioned in like home by like homer like all the way

back first recorded history so saying aside it's obviously true so that that passed and you know some other like not fairly uncontroversial for the DNC things and that resolution and then it gets to the one that says uh that there's going to be an arms embargo on Israel and you know and the Democrats are going to recognize a Palestinian state, there was an attempt to amend it to add offensive weapons and put in some other palatable things to Israel. That was defeated. I think by a combination of the resolutions supporters didn't want to water it down and the resolution's opponents didn't want to be watered down out of fear that it might pass. if it was watered down.

So that amendment was rejected. So it went straight with an arms embargo, and Democrats voted it down, and DMFI celebrated. So, and then when they left the room, all the reporters followed them, and the DNC staff was, and members were just livid. Like, why won't you stick around and follow the rest of our proceedings? Why are you so concerned about just this one issue? Right.

Which I get it, but they're carrying out a genocide. And so... It's interesting that they couldn't even get it amended, right? Because that's a... Alyssa Slotkin sat literally right here and said she would consider an offensive weapons ban. Yeah, and then went on Colbert and missed the vote. Yeah.

But said she would have voted for it. Right. Yeah. Which, anyway. The offensive weapon thing is insane. Like, if you think somebody is committing a genocide, why give them any weapons whatsoever? And if it's only about civilians, who needs the defensive weapons more than the Palestinians? If you really want to protect civilians, wouldn't you send the Iron Dome to the Palestinians?

When was the last time anything was fired at Israel? It reminds me we were sitting at the DNC last year. it just was the most obvious thing in the world that the party should allow just from the bare political standpoint of this should allow somebody from the free palestine movement to go up and speak i mean they have so many speakers throughout the week they have they're just doing random people throwing random people at there and they can't give any they won't give an inch yeah they wanted a two minute vetted speech by a palestinian america who serves as a Georgia lawmaker, and they wouldn't allow it. In St. Louis, Corey Bush, as we know, was ousted by Wesley Bell last cycle. Bush is rumored to be looking at a rematch. Wesley Bell, as you saw last week, had a town hall where a bunch of constituents complained to him about his support for Israel's genocide.

He told them, he would talk to them after he dealt with the media. He went and did some interviews with the media as he was back talking. the media, his security, then beat up a bunch of constituents. Now we would have a new event. It's a public event, if you look, watch, see how many people you can count in the audience. The event I'm about to show you. Where he's asked about the enormous amounts of money that he has taken. And his defense is quite remarkable.

Let's roll Wesley Bell here. People want to support this, support what we're doing. Hey, we'll take it because we've got to get our message out. And the bottom line is that in our politics, you know that they have, they're expecting close to a, like a couple billion dollars in these elections coming out. And so that money is flowing everywhere. And until we address that issue and give campaign finance reforms,

if you want representation that's going to represent your district, those people can't just go in there with empty pockets and just hopes and dreams. We've got to understand there's a game being played. Politics is a game that's being played, and we can sit back and be righteous and say, no, we're not going to do it that way, and we can keep losing. And you know what? That's what we've been doing. Listen, we can't just sit back and just be like, oh, well, we just keep doing what we're doing,

and no, we're not going to get in the ball. No, we can't do that. And so I hear what you're saying, and that's why. I stay accessible. I stay. I'm going to come out in the community. I'm not going to shy away from tough stuff. So Wesley Bell got more than $12 million from APEC to defeat Cory Bush.

His diagnosis is that Democrats are not doing better because they are too discerning and puritanical about who they will take money from. And if they would just take more money from more people, Democrats wouldn't be in the bind that they're in. Now, if he had not taken a penny and had not even run for Congress, St. Louis would still be represented by Cory Bush and her, quote, unquote, empty pockets. Right. So I don't quite understand what he accomplished in terms of representation for St. Louis by taking the money. But setting that aside, so are Democrats too discerning about who they take money from? Is that your assessment?

Yeah, clearly. I mean, all that cash from Jeffrey Epstein and Harvey Weinstein, that was just to say, they, They were just being careful. That is all you can say. Yeah. So thank you to Wesley Bell for being open about your willingness to take money from absolutely anybody. Oh, let's not forget Sam Bankman-Fried. Sam Bankman-Fried. That was a fun one.

You know, it's nice when people are upfront about it, at least. Yeah. I'll take that. So if Cory Bush does run again, that's going to cost A-PAC, another. $10, $15 million in St. Louis. Yeah. And maybe Bell wins. Maybe he doesn't.

