The Majority Report with Sam Seder - 3539 Whos Coming For Hegseth And Mike Johnsons Mutiny Woes W Jeet Heer Rep Summer Lee

Episode Date: January 11, 2026

It's Casual Friday on the Majority Report On today's program: On CNN, John Berman spars with Senator Tom Cotton over the legality of the boat strikes, and Cotton offers nothing but total deference to his supreme leader, Donald Trump. National Affairs correspondent at The Nation magazine, Jeet Heer joins Sam and Emma to wrap the week's news. The three get into the boat strikes, the house GOP women are leading a revolt against Speaker Mike Johnson and more. Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA) joins the program to talk about the internal GOP chaos in Congress, Epstein, problems facing the Democratic party, money in politics and more. In the Fun Half: Scott Bessent short-circuits from the softest pushback from Andrew Ross-Sorkin over his claim that inflation is worse in blue states. Tim Pool tries to promote the potential ground war with Venezuela without violating his ant-war facade. Chris Cuomo tries to label people voicing their opposition to Hegseth's slaughter in the Caribbean as hypocrites because Obama's drone strikes. In defense of Trump dozing off during a recent cabinet meeting, Sean Hannity tries to excuse it by claiming that Trump almost ever sleeps. All that and more. The Congress switchboard number is [phone]. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. Follow us on TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/@majorityreportfm Check us out on Twitch here: https://www.twitch.tv/themajorityreport Find our Rumble stream here: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Check out our alt YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/majorityreportlive Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! https://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: https://majority.fm/app Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code majority to get 10% off your purchase Check out today's sponsors: DELETEME: Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to joindeleteme.com/MAJORITY and use promo code MAJORITY at checkout. AURA FRAMES: Exclusive $35 off Carver Mat at https://on.auraframes.com/MAJORITY. Promo Code MAJORITY WILD GRAIN: Get $30 off your first box + free Croissants in every box. Go to Wildgrain.com/MAJORITY to start your subscription. SUNSET LAKE: Use coupon code "Left Is Best" (all one word) for 20% off of your entire order at SunsetLakeCBD.com  Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech On Instagram: @MrBryanVokey Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on YouTube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com  

Today's episode brought to you by sunset lake sabade.com. Use the code left as best. You get 20% off. And maybe you might want to get yourself 20% off on some flower or keef to celebrate Matt Lex's birthday. Or you can get some of that lifted tea that Brian raves about so much. I have a birthday, too. just not today. Get it now and just consume it until his birthday and through it.

You can get sabaday coffee and sabaday fudge. You can get lotions with seaboday that are great for dry skin, soves that are great for your muscles and off-label use, eczema for me. You can get tinctures that help you sleep, tinctures that help you relax, tinctures that help your dogs relax. you can get gummies, gummies that help you relax, gummies that help you sleep, gummies that help you focus, gummies that make you more calm, or gummies that have a little bit attached, say, in them, and, you know, make you have more fun than normal for some people.

Anyways, it's all at sunsetlake sabadea.com. Great farming practices. They don't use any pesticides. integrated pest management. They have great farming practices, regenerative farming that they developed with the University of Vermont. They are great movement partners. They donated tens of thousands of dollars to strike relief funds.

They just gave $5,000 to Vermont food pantry, carceral reform, planned parenthood, refugee resettlement, just an all-around great company, great company to support, but also a great product. Sunsetlake sabadeh.com. Use the code left is best. They're fans of the show, and you get 20% off. Now time for that very same show. Casual Friday. That means Monday is casual Monday.

Tuesday, casual Tuesday. Wednesday, casual hump day. Thursday, casual thurs. That's what we call it. And Friday, casual Shabbat. The Majority Report with Sam Cedar. It is Friday. December 5th, 2025. My name is Sam Cedar. This is the five-time award-winning majority report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America. downtown Brooklyn, USA. On the program today, Jeet here,

National Affairs correspondent at the Nation magazine, and then Representative Summerlee, representing Pennsylvania's 12th congressional district. Also on the program today, Trump regime blows up another boat in the Pacific, but controversy continues on

about the whole program and the double-tap. D.C. would be January 6th bomber reportedly tells the FBI he bought into the 2020 election conspiracies, though he started collecting stuff to build those bombs months, months before the 2020 election. Supreme Court reverses district court in reinstating Texas's racial gerrymander. Trump regime shortens term of work permits for migrants. Michigan Supreme Court considers barring courthouse immigration raids. And Kathy Hochel of the Hokel administration teeing up a tax increase on the rich.

Huh. Seems like she can be. And we were told it was impossible. Grand jury refuses to re-indict. Letitia James. Trump to end prison rape protections for trans and intersex people. Jesus. RFK's CDC advisors weakens a recommendation on hepatitis B vaccine for babies.

And Netflix to acquire at least half of Warner Brothers. No word as to who's going to get CNN. But for the moment, it appears it won't be a, Barry Weiss's patron. All this and more on today's majority report. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. It is casual Friday. Casual Friday.

And Matt Lex birthday. How old are you now? Like, how old are you now? 37. Jeez. I know. I've seen you go from your 20s to your 30s. Deep into your 30s.

Deep, deep. you are having an emotional breakdown. What are your big birthday plans? In terms of my neurological capacity. Yeah, just cope with, you know, the passing of my life, I think. But no, I'm hoping. All right. Spent some time with my whiskey bottle.

Rapidly accelerating March of time. Oh, believe me, buddy. Sounds like a great party. You have no idea how fast it starts going when you start to get the other side of that hill. I'm staying in a race. We'll probably have more to say on that birthday later in the program. There's a piece out. We'll talk about this with the jeat.

But there's a piece out today, news and analysis piece that it seems. like just incredibly overdue by Charlie Savage and Julian Barnes, saying that the second strike scrutiny, the scrutiny over the second strike. And we've, lawmakers have seen the video and apparently like I don't even know. It's hard to even sort of like entertain these things. But supposedly they were really shook by the fact. that these two guys who are allegedly drug traffickers were just hanging on to shards of the boat and weren't calling in for reinforcements.

That was what the new lie from the administration has been to justify the double tap, to justify the second strike, which is that these men that are people that were clinging to the wreckage of the boat were using some sort of radio device to, signal on nearby other narco-terrorist boat. The video proves, and I think the admiral told them it had to in that briefing, that, no, there were no radio or communication devices, nor was there a second boat in the vicinity that they could have been signaling to with their hands. But even, like, okay, like, what does reinforcements mean?