He only won by four percentage points. Yeah, it was something like that, or less than that. I think it was like 4,000 votes or something like that. Which is actually, I think, remarkable given how radical compared to the average Democrat Cory Bush was. Yeah. Yes, she was one of the first, and she was a lead sponsor of the ceasefire resolution. Like she, yeah, she did not back down.

remotely. And so this was, you know, two years later, she may be in a better position. Yeah, oh my gosh, especially because I think the climate has changed significantly on the Israel question. And he's going to have to go around continuing to explain how, why he's taking all of his money, and he's going to have to do better than that. But you can't do better than that. Like, that is it. Like, that's, that's it. It's just a behind-the-scenes secret. Democrats are, and Republicans are not at all discerning in whose money they take. No.

That's, they will take anyone's money. Some are, like Cory Bush. Like the Justice Democrats, the world now, she doesn't have to be discerning because APEC is not showing up an offering her money. Although, as I reported in my book, The Squad, you know, after AOC won, her campaign, got a call when and said like A-PAC is ready to raise $200,000 for you off the bat I think 100 or 200,000 check the details in the book and there's a lot more where that came from and we'd love to educate you on the historic relationship between Israel and the United States and we believe so it it was even on offer for her she said no we're not doing that right like and the campaign was even a little surprised at the braise of it? Like you, you're kind of, I think, trained to think it's a little more sophisticated than that? No. Absolutely not. Absolutely not. Hello, it's Daniel Fischel.

Writer Strong and Wilfredel from PodMeets World. And we're bringing you Viva Las Content. That's right. We are back in Las Vegas, the city of sin, and giving the people what they want. A full week of Y2K content. Wait, we're back in Vegas? Tell me why. Well, for the Backstreet Boys' residency at Sphere, of course. We sat down with Kevin Richardson and A.J. McLean just minutes before they took the stage, and our very own Wilfredel basically became the newest member of the band.

Boy band, please. Plus, the man who has the longest running comedy show on the strip joins us and gets his props. It's carrot top, baby. And finally, we all L-O-V-E-Hur, Ashley Simpson-Ross, joins us. to talk about her upcoming sold-out Vegas residency. It's a full week of nostalgic interviews you don't want to miss.

Listen to PodMeets World on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. December 29th, 1975, LaGuardia Airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage, kids gripping their new Christmas toys.

Then, at 6.33 p.m., Everything changed. There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal. Apparently, the explosion actually impelled metal glass. The injured were being loaded into ambulances. Just a chaotic, chaotic scene. In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged, and it was here to stay. Terrorism.

Law and order, criminal justice system is back. In season two, we're turning our focus to a third. threat that hides in plain sight. That's harder to predict and even harder to stop. Listen to the new season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, I'm Jay Shetty, and I'm the host of the on-purpose podcast, and today I'm joined by one of the greatest athletes of all time Novak Djokovic. The world's number one mild tennis player. 14 grand slams in a glittering career.

Novak Djokovic! You've been through so many injuries, loss. I always showed himself. What has Novak Djokovic done? What goes through your mind when you lose? I just want to be left alone. What has it taken to become Novak Djokovic? It's a consistent practice.

It's prayer work, mindfulness, meditation, conscious breathing. It requires more responsibility from you on a daily basis to prepare yourself for the biggest. battle. When you reach your 30, you start counting your days to your retirement. I'm 38 this year. How far can I go? How long can I push my own limits? Listen to On Purpose with Jay Shetty on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Netanyahu decided to drop by Patrick Bet David's show. Of course. So tell us about who's Patrick Bet David? Like what's his Don't ask me.

What's his place in this ecosystem? Do we know? I mean, maybe you could lump him in with the, like, podcast bro category if people are. He's definitely bro-coded. He has, like, very lively conversations on his channel. What's Netanyahu doing? Like, Nelk boys and now this. And then they brought these weird influencers over to, like, take video from the...

The Prager You influencer. I mean, it's exactly what Netanyahu. Yahoo, just from a cynical perspective, I think the Nalk Boys decision, as unsurious as we all know it is, and as cynical as we all know it is, that is exactly what you would want to do if you are trying to prevent losing young right-wing men to the anti-Israel movement. That's like actually exactly what you would want to do. And you would also want to go on Patrick by David's show if that's what you're trying to do. So I think strategically it's like pretty clever. how do we think it went for him let's take a look

Israel owns America you know Israel is who makes America do things they want them to do whether it's through APEC you know whether it's through you know funding money you'll typically hear this this has been overly said the last couple of years in a major way and there's a big there's a there's a community of Americans that at this point believe that whatever Israel wants they make a phone call to America America better do or else do you agree with that Absolutely not. I think it's full of Hocom. First of all, do you know President Trump? I mean, sort of I've known him for many years.

Sure. You don't make him do anything. He does what he thinks is in America's interest. I don't know. It's a good question, but you've said something about Biden that I should just point out the facts. In fact, President Biden supported us in the beginning of the war after this horrific massacre, and he came here and I very much appreciated. But as the war progressed and the vilifications of Israel, the distortions on the media began to pile on, he began to take a different course. And when we were just two-thirds of the way, three-fourths of the way, in Gaza, I said we have to go into that last position that they had where they had organized battalions. It's in a city called Rafah in the southern part of the Gaza Strip.

And he said, don't go there. And he said, if you do go there, I'll smack an embargo on you. You know, you're fighting a seven-front war, and all of a sudden you're slapped with an embargo. What do you think, Gordon? So Biden did say publicly, repeatedly. And Miller and others, Matt Miller and others, State Department's spokesperson said, Rafa is a red line that for many reasons, it was, U.S. policy was that Rafa should be, as a red line, do not go into Rafa.

Now, for the first time, we have Netanyahu's claim of what Biden was willing to say to back up this red line. There will be an embargo. I assume he means arms embargo, not massive, not the mass starvation of Israel. That's barbaric. Nobody should do that. Clearly, he did not do that. Nanyahu called his bluff, whether, we know he made a bluff of some sort because he publicly said it's a red line. So strategically, it seems like what Nanyahu is doing there is trying to say, I'm with Trump, Biden is with Hamas. and so if you Patrick but David viewer are with Trump then you're with me

yes he's tying himself to Trump yeah and and further um creating adversaries out of Democrats like he he's very clever we just talked about Apex Corps and you know the the Democratic establishment support of Israel remains like rock solid yeah Netanyahu's adversarial relationship to the Democratic Party is, remains very strong. It's this one-way support. Yep.

That's a really interesting point because, as I was going to say, I mean, Netanyahu can be credited with solidifying the Republican Party's magnetic-like relationship with Israel. It was not always like that. If you go back to the Reagan administration, there's a lot of support for Israel, but there's not this. deference, this reflexive deference to Israel, which is actually really just the reflexive deference to Lekud. And that's Netanyahu. Netanyahu has led the way on that point. And it's been whatever you say about Netanyahu, and you can say a lot of things about Netanyahu, that has been politically, cynically, a calculation that paid off for him. And I think that's what you're seeing in the Patrick Beck-David interviews. He's continuing to try to make that point, that he is

that Israel is the renegade actor, that that is the maverick actor. That is the, if you're an American who wants to see the sort of global elite busted up, you're supporting Israel in this situation against the rest of the world. And the evil forces the rest of the world, the Islamists that want to take down America for American freedom and all of that, he's trying the same line out. And it's probably the best he's got. I mean, unfortunately, for him, it's probably the best he's got at this point. And while this is going on, the news out of Gaza, is that Israel's incursion into Gaza City is continuing. And the reporting that we're getting from the ground there is that it's horrific beyond even the description of what we've seen before.

Previously, when cities have been taken by the IDF and destroyed, first they would take the city. it would they be completely depopulated and then they would send in these combat engineering units that would then detonate block by house by house block by block until cities at complete rubble which has now been done to rafa that's not what they're doing this time this time they are sending in bomb laden robots into populated city blocks and setting the explosives off and to the point where you can see the explosions from like miles away. You had this like IDF linked Mossad. It's called Mossad at Ossent account saying that actually that Hamas was doing this.