Like, they come in and they, they, they, they, I don't, know, rescue the couple of pounds of cocaine that's on there and then load it onto another boat and go, like, this is all, it's absurd. You know, like it's in, and I don't know, it's something to talk about with Jeep, but here is, I guess the absurd part is, I have no doubt that, you know, these are war crimes, but the absurd part is, is like, where's the war? Yeah. This is like, what's the difference between them just blowing up, I don't know, a guy driving his car on the highway? They've already killed people on U.S. soil this administration via the abusive tactics by ICE. I mean, this is a murderous regime. And look, every administration in my lifetime has been a murderous regime and has committed war crimes. And I include Obama and that and I definitely include Joe. Biden in that. But they are bringing it even closer and closer to home. This is what Richard

Beck was talking about also in his book, Homeland. The fact that the war on terror tactics are coming increasingly closer to our home base, it's fascist blowback or imperial blowback, rather, and we're seeing it in real time. Yeah, it's bizarre. But here is Tom Cotton, who's also talking about bloodlust. He is... is probably one of the most bloodthirsty in the Senate. And the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee at this moment. And here he is with John Berman from CNN. A question. If they are terrorists, when did Congress pass the authorized use of force to attack them?

John, the reason why your question is not well-founded. It's like saying, would Barack Obama be okay droning an American citizen when he was present like he did to Anwar Al-Alawki over in the Middle East. These are totally different categories. The president has a-in-law-in-the-concutioned in the Constitution is our commanding chief. That's why I asked when Congress passed the authorized use of military force. There was an authorized use of military force against terrorists. I'm not saying what he was legal or not. Just because it's so cynical to use Anwar Al-A-Lawki in his death, which the only people

that were criticizing that at the time were left-wing folks. I just want to point that out. I mean, Tom Cotton was in the Senate. Yeah. And I do not remember Tom Cotton leading the charge against. It's not like they were shy about going against Obama. It was literally, you know, a half a dozen people on the Internet who were arguing that the attack on Al-Wa-Wa-Wa-Wa-Wa-Wa-and we also killed his son, incidentally, two weeks later while he was sitting in a cafe, a six-year. year old boy, American citizens, both of them.

Yeah. And the whole, you know, Obama assassination Tuesday meetings that they would have where they would line up who they were allowed to assassinate, it was only folks on the left who were crying out about this. Tom Cotton, as far as I remember, said nothing other than, you know, we're in the middle of a war on terror and Obama loves... I mean, there's a, he's maybe the most hawkish senator in, in, in the country right now. I just like, when they're talking about the use of the authorization of military force,

you have the 2001 authorization of military force and then the 2002 one. And neither of them, even in the broadest understanding of those authorizations would apply, because one's pertaining to 9-11, the other's pertaining to Iraq. The Venezuelan drug smuggling, they're not even attempting to make that case. And so that's what Berman is setting up here. the idea that like you really think that this is a legally reasonable interpretation of the AUMFs that were pertaining to Iraq and Afghanistan to say they can be applied to boats in the Caribbean or do you have to pass a separate authorization for the use of military force because this is what Congress's job is supposed to be until but we gave the power way too much of it to the executive branch after 9-11. Congress passed the authorized use of military force. There wasn't authorized use of military force. against terrorists. I'm not saying what he was legal or not, but that's what they based it on.

In this case, one was the authorized use of military force to attack suspected drug dealers off the coast of Venezuela. John, the president has inherent authority as the commander in chief under the Constitution to protect America using our armed forces against a foreign terrorist organization. Congress has passed laws that allows the president to designate foreign terrorist organizations. That's what he's done with these cartels in Venezuela. who are deeply intertwined with the illegitimate Maduro regime. The president is finally have a president's taking seriously this threat. The latest explanation, excuse me, Senator, you know the latest explanation from the administration

is they are non-state actors in this case. That is important for them to designate their non-state actors here. They are not for purposes of attacking them off the coast of Venezuela connected to the Maduro regime. They're non-state actors there. And Andrew McCarthy and other conservative writers will say that they don't qualify by the statutory definition of what a terrorist is in U.S. code. Well, John, I disagree that all of these cartels in Latin America do qualify as foreign terrorists.

And frankly, their activities have killed many more Americans than al-Qaeda or ISIS has killed. And it's a threat that we should take seriously in our own backyard just as seriously as we take the threat of al-Qaeda and ISIS around the world. I think most Americans, especially those are Kansans who have. lost loved ones to drugs would agree that we need to take this threat seriously. You know, we'll pause for one second. You know, this is by this measure, the Republicans taking Medicaid away from millions of Americans and pricing health insurance away from millions Americans, which we know for a fact, will kill 10,000, 20,000 Americans over the course of, I don't know how much period of time.

We know that we have 70,000 overdose deaths. We don't know what percentage. We know 10% of drugs in this country come from Venezuela. We don't know what the percentage of ODs they are, but that would be if it's 10% of those ODs, 7,000 people, more people are going to die because of why he voted for a couple of months ago in this country. We know this. It's a fact. Does this is this the definition of what constitutes like a threat to the American public that qualifies for? Assassination.

Murder. Murder. Extrajudicial murder without bringing in. What's the difference? Let's bring the drones right over, you know, the Senate Republican caucus meetings. Interdict the boat. I mean, exactly right. Interdict the boat and then make that case.

But that's the whole, this whole charade is meant to disguise what the true design was, which was to try to goad Maduro and the Venezuelan government into responding. Just a little bit more because Berman kind of makes the key point here. I just say like God never addresses the whole country. about non-state actors that Burman brings up. We would agree that we need to take this threat seriously. Then when will you vote on an authorized use of military force if it's as big of a threat as foreign terrorists? Yep.

John, I think the president has every legal authority he needs as the commander in chief. If my Democratic colleagues disagree, then they're perfectly entitled to offer an amendment when we start debating the defense spending bill to prohibit him from doing so. Congress has done that throughout our history. But until they get the votes for that, the president has the authority that he needs to protect our country from these drug traffickers. That's not how that works. That's not how that works.

He doesn't have the authority until Congress decides to restrain him. The authorization for the use of military force is supposed to be. It's already insanely broad in its scope, but clearly related to the 9-11 attacks and to Iraq and broadly to the Middle East. that has nothing to do with this. If you want to make a claim that these are narco-terrorists, then pass the authorization for the use of military force that would allow Donald Trump to do this kind of thing.

But they're not going to, because they know there's actually no legal basis here. All right. In a moment, we're going to be talking to Jeet here, National Affairs Correspondent at the Nation. We'll be talking about this and more. And then later in the program, Representative Summer Lee, representing a Pennsylvania's 12th congressional district, A couple words from our sponsors today. Delete me makes it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data online at a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable.

I've been using Delete Me for well before they became a sponsor, I don't know, for 10 years at least. largely of course because you know i feel a little exposed uh doing the show but it also has the added benefit of making it much harder for um fissures people who are trying to scam you online for identity theft etc etc because uh all of your sort of information uh your basic information is available through these data broker sites where you've lived what your addresses are, who your relatives are, maybe your emails, if you have multiple emails, what your phone numbers are, what maybe some of your social media accounts are,

and they use this information along with the other information they might get in on the dark web. They can build a whole dossier on you. They can either use it to trick you by sending you emails and saying, you know, hi, Sam, you're, you know, something's up with here, click on this link and bingo, bango, you're in trouble. Or they can steal your identity because they've got enough information. Data brokers make a profit off your data. Your data is a commodity.