It's like Hamas doesn't have robots, first of all. Hamas doesn't have explosives with charges like that. And also why would Hamas be blowing up like city blocks filled with people? And so they're sending in these robots basically, you know, suicide bomb. except their robots rather than people and then and then and then moving in and then clearing and then and proceeding a pace you've got close to a million people affected by this in and around the Gaza City area who are now being pushed further west they're very nervous about going south they're telling us because if they know or they believe that if they go south like that's it

it's like that gaza city's over it'll be it'll be completely flat and completely destroyed so there's very little Hamas resistance in the area in these areas because what are you going to do like there's these robotic bomb laden monsters are rolling in and they're just blowing up like there's nothing you can really do as a as a resistance force against something like that now this is happening in the context of the assassinations of all of the journalists who, not all of them, there's, you know, many are still working, but many of the most prominent journalists in Gaza City were killed over the last several weeks. Conunis, we had, you know, five more journalists killed the other day, including a sixth in his tent later, an investigative

journalist in a separate attack. So fallout from that attack continues. And that's, so let's, we'll move to that next. Because we're learning two just absolutely, unbelievable details about this and and I think it's people need to retain their ability to be shocked by this because if you if you're not then you're you're losing the moral core your moral core and and people want you to become numb to this stuff and when things that shock the conscience happen we should still acknowledge that that they're shocking so it goes back to this we can play c6 here this is a strike that probably everybody has seen by now that that's the second hit on the second of the double tab master hospital and so they struck the hospital at 10 a m

and then at 1017 as you can see in the bottom corner there it says kudes 1017 kudes al kuds is the arabic name for jerusalem so so 17 minutes after the first strike there are first responders medics journalists a medical student a civil defense worker rushed to the scene trying to save the people who had been killed, which included the Reuters cameraman, because they attacked this camera, which we'll talk about in a moment. 17 minutes later, they bomb it again to kill all of those people. So the IDF has now come out with its own explanation for what happened. We'll get into that in a second. What we're learning, though, is that the day before this happened, the international doctors working at Nasr Hospital were told that the next morning, they would have to go to

the WHO headquarters, which is 30 minutes away, for an in-person gender violence training. It's extremely unusual. And we'll talk about this a second, but let's put up C-7 here. I was just listening to your reporter saying that Netanyahu says this is a tragic mishap. This absolutely untrue. This is strategic and intentional. The foreign aid workers, the foreign doctors that are actually in the hospital were asked to leave before this airstrike. And so that is not a mishap. That is absolutely deliberate. This is not the first time Israel has struck a hospital. Are you hearing from your contacts on the ground that foreign doctors working at NASA hospital were given the heads up to evacuate NASA hospital before a strike came?

Absolutely. They were told some arbitrary reason that they had to leave. and they weren't allowed to come back until the next day. So this is not an accident. Now, to travel from Nasser Hospital and Conutus to the WHO, that travel would have to be coordinated with Kogat, which is the Israeli agency that makes sure that they know who's moving where. And if they see a convoy moving and it is an unapproved convoy, they will strike it with a drone.

And so the hospitals always coordinate their. movement WHO coordinates movement with Israel at drop site we confirmed directly with with a person on the ground there that this that what dr. said maybe side there said did in fact occur there not another interview was done by I believe this is a nurse with times of times of London we can roll C8 there are other NGOs that do enter the hospital that were also attending the mandatory meeting but they they don't sleep in the corridors okay so how many of there were you approximately at this mandatory training and you've already said it's pretty unusual for you to have

this sort of mandatory training yeah it was about 15 of us that were there and the training was in what Amanda the training was at the WHO house and it was a training for gender based violence Was it strange to you or is this normal to receive this type of training? Yeah, in my prior times of volunteering internationally, we usually get all the information prior to our start. The fact that they're now introducing this gender-based violence lecture halfway through my rotation. What's also interesting is they mandated that one of our other volunteers who's planning to exit tomorrow to also attend.

So it was mandated for volunteers who really weren't going to have any physical interaction with patients. Also, the fact that we inquired about other ways to attend the lecture remotely, and it was completely turned down. So far, us as a group, our NGO, have discussed amongst ourselves, and we're all in consensus that this was a fishing expedition. Like, this didn't seem right. This didn't sit right with any of us in our gut. We knew something was not right. And so we inquired with our lead coordinator to investigate this with the WHO to give us more answers as to who ordered them to have us leave. So at a bare minimum, we know that the Israeli military knew that all of the international doctors and nurses were out of Nasser Hospital when.

they attacked the hospital. That's at a minimum. The questions that remain to be answered are who insisted to the WHO that these nurses and doctors go in person at this time? Why didn't they do this beforehand? Why did they have to do this in person? Who made that demand? One of the internet, as she said, I don't know if she said it in this clip or not, one of the international doctors was leaving the next morning, or later that day or something. Right. So it's like, and try to get out of it. Like, I don't need this gender-based training.

Like, I'm leaving. They're like, nope, you also must attend every single person. Because if you're going to do a double-tap strike in a hospital, you're going to kill a lot of medical staff. Because if you hit what, they hit the fourth floor right near the intensive care unit. And so one of the, one of the, one of the, doctors who was killed is a he's a resident who's a third year medical student he rushed to the scene American European Malaysian all you know these other doctors who were at Nasser

Hospital would have rushed to the scene it was a scene of terrible carnage trying to treat people as quickly as possible and then when you double tap it you would have killed those Americans and Europeans and Malaysians or whoever else is there so at a minimum, we know that that was not a risk that they faced with this double-tap strike. So then also we have now C-10, we can put on the screen. This was the headline in the New York Times just yesterday saying Israel says it attacked Gaza hospital to destroy camera placed by Hamas. And Ryan, you posted this by saying, compare this honest and press reporting from New York Times

is Eric Toler and others with the headline that the New York Times put on his article. Absolute night and day. the journalists find the IDF flat out lied. The editors then write a headline that pretends the IDF claim is serious and includes their slanderous claim that six of those killed were militants. Right. Yeah, and for context and credit there,

we put up C-11 as well. The first person, the first reporter, to observe this. And Eric Toller, in his thread, credited Eunice Tarawi, who's done incredible work. He's the guy who is constantly doing investigations into the war crimes committed by Israeli forces

using their own TikTok and Instagram and Facebook confessions that they post. What he observed is that on Channel 12, a right-wing Oson enthusiast, as Eunice calls him here, these guys who go on Twitter and look at satellite images and say, oh, look what I found here. Toler is a Bellingcat guy. Yeah, Toler is a former Bellingcat guy.

who now does this exact thing, OScent for the New York Times. You geolocate, you look at satellite image on this day, compare it to this day, and you can try to figure out what happens. It's very valuable. It's an incredible skill if you're good at. Yeah, an incredibly dangerous if you're not.

We reported earlier. Oh, yeah. Remember that the U.S. used some OSENT advice from amateurs in Yemen and killed dozens of innocent people. Yep. So this guy, he claimed on Channel 12 to have identified a Hamas camera

and you know there are cranks all over Twitter and all over YouTube and everywhere else. It shouldn't be a crime to be a crank but according to this crank he was involved

with the strike he was online with them he is now saying publicly to his Israeli media that he was helping to guide the missile. And Israel is still saying it was the second shot was a tank shell. There are photos of a missile approaching the hospital. Precision guided missile and that he was guiding it. He points to this white towel covering the camera, which is his evidence

that it's a hidden camera. Use your brain for a second. A black camera sitting out in the sun. is going to overheat you put a you put a white towel over it if you're Hamas is that how you hide a camera by putting a white towel over it the fourth floor of a hospital where all the media work now what we also know is whose camera this was this was a Reuters camera so we can put up C12 so Reuters cameraman was killed immediately and their camera was struck. And so the IDF then comes out and does not give any explanation for the second half of the double tap.

But they say that their now official story is that they identified a quote Hamas camera and moved to eliminated. If we can put up the Reuters headline, so the Reuters camera man was killed in this attack on a Reuters camera. In the article itself, there's a picture of the Reuters camera that was destroyed with a Live View backpack. A Live View backpack is only used for broadcasting.

You've probably used them maybe back way in the day. Yeah. You see them at any press about it. Right. It's for broadcasting. It is not for communication. It's not for secret communication with militants. You need a broadcast license.

You need to be working with a broadcaster or with like a use. channel or something. Yeah, right. It's not just like a streaming kit. Right. But it's not for communication one to one. No, it's a broadcast. Like literally the broadcast of the broadcast word. Yeah. Yeah. And so they have a picture in the Reuters article of the Live View backpack that was hit by the shell. Reuters headline is initial inquiry says Hamas camera was target of Israeli strike that killed journalists, and it says by Reuters. Interesting, there's no byline, which usually in a newsroom when there's no byline,

whoever was forced to write the story refused to put their name on it. So they killed a Reuters cameraman and then said it was Hamas. They didn't even say he was Hamas. They said camera was Hamas. And Reuters is willing to call itself Hamas because Israel says so.