Anyone on the web can buy your private details. This can lead to, like I say, identity theft, fishing attempts, and harassment. But now you can protect your privacy, would delete me. What do do? your name, contact information, social security number, home address, even information about your family members could all be compiled by data brokers and sold online. New York Times wirecutter named Delete Me, their top pick for data removal services. Delete me knows your privacy is worth protecting. You sign up and provide Delete Me with exactly what information you want deleted.

Their experts take it from there. Delete me sends you regular personalized privacy reports showing what they found, where they found it, and what they removed. and Delete Me isn't just a one-time service. It's always working for you, always getting those data broker sites to take your info down because they repopulate the sites. Thanks to Delete Me for sponsoring the Majority Report. Take control your data, keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me. Now at a special discount for our listeners, get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to join

deleteme.com slash majority. Use the promo code majority at checkout. Only way to get 20% off. Go to join deleteme.com slash majority. Enter the code majority at checkout. That's join delete me. com slash majority. Code is majority.

Also, this episode of Majority report brought to you by Wildgrain. Wild grain is amazing. It is the first bake from frozen subscription box that provides for you artisan breads, seasonal pastries, all and fresh pastas, plus all items conveniently bake in 25 minutes or less.

Unlike store-bought, Wildgrain uses a slow fermentation process that's easier on your belly, richer in nutrients, and richer in antioxidants. It's made with simple ingredients that you can pronounce, no chemicals here, in other words. Wildgrain's

boxes are fully customizable. They're constantly adding seasonal and limited time products for you to enjoy. Like right now they have tear, oh, tear and share cranberry pecan rolls, Parmesan herb biscuits and apple pie bites. Damn it. In addition to their classic box, they now feature a gluten-free box in a plant-based box. I get a box. I have still some apple cider donuts that are sitting in the freezer that taught me.

I try and save them for Saul every now and then. I break down. But to have a warm apple cider donut is nuts. It is nuts. And it is so easy. I literally, I take it out of the box. I put the oven of four and a quarter. Put it in there for, I think it's like 15 minutes.

It comes out. It's insane. I've had quassants from there. Insane. Bread. Also, great pasta. had a like a squash ricotta uh ravioli all their stuff is really amazing um this would make a great gift too incidentally um but uh if you i don't know you're having people over for dinner

and you make fresh baked bread it's but really you don't even have to take a bowl out you just pop it into the oven for 25 minutes honestly it is amazing um you can give a gift box or send an e-card gift to the inbox, Wildgrain makes the perfect gift for loved ones to bring or to bring as a host gift. It's true. For limited time, Wildgrain offering our listeners $30 off your first box,

plus free croissant in every box. When you go to wildgrain.com slash majority, start your subscription. You heard me. Free croissant in every box. how do you say free in French I don't know I took one fair

laissez faire oh yeah uh fé croissant and allemont a box 30 bucks off your first box when you go to wildgrain

dot com slash majority check it out honestly delicious and lastly this episode is brought to you by aura frames just a fantastic gift this is like there's

the intersection of fantastic gift super easy gift to give that's why I love this one because it's actually a really thoughtful great gift for your parents your grandparents your uncles your aunts your cousins

your friends even your own kids and it's also super easy you don't have to leave the house You don't have to, like, you can personalize it. You buy Aura frames and you can literally preload it without ever seeing the box because they send you a code. It gives you unlimited free photos and videos. You download the Aura app.

You connect to Wi-Fi. You send the videos to this video frame. And your parents are going to be able to see rotating. It just rotates through. It's fantastic. It's video, audio. It's really great. Matt now is telling me that I had free wrong, but we're wrong about it.

It doesn't matter. This is also Tre bien gift. Don't wait, win the holidays right now with ORA frames. It comes with a gift box. Obviously, no price tag on it. It's just a great gift to give both for you the giver and for the getter. And then it's a gift that can. keeps giving every day because you can put new photos up there every day.

For limited time, save on the perfect gift by visiting AuraFrames.com, get $35 off or his best-selling Carver Matt Frames. Name number one by wirecutter. Use the promo code majority at checkout. That's A-U-R-A-Frames.com promo code majority. This deal is exclusive to listeners and frames sell out fast. So order yours right now in time for the holidays. Support the show. mention us at checkout terms and conditions apply uh we'll put all of that info in the podcast and

youtube descriptions quick break and uh we'll be right back with jeet here we are back sam cedar ama vigland on the majority report want to welcome back to the program the national affairs correspondent for the nation magazine always a pleasure jeet here uh welcome back jeet always a lot of fun to be on the show. So you got a couple of articles that you've written in the nation over the past two, actually, that were right in line with what I wanted to talk to you about today, which is great. I mean, that often happens. But let's start with this.

Over the past couple of days, there has been this sort of seemingly out of nowhere, this, sudden paying attention to the fact that for the past three months, we have been, as a country, blowing up boats in the Pacific, in Caribbean, the Pacific Ocean, the Caribbean Sea, for seemingly, I mean, you know, no reason, no reason without any clarity as to who are on these boats. We're not even clear, like, all we hear is narco-terrorists, but we don't even know, like, what group is it, supposes? I have to correct you, not just narco-terrorists,

but caliphate cocaine narco-terrorist. I believe that there is some indication from the senator of the great state of South Carolina that what we're dealing with are jihadists who are also smuggling in cocaine. But that's how you bridge the that's how you bridge the AUMF, right? Because like we just played this clip of Tom Cotton and they are trying to say that Trump inherently has the authority to do these strikes. That is not true.

The authorizations for the use of military force incredibly broad. We need to be repealing these. This has been a progressive idea for quite a while. But it pertains to 9-11 Iraq, the Middle East, not Venezuela. Well, I mean, that is a sort of gets to the sort of broader source of all this, which I mean, it really does go back to the legacy of George W. Bush and the now sainted Dick Cheney, who as both earlier presidents, who created a sort of broad presidential power on the idea of fighting, you know, this amorphous entity called terrorism and also fighting metaphorical war on drugs. Trump is basically using that authority to launch these kind of, you know, what I see is sort of performative wars or, you know, I mean, real wars in the sense of you're like killing real people. But Trump seems to have the idea that, you know, he wants to be a president who can be a military leader, but not get involved in the actual wars that could get you in trouble like Iraq. And so, you know, like picking off small fishermen's boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific seems the way to go.

And as you mentioned, like, this has been going on for months. And, like, you know, your show has dealt with it at the nation. I and others have written about it, but nobody was paying attention. I mean, you could not get like Kim Jeffries and Chuck Schumer to talk about this. And this actually gets to the other aspect of this. Like, the thing is, like, in and of itself, I said right from the start, this is simple murder. Like this is just like, this is like this, it's not a war.

You're just like blowing up ships. And even if we stipulate that what they're saying, which they've never provided evidence for, that these are drug ships, like you don't actually have the right to blow up like drug in the United States. You certainly can't do that in international waters. It's a simple policy of murder. But what seems to have happened is that,

video came out from the first of these strikes on September 2nd, which showed that even with the broadest presidential power, and the broadest claims for like a war on narco-terrorism, they blew up the ship, but there were survivors, and then they blew up the survivors. And, like, that is as clear-cut, like, a crime as you can imagine. Like, there's even within the rules of war, if you say this is a war, which is a war,

it's not, that is a crime. You know, this is actually, in Nuremberg, Japanese and German officers were tried, found guilty, and executed for doing what the Trump administration did here. They had killed American soldiers who had been wounded and should have been taken as prisoners of war. This is like, like, so I mean, what seems have happened is that even within this horrible system, bipartisan system of accepting presidential war-making power, this is like,

you know, this actually crosses a real line. Is that, I mean, is that what, because this is the first piece, you know, I just mentioned the top of this, Charlie Savage, and just, and Julian Barnes in the Times just finally came out with a piece. Second Strike scrutiny obscures larger question about Trump's boat attacks. But what, why did it take so long? Is it just that the, the Democrats are too nervous about challenging all the other stuff, let me that you just said.

Like put aside the, I guess you could call it a war crime, but there's no war. Like, there's no, like, it's a second to order, like it's a second order. like it's a second order like a threat to the American public because they're not claiming that the narco terrorists, you know, just sort of the generic narco terrorists are coming and shooting Americans. They're claiming the narco terrorists are selling a product that's killing 70,000 Americans a year. We could debate as to like, you know, why they're in that situation. It was because of Purdue Pharma and and, you know, PBA. and whatnot. But is it now a considered a threat to the to the U.S. public if there's something

that could kill them, that if you distribute something that could kill them, like, are we going to do this with, I don't know, cigarette manufacturers? Are we going to do this with processed food? Are we going to do this with, you know, I don't know, people who provided poor PPE during COVID. I mean, well, like, there's no, there's no justification of this. And we didn't hear the Democrats say a single word. And we didn't hear the media say a single word. Like, why is Charlie Savage, who is a national security, you know, a writer? Now, maybe he's written some stuff about this before. But this also seems to be like, second strike scrutiny obscures a larger question about Trump's boat attacks. We, buddy, you could have written a piece about, and maybe he did.

be fair, but certainly not that many people. I mean, Savage is an excellent reporter. Yes, without doubt. He did report it. But certainly, the New York Times editorial page. Well, this is a news analyst piece that he's read, analysis that he's, he's written. But the point remains. I mean, maybe it's not him.

I may maybe it's unfair because he is a very good reporter on this stuff. But we haven't seen any part of the establishment. Yeah. Say a word about this. No, no. I mean, like, it's completely deranged. I mean, there seems to be like a sort of broad acceptance of Trump as a commander-in-chief. I mean, you know, he did win the election.

There is a sort of, you know, imperial presidency that goes back to the Second World War. And, you know, like, if one wanted to credit, like, Schumer and Jeffries with any sort of Machiavellian cynicism, what could say that maybe what they're thinking is, look we have the imperial presidency Trump has it we don't want to push it back because next time it's going to be our term we'll have like a Democrat in power I don't actually I don't even

I feel like that's giving them too much credit like oh definitely like so what George Schumer's like I want to make sure that we have a president who's going to be able to push through single payer yeah well I mean I mean like you have like later I mean like okay you know like I'm generally very

Pacific I don't like you know used the military force. But, you know, like, if President AOC wants to bomb the Slacker family for their crimes against, you know, like, actually literally being responsible with the death of, like, thousands of Americans, probably hundreds of thousands of Americans, you know, well, well, we've set the president. We've set the president. But if we have to, like, you know, like, why should we leave the dealing of health care

executives to Luigi, you know, like, maybe the next American president, I was to like realize... Send out a couple of drones. I wait for a book. Their next mission. Board of directors meeting and that's it. Yeah, no. But I mean, but unfortunately, I mean, this is our dreams, right?

Like, unfortunately, this is not how they're thinking. I just think that they're cowards. I think that they are in a permanent, like, 2002 mentality, like, you know, that the Republicans are strong on foreign policy. We have to differ. And we're even seeing, like, on Venezuela, right? Like, you know, like 70, 80% of the population that someone who paid Venezuela

and you're seeing like nothing from virtually nothing from the Democrats except saying like, well, Congress should authorize this. Right. You know, we reserved. There was an attempt. To be fair, there was an attempt in the House to push a bill to block any type of, I don't know if it was just strictly, you can't do this unilaterally without our authorization or if it was like really a legitimate attempt to block it.

But you know, we forget Nancy Pelosi was clapping when Juan Guaido showed up at the state, you know, Trump's, you know, first term state of the union. Biden brought him in in his term as an ambassador for the democracy summit that he was holding. It's a, it's a deep rot. It is a deep. I mean, I mean, basically, at the highest levels, I mean, I think the Democrats actually divided. I think that there are people in the House who are speaking out against Venezuela and these attacks. But I mean, certainly like Schumer, like the only thing I've heard from Schumer is that he wants congressional authorization, which I'm sorry, that's not like.

No side deals on the when dealing with Iran. Do you remember that? His video about after Trump bombed Iran, he was just, his critique was. Or right before, the critique was process. Yeah. So, I mean, the larger aspect is you have an imperial presidency that is tied to imperialism. It's seen as you have to give the commander-in-chief this sort of like, you know, broad authorization to carry out these imperial wars.

And among the Democrats, you know, I would say at least among the leaders, there's acceptance. I think that, you know, like this is sort of changing in terms of Congress as a whole. But it's going to take time. And I actually think that, you know, if one is talking about bipartisanship, I mean, like, there are actually some Republicans who are, like, also speaking out against us who could be very useful allies, you know, if we really wanted to roll this back. But, yeah, I mean, the thing is, what you said before, like, I kind of made a mistake in one of my columns that referred to this as a war crime. And I think my colleagues and I talked about this, like, like, no, no, this is like just, it's a crime, pure and simple. This is murder. This is the American government acting like the mafia.

It's totally, you know, and if this were like, you know, like a genuine constitutional republic, this would be on itself, you know, grounds were impeachment and removal. But we're so far away from that point. Yeah, it's amazing to me. I mean, throughout, like, you know, we would headline every time we blew up another boat. and but it was like there's no we you know we couldn't play footage where you know Chuck Schumer comes out after the first boat is like what is the president doing like and this is the thing that I just find sort of fascinating it's like the the the timidity I mean I was

talking to somebody yesterday about like you know going back to the Kerry versus Bush in 2004 and how John Kerry was swift boated But the reason why John Kerry was able to be swift-boated, the predicate to that was how defensive John Kerry and the Democrats were when it came to national security. I mean, here's a guy whose John Kerry was not only, I think he got a purple heart, but he, the most admirable thing about him in terms of the military was that he testified in front the Senate said who's going to be the last person to die in Vietnam for a mistake. And cut to 2000 in the wake of 9-11, the Democrats are so terrified of being seen as being

soft in some way that Kerry had to like lard up on all this sort of military regalia as a way of like trying to sell himself to the American public. And he basically just said to, you know, George Bush. like here's my soft underbelly um because you can you can sense my insecurity about this rather than just being secure enough and saying like i'm a vet like ice actually served he didn't that's it he brought people up there do like whole military pageantry during the dnc 2004 but that was way i just want to like uh john carey ready to serve yes yes the whole thing but but that national mood is so different. What makes it even more egregious for the Democrats now is that

national mood is way different than this one one right now where it's actually quite bipartisan the disgust with our foreign policy. I mean, especially among the base of the party that's acting in this manner or not acting. I've been correct. He got a silver star, which involves meritorious combat action. I mean, so the guy was actually, you know, like sort of a decorated vet. And rather than let that speak for him, he had to do this whole. whole sort of like, like, almost like, like somebody would cause play. He didn't need to cosplay. He could have just gone up there.

But it's this sort of like temerity in these areas. Like Chuck Schumer should have been out there on day one after this is done and just go like, I don't know how we're going to stop him. But what he's doing is illegal. This is wrong. We don't know who those people are. We don't know wonder what authority he's doing this. There is no such a thing as a vague narco-terrorism.

terrorist. That's a made up word. I mean, they, they, they, they are so fearful, they miss these opportunities. And now it feels like, almost like when a ref misses a foul, uh, you know, a blatant foul on one end of the court, they come back down and they call and they make up, and they make up, it's like a makeup call on some level. Yeah, yeah. I mean, if I had to like, their eyes, uh, my sense is that like some of this might not have to be coming from within the military itself. I think the Pentagon is quite unhappy with Pete Hanksaf. They, and for very good reasons, you know, like this guy is like a totally incompetent. Well, that video has to come from somewhere, right?

Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's not coming from. I think that the, and he's been firing people like left and right. And like, so I actually do think, like, my suspicion is that what has changed is that the military started to like leakless and also, you know, tell their allies in Congress, including Republicans, because I think it's actually notable that congressional Republicans are starting to move away from Hexon. I actually think that the change is not any disgust at the policy. The change is that some people are seeing this as an opportunity to, like, you know, go after Pete Hexon,

which, you know, like I totally support that's all good. But, I mean, you know, like you remove Hexap. Hopefully you get somebody a little bit more competent in their place. but, you know, the core problem of the policy, I mean, the core problem is like it's an imperial fantasy. It's this idea that the U.S. can go back to the 19th century, gunboat diplomacy, and keep Latin America in line. And we're seeing a lot of this, you know, with Trump, with like, you know, intervention in Argentina, in Honduras. And, you know, like, I mean, America's a, you know, big, powerful country. A lot of these countries are dependent on it.

But, I mean, I think the era of, like, however, you know, America could dominate the hemisphere like that. I think it's frankly over. And what you're seeing now, like, you know, more broadly, is this is really increasing the incentive for all these governments to, like, you know, strengthen their ties with China. Like, you know, like, let's not be beholden to like this, you know, this rogue crazy superpower that is like, you know, we'll arbitrarily blow up our shows. Like, I think you're absolutely, I think the military, I think that's like, you know, the answer to the question we've been asking around years. Like, why all of a sudden? And it's because the military sees this as an opportunity to both maintain their ability

to bomb boats, you know, at will, but also to get rid of Whiskey Pete. And when I saw Jake Tapper speaking passionately about this issue and him being across the reporting on these leaks, I was like, okay, it's some national security people that are leaking to him. That's what it felt like, at least. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I mean, like, you know, there's a lot of reasons, you know, like, this is the guy who brought it, like, all the, you know, generals and admirals, like, in America, all over

the world who are serving brought them to Virginia so he could lecture them, you know, like, about working out, you know, like, start losing some weight or whatever. Like, like, can you imagine, like, if you know, you're, like career built there, you devoted your life to this and this, like, you know, this complete degenerate former alcoholic spouse abuser is the former? Well, you know, I want to give him credit.

Yeah. I would, if he may be taking a break, but I suspect that, well, that's when he had the fog of war. Apparently he was at his home. Did you know that? That's what the classified briefing said.

So who knows what he meant by fog of war at his house? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. The Jack Daniels of war. I can can CNN is CNN going to do a cal she a bet on how many seconds after Pete Hegzeth loses his job? Will he have a bottle in his hand? Sam, I can't come in preemptively next week. I'm down with the case of fog of war. Yeah, exactly.

All right. So let's move on to the what's going on the house. You have a piece up about Mike Johnson is, and it's been. been very quiet about this. But there's like a full on sort of like a mutiny brewing in the Republican caucus. And I don't know. Let's talk about this specifically, but I do get the sense that a lot of like things are cracking up now on that side of things. In the in the MAGA world, it's not just in the house. It's also like we see it in the, you know, the podcast, you know, conservative media world.

Things are cracking up to largely, you know, some to say extent about Israel, but also sort of like broken out in the open with the Charlie Kirk thing. There just seems to be a lot of like things that are unstable on the Republican side right now. now, not the least of which I think it's because of that election two or three years, I guess a month ago now. But what, tell us about an election in Tennessee where the Republicans, like they won, but it's a 13-point swing towards the Democrats. I mean, I do think that, yeah, I think there's a lot of discontent, probably like, you know, a lot of different sources, even though, you know, like in some ways the Republicans have

been running roughshot. I do think that they have a sense that, you know, like, they had this very narrow window of opportunity of two years with a trifecta. And it's, you know, it's coming to a close and they're looking around thinking, like, you know, like, what have we actually, like, achieved? And I think there's also, like, all sorts of internal tensions within it. I mean, like, I have to say, like, you know, like the Republicans in Congress have been a mess for a long time. I'd argue since Newt Gingrich took over in the 1990s. They love fighting amongst themselves.

Well, that's the first time that they, you know, Newt Gingrich took over in the 90s, but it's also the first time that they had control of the House for 30 years prior to that. I mean, people don't, what did you remind people? Up until like 1994,

Democrats controlled the U.S. House for 30 years, for 30 years. Go ahead, sorry. Yeah, yeah, no, I think the Gingrich moment is kind of key to a lot of this in the sense that he both, you know, did an amazing thing of, like, you know, flipping the house for his first time in decades. But he, like, sort of flipped the house running as this outsider, running as, you know, like, I'm challenging, not just the Democrats with the leaders of my own party. And this actually created this template where, like, you know, like, anybody who's like, you know, an underling thinks, like, well, you know, like, dude did it. I can overthrow the king and I can be king. And, you know, like, they've gotten through, like, it's a real contrast between the two parties where, like, you know, the Democrats have had, like, stable leadership.

In some cases, perhaps too stable leadership. Yes. You know, but the Democrats, the Republicans have this constant turmoil. And I think we're seeing this, like, with Mike Johnson. And I think, like, one of the more interesting subplots that's kind of coming around is that Mike Johnson, I mean, there's two ways to look at it. One is that he's like a kind of sexist pig who has like alienated a lot of like women in his own party. Perhaps the other way, maybe more generous way, you know, in the spirit of like the Thanksgiving holiday is, Mike Johnson is recreating second way feminism.

You're suddenly seeing people like Barjee, Taylor Green, and like, wait a minute, we're second class citizens, you know? Like, we're months away from Nancy Mace, like, you know, tweeting out the Scum Manifesto. and like, you know, like how Valerie Salinas and how like, you know, like, maybe we should castrate all the men. Because I'll tell you, the women of the GOP, they are not happy. That article

from the Times is, I mean, that's why it's just funny. Like, they are, first of all, Nancy Mace was also across getting rid of Kevin McCarthy. So I just want to point this out, too, that now she's turning on Mike Johnson. But it was Marjorie Taylor Green.

It was Annapolina Luna. It was in that article. And also notably, Elise DeFonnik, who is really, really scorned at this point, tapped for UN ambassador and then ushered away to saying Trump says, you got to go back to your district. You don't get that fancy outfit in the apartment anymore. All those dinners you thought you were going to. Go back to your district.

And then now you got to run in this race in New York State that is increasingly looking. like it's unwinnable in part because Trump screwed her over by playing paddy cakes with mom Donnie in and getting flattered by him in that meeting, which was like her going to be her statewide argument about anti-Semites and socialism coming for you or whatever. And so she's turning on Mike Johnson now in this very interesting way. And it's like, you guys, what did you think you were signing up for? He's a Christian evangelical fundamentalist. I get it. But it's like, you I guess there's an unspoken rule that if you're a woman in the Republican Party, you can have your own career,

but as long as you say other women shouldn't have their career, they should be under the dominion of their husband, then we'll allow you to play ball. But Mike Johnson's such a true believer that he couldn't even do that. And apparently he just doesn't listen to any of the women. That's what the Times was reporting in their caucus meetings. Yeah, no, he doesn't. I mean, just to give you a sort of statistics,

so there's only like out of 200, 120 Republicans in the House. It's only 33 women. In contrast, there's like almost 100 Democratic women. So they have a small number. But not one Republican women elected is on a committee chair. Like all the committees are headed by men. The woman that Johnson is closest to is Lisa McCain.

But he said, about her, you know, she's the person I would trust most to make Thanksgiving dinner. So, by the way, Emma, I hope that you made Thanksgiving dinner for everyone at the majority. If you mean drinking wine on the couch and watching football, then yes, I did make Thanksgiving dinner. My kind of Thanksgiving dinner. Emma brings us sandwiches in the office every day. She comes in with. I have to.

It's in my contract. She's wrapped them in linen napkins for us. Yes. It was twine. I mean, yeah, the way to get into good heart of, like, you know, Republican leadership is to be the type of woman that makes Thanksgiving dinner. Johnson and his wife were all, like, on a podcast, and they talked about Atlanta, about, you know, there are theories about the different brains of men and women. How men can, you know, men are for Mars, women are for Venus. Their idea is, like men's brains are like waffles and women's brains are like spaghetti.

So, Sam, with his waffle-like brain, is able to compartment. mentalize, whereas Emma with her spaghetti-like brain, she cannot compartmentalize. And it's always like mixing up personal stuff with political, with business. It's true. This is actually a fairly common theory in the Republican world. There's actually a big article in the compact by this woman Helen Andrews about how women are ruining the workplace,

basically saying that everything that's wrong with America, Woke, D.I, comes from the fact that, you know, women are now a majority of lawyers, are majority at the New York Times, and they're bringing all their icky women spaghetti brains, inability to compartmentalize into the public space. And that article made a huge hit. Ross, do that interview there for the New York Times,

you know, under the headline. you know, like are women ruining the workplace? So this is like a very serious ideological faction. And it's in tension with the fact that, you know, you actually, you know, like there's only a smaller number of Republican women, but they are Republican women. They have all the same ambitions as like male politicians. They want to serve on committee chairs.

They want to be able to see a future where they can rise in leadership. And, you know, Johnson's not having it. So he is like, you know, basically recreated the kind of, Ender wars that the rest of America experienced in the 1960s inside the Republican Party. It's fascinating. We're going to link to that piece. Jeet here, National Correspondent at Nation Magazine, I encourage people to read that piece. It is fascinating.

And, you know, we have to say to Emma all the time. Like, facts don't care about your feelings when it comes to the Giants or the NICS for that matter. All right. Picking these things I'm so emotional about isn't helping my case. Jeet here, thanks so much. I really appreciate it. We'll talk to you soon. Always great to be on. Yeah. Okay. All right, folks, we're going to take quick break. When we come back, we're going to be talking to Representative Summerlee, representing Pennsylvania's 12th congressional district. We'll be right back after this.

We are back. We are back. Sam Cedar, Emma Vigland, on the Majority Report. It is a pleasure to welcome to the program, Representative Summer Lee. she is representative of pennsylvania's 12th congressional district which is Pittsburgh uh and uh in environments um congresswoman uh welcome to the program i don't know if you caught part of what we were just talking about with jeet here but he wrote a piece about the sort of nascent maybe not so nascent mutiny that's sort of taking place in the house with mike johnson particularly amongst women Republican Congress folks there because apparently Mike Johnson thinks that women have spaghetti brains and men have waffle brains.

I'm shocking. When you say I literally caught the last like five seconds, but was still able to put the context clues together. Well, so I mean, what is your sense? of like, of what has been going on with Marjorie Taylor Green. This could be her last day, I think, or close to it. I mean, last day where she shows up. I mean, she doesn't qualify for her pension for a month, so she can hang around a little bit.

But she's also done quite well. She's, does she, like, does she do like a little, like after session, like little learning annexes on how you can make $25 million while you're in Congress for $4? years? I have not received the link. But, you know, I don't know. When we talk about just what's been going over there, I think we think about it as being a this Congress phenomenon. But honestly, obviously, I came in, you know, 23. It's been like this the entire time. So it has been a really chaotic environment. And obviously, Mike Johnson wasn't there at the beginning of that. But there's obviously been this push and pull, this tension between the real,

hardliners who are incidentally more likely to be women and you know and this new kind of culture that they've even had to deal with. I've always wondered within, you know, Republicans before it with MAGA Republicans, what would the dynamics be as these women who are comfortable enough or with the desire to harm or oppress other communities and overlook their own oppression within in their own caucus. Like, how long would that dynamic last? And I guess we're, we're looking at that. Yeah, I guess so. And it is interesting, too, that the fault lines also seem to fall around Epstein, right? You had these women and Marjorie Taylor Green at the very least was passionate about the Epstein case. And on her way out, she was supportive of the victims. Don't give her a ton of credit, basically at all, but we'll give her a little bit there.

What was that like seeing that play out, including one of your own members being prevented from being sworn in in order to help with this cover up? I mean, it must have been a totally wild ride for the past few months. Yeah. I mean, for us, the last few months, but just for perspective, right? For the survivors, this has been years, right? It's been years. And that is back in the media and the way that it is right now. I just always want to go back to them, right?

and how it feels for them to just not relive this, but also reopen wounds and threats, harms, risks, right? Because we're talking about some of the most powerful people, even now, right? We talk a lot about the Epstein Transparency Act, which was an important move from the House and the Senate all the way to the White House to bring us closer to some sort of transparency. But the DOJ has actually been obstructing justice since August, right? we were able to secure a subpoena for all, you know, the complete, unredacted foul back then.

So they've actually been holding all since then, and that's been because of Trump. And it's been, because of that, it's just been like this slow drip. And I'm certainly not sure why they prefer the slow drip to just ripping off the mandate. But they really prefer this slow drip. So every couple of weeks, right, we get new information. We've gotten subpoenas for, you know, the banks and the estate itself, which has been, you know, bringing out and bringing more to light. And, you know, it's all, it's gone to mount and it's going to mount. But the lints that they've gone to to try to keep this from happening, you said it, not swearing in

one of the new Democrats who won in a special election, not responding to the legal subpoena, right? You know, Johnson, not bringing it to a vote in the first place has all, makes everybody in this country wonder what on earth is in who on earth, what on earth is in there? Because they are bending over backwards to keep this from coming to light. And I mean, Trump could, you didn't need, he didn't need the legislation, right? I mean, he could have just ordered the file. You could have just said, they're declassified, releasing him tomorrow. But he's gone through this whole thing.

Do you think there, do you think, is there a sense? I don't know. I don't have a sense of how much insight you have to what happens in the Republican caucus. I don't get the sense that you. are powing around with a lot of the Republican Congress people, but not especially. Do you think they're just like playing out the clock and that the idea is that maybe the clock is, you know, we all assume Donald Trump, you know, everybody assumes that Donald Trump is going to be there for four years. It's only recently that he said that he wouldn't run for reelection.

He sort of gave up that ghost. But, you know, there's also, it's not like Trump. We just saw him fall asleep about four or five times in a two-hour meeting the other day. And he's, you know, I don't know what the over-under is, just since we're in the gambling mode here, of Trump lasting to the end of the term. But it does sort of feel like they're playing out the clock, but they know they can't play it out for four years. I mean, if we're talking about for Epstein, then I don't think that they can play it out. Again, these survivors have been waiting for years.

this has, you got to think, the Epstein investigation, the files, the documents, you know, the cases that have involved the entire Virgin Islands and, you know, these banks, right? These have been, all of this has been ongoing. It has seen multiple attorneys generals, right? It's seen multiple, you know, presidencies. And it will be there, whether or not Trump releases it or not. It will be there when he's gone. and the DOJ will still have it and people will still be demanding it. So if they're waiting for people to stop thinking about it, I don't think that they're going to get that. If they're waiting for their party to reclaim some sort of normalcy, I don't know when the last time they were normally. I don't know that they get that either, right?

Because again, we always are focusing on Trump, but at the end of the day, if Trump doesn't make it to the end of this term, or he gets to the end of the term, they're still a JD Vance. There is still this movement around them that is an agreement with the direction that they're attempting to take our country in, right? If any of us are relying on just toppling one person or removing one person, then we are mistaken, and we should have learned that, you know, back in 2022 or 2020.

And I don't think that we did, right? We are dealing with something so much deeper than just one man, one person. That goes for both Epstein and Trump, right? Both of these are indicative of much larger problems and much, bigger to schemes of corruption than I think we sometimes want to admit. Do you, is it your sense? I mean, I know you've only been in Congress for a couple of years now. But do you, is it your sense that there is two different ideas about this within the Democratic

Party to the extent that, you know, you can be aware of it? I mean, because, you know, for a long time, Barack Obama, the fever is going to break, 2008, the fever's going to break, 2010, the fever's going to break, 2012, the fever's going to break, 2016, the fever's going to break, then Joe Biden, the fever's going to break. And I also like, you know, even with folks like Chuck Schumer, you know, we're hoping that responsible Republicans will, you know, release these files or do something. But I also get the sense that there's a different generation or different cohort of Democrats who also realize what you've just articulated that this isn't a Donald Trump problem,

and this isn't like a head cold. This is sort of endemic in the Republican Party now. What is your sense of like where your colleagues are broadly speaking on that? You know, I think that that follows a lot of the fault lines that we see within a Democratic Party, right? The tension that there exists between generations, the tension that, exist between, you know, what we like to characterize as left versus right, right? The reality is is that there are some people who are serving right now, the Democratic Party, who can nostalgically recall a time where they got along better with Republicans, where there was a, you know,

camaraderie that existed that they really, really enjoyed. And for them, it was like the Yankees and the Mets, right? You know, we might play against each other. or, you know, but we're on the same, we're playing the same sport, right? We have the same interest, like it's the same stadium. But the more you are seeing these fault lines kind of just get bigger, right? Marginal, more marginalized people who are here, right? Marginalized folks who are just like, honestly, I've never liked the things that Republicans were willing to do to people like me in community that's like, man.

The more that we get in spaces like this, the less you see that same sort of like cigar country club stability, the less you see a willingness to protect them. because they're a part of the institution, right? You're seeing more people who are like, the institution reflects the country, and the country is sick right now, right? The country is going in a direction that might, honestly, might be a redeemable, right?

The democracy is objectively at risk right now. Like, we are in the midst of an authoritarian government, authoritarian takedown. And if to the extent that there are Democrats who don't want to reckon that and more than rhetoric, right, but in truth, right, that we know that if your country, if your democracy is backsliding, you probably have two years before it bottoms out. If it bottoms out, you probably have 10 years before you can fix it. It's an urgency right now, but I don't think that we are all recognizing.

So I do think that that exists. And, you know, again, I think it's generational. I think it is demographics of people who are more or less likely to believe that Republicans will come around. You know, to that point, this notion of like, you know, where we are with this authoritarianism. We had case to be a Roman on the other day talking about a third reconstruction. And that in response to what we're experiencing now, like inevitably Democrats will back in power. I mean, hoping, you know, that, well, let me put it this way, not necessarily inevitable. Right. Let me restate.

The job number one is to fight that authoritarianism. In the event that Democrats get back into power, there is no reverting back to whatever the normalcy normalness was beforehand. We've seen like the wholesale destruction of our agencies within the government. We've seen the wholesale sort of like undermining of trust in government. And in some reason, we have a secret police force. now that goes around in masks. We have a Supreme Court that sort of just is willy-nilly signing off on what is going to help

Republican prospects. What do you see as the amount of change that has to happen? Like I just saw, you know, Gavin Newsom, I can't remember where he was interviewed, but he was asked about Mamdani's taxing him. And we should say, Hockel is apparently like moving in that direction. going to allow for and he was asked about uh... wealth tax which is different than what mom donnie is proposing he's just proposing a uh... uh... a supplemental tax on extremely wealthy people but it's not a wealth tax

although i'm very much in favor of one uh... uh... warren suggested one but where like uh... in newsome said we need to have a big tent uh... that's why we i guess wouldn't tax the well which might be the most popular position within the Democratic Party in terms of voters that I could possibly think of, except maybe also cutting off funds to Israel. The opposite. Oh, no. What is your saying? That we are not in touch with actual voters, constituents, whether they vote or not,

are actually believing because we are too closely, we're holding onto the kind of institutionalist view way too hard, right? That we're missing the mark because we can't see it. Listen, I always say this. Just to answer, I think, both parts of your question. I always say this, that, A, the Democratic Party will have to choose who it's going to be. It cannot serve two masters. And sometimes, when we talk about the Big Tent, this is not to negate or to ignore that this is a big tent. But I do think that sometimes we use the Big Tent argument as an excuse to not have to do introspection, right, as an excuse to not have to take a stance. And I think that for a really long time, the Democratic Party has tried to serve two masters, right? We want to be the party of the corporations, and we also

want to be the party of the people. But the people aren't having that anymore. The people no longer accept that. They see it for what it is, and they are calling on the Democrats to choose and to choose them. So the tension that we feel is, right, this idea that the Democrats think that they don't have to choose them all the way, that they can steal straddle offense. So we say, it's a big tent. I do believe that we all represent our districts. But it's funny because it's like, well, we don't want a wealth tax people, they're a politician. I don't agree, obviously. There are politicians who will, you know, bend over backwards to protect the ultra, ultra wealthy, but will not use that same energy to protect poor and working class people who are taxed, who are taxed and still

can't afford their health care. They're taxed and they still can't, they still don't get, you know, quality public schools in their district. Their tax and their roads still are unpaid. You're taxed. And they can't afford housing in the communities that they that they called home communities that are by their jobs and their friends in their in their lives right it i think that it's wrongheaded to continue to say that we will never consider taxing people who have just far too much i mean to say that the poor are on their own and then think that democrats will come out the tent is going to shrink if we don't think that poor and working people are in it i think that the last thing about that is that like we think that we orient that people orient themselves

and they organize their lives and their politics around this left-right binary. But people are mostly like, man, there are people who have a whole bunch and there are people like me who don't got enough at all, right? There are people who, you know, are going to be okay at the end of the day and there are people who weren't. I do not think that there is a normalcy to go back to. There is no way that we can go back. You said it.

Too much has been broken. Too much about our checks and balances. The vulnerabilities of them have been exposed in such a way that we cannot pretend that that did not happen. even if we come out of this, to go back and go back and pretend that none of this happens is certain due. We have to move forward. And I think that that's exciting. I think that that prevents an opportunity for us to actually be a more perfect union.

I think that this was predicted by our founders. It's predicted in our Constitution that we would face times like this. I think that they also hope that we would make it through it by understanding and recognizing what we're dealing with. We're not there yet. right and and i i think that the the the big ten argument you say like they talk about building a big tent but in fact the tent has been incredibly narrowed um it has been uh reoriented towards like a more consultancy consultant viewpoint that micro targets uh based on data specific sets of voters and it has torched the democratic party's brand where um there's there's that element there's also

the element that we have to contend with the fact that the concentration of wealth at the very top right now, which is only rivaling the gilded age right in our, in the history of the past 150 years, is also affecting our democracy. And so if we go out and talk about democracy on the campaign trail, but we're unable to, uh, put it forward in practice and make people feel democratic outcomes and responsiveness from their government, then, when people are going to lose faith in democracy. That's another thing that I wish maybe some of your Democratic colleagues would contend with, and I'm curious about your thoughts on this.

You can't make the case for democracy, and it makes the case for fascism inadvertently with Trump, when the outcomes for people are not democratic, when they don't feel like their representatives are representing their interests, and when you have that concentration of power at the very top, that's also, it might be the threat to democracy, way more than even Trump himself. Yeah.

Listen, this is the core argument that I make all the time, right? Especially if Democrats take over the House, the first thing that we would likely, in past years, in past Congresses, our HR1 has usually been some sort of voting rights reform, democracy reform package. We are, of course, talking more about like the corruption piece. But for me, I also talk about you cannot have democracy reform and do nothing to. about money in politics. You just can't, right? That's why, right, getting super PACs, you know, eliminating super PACs.

That's why, you know, reversing in Citizens United, right? All of those things are foundational to, not just your democracy, but it's also foundational to all of the other things that we care about, right? Everyday people are like, oh, you know, you ask most Americans, they believe in Medicare for All system, well, why don't we have it? Well, because pharma and,

you know, the insurance companies, all of them have more lobby and power in Congress, more money to support and undergird campaigns than the average person does. Why can't we stop mass shootings in our schools? Well, because the NRA has, you know, such an intimate relationship with politicians, right? Why, you know, do we know that climate change is real? Why do we know that it is an existential crisis? but then we are now backtracking on sustainability, on renewable policy and energy sources.

Well, because of money and politics. So it hits both things, right? It gets at our democracy. You can't have an oligarchy and a democracy. You can't have a corporate duopoly and a democracy. People are finding more and more that the system of government itself can't represent them. That as long as we have these, I think that the corporate duopoly is the big tent, right?

That is the big tent. And it's too big, right? People need to find or feel that there is some way of accomplishing something, that there is something in this system that will be responsive to their needs. And we can't be responsive to their needs, the government, the big we, because, well, you know, I fight for, I fight for. But the big, the House, the Congress, the judicial, all of those things can't be responsive to people if it's also being responsive to Elon Musk, if it's being responsive to the

pharma if it's being responsive to oil and gas, big fossil fuel, right? And that's what fundamentally people are seeing. And that's why they don't believe that a democracy can work anymore. Because if this is, what we've experienced is a democracy, then maybe they don't want that. We have to, we have to address that immediately. I mean, that's what Brandeis famously said on the cusp of the New Deal is we can either have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few people or we can have a democracy, you just can't have both. So when you say, like, the, the Democratic Party has to understand this,

and again, we have some people in the IMs who are, I am saying, like, I love what the Congresswoman is saying, but will the DNC, listen, is there, like, do you perceive the Democratic Party to be, that there is this sort of like overarching entity that has a philosophy, or is it like a series of individuals that you need to have more individuals like yourself than the other individuals, and then that wins out? Okay.

This is the call. We hear, listen, since November, we've been hearing a lot about it. The DNC, and by we have, I mean, all of us, right? All the other left people. The DNC, the D-T-T-T-W-C, what is it? I think it's less, you know, big entity, more individuals. but the individuals who run entities matters, right? So I will say the Democratic Party is, it is decentralized.

It is far more decentralized. The Democratic Party of Pennsylvania is not the Democratic Party of South Carolina. It's not the Democratic Party of, you know, Iowa. That