Knowing full well, that it was their camera and their cameraman that they attacked. Again, the headline, initial inquiry says Hamas camera was target of Israeli strike that killed journalists. And nowhere in the article do they even say that that's not true. What they do say is that their camera operator was killed and that their camera was hit. But they don't even connect the dots that that's the camera they're referring to. I don't know what more capitulation.

you could have than to literally call yourself Hamas as Reuters. It's like a, and to do that in the wake of their colleague being killed, it's truly startling. A Reuters photographer resigned in protest over this. I saw yesterday or the day before. So like I said, I think we need to maintain our capacity to be shocked by this. Because if this isn't shocking to us, then it just becomes normalized and they won't even bother offering explanations. Meanwhile, as he was, before he was going on the Patrick Bet David podcast, Netanyahu was posting C9, that free press video discussing how they wrote the article, this is getting really mad at that Crystal and Sager talked about yesterday because they went after.

you Crystal and Sager, by name, Inglan. Did you feel left out? Of course I felt left out. I mean, you know I like to be part of group activities. But they went after you guys for questioning the article. And then Netanyahu actually posted in solidarity with the free press, basically, the video where they talked about the process of developing the article. Yeah, he posted Facts Matter. And in one of the clips here, and this is the one we just had up there, Olivia Rheingold is cited.

the case of Moseb L. Debs, and this is what they, this is what the free press itself put in their video. They write, or they quote, the 14-year-old boy was featured in the same CNN story as another child, quote, suffering from malnourishment, unquote, scare quotes. The original caption didn't mention that last May he sustained a traumatic head injury amid what SHMS news agency, closet-based outlet called, quote, an Israeli shell explosion. So, according to the free press, CNN is being unfair to Israel because they said that a 14-year-old boy is suffering from malnourishment without in the caption mentioning that he'd also had part of his skull blown out by an Israeli shell.

And Benjamin Netanyahu is so proud of this reporting from a Livy Reingold and the Free Press, that he shared it with Facts Matter. So in that editorial, one of the things the Free Press cited in defense of that article was that Washington Post, other outlets, added corrections, which really weren't corrections so much as they were updates to the stories. Update, the 14-year-old suffering from malnourishment also has a traumatic brain injury. And that's exactly... Okay, that's useful information. That is fine.

Right, and that's where they... Like, yeah, that's where it's like, yep, this is absolutely correct, that the context is important. And in some cases, the context is even more devastating to the narrative that, you know, this is all okay. That this isn't, you know, some deeply serious concern because, like, when you, when you zoom into the context, you realize, oh, this kid had his head blow off. Right. Or you realize this is a condition because someone was malnourished in the womb. This is a condition because nobody objects to the context. And I actually think that's the Washington Post and whoever else updating their story

proves that nobody objects to the full context. Right. And nobody would object to this reporting from the free press if they didn't follow it immediately with Israel's opponents are saying that these are the average. representatives of people in Gaza and they're using them to tell you that there's a famine when in fact there is not a famine. There is certainly there's suffering in Gaza, but there's no famine. So they are very clear about the purpose of their context that they're adding. They think that what they're doing is complicating the question and and letting people know

that actually it's not as bad as people want you to believe. That's what they're saying. Right. The context they're adding does not actually make their case. And so that's, if they're actually genuinely curious about why people are objecting to their reporting, that's why. It's because their conclusion, which clearly they started with before they did the reporting, their conclusion is incorrect. Also, they keep citing cerebral palsy and all these other maladies that are not fatal in children. So the fact that they're dying with these preexisting conditions, is not the point that you think it is. The point is to treat these conditions, not to malnourish them such that they die with them,

and then point to those conditions as some type of excuse for Israel to continue with its genocide. Hello, it's Danielle Fischel. Writer Strong. And Wilfredel from Podmeet's World. We are back in Las Vegas and giving the people what they want. A full week of Y2K content. Tell me why. Well, for the Backstreet Boys residency at Sphere, of course.

We joke and say this is our second marriage. But it takes a lot of communication. Plus, it's carrot top, baby. And finally, Ashley Simpson-Ross joins us to talk about her upcoming sold-out Vegas residence. Listen to PodMeets World on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. December 29th, 1975, LaGuardia Airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage, kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then everything changed.

There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal. Just a chaotic, chaotic scene. In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged. Terrorism. Listen to the new season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, I'm Jay Shetty, and I'm the host of the on-purpose podcast, and today I'm joined by one of the greatest athletes of all time, Novak Djokovic.

He's won 14 grand slams in a glittering career. Novak Djokovic! When you reach your 30, you start counting your days to your retirement. 38 this year, how long can I push my own limits? Listen to On Purpose with Jay Shetty on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. This is an IHeart podcast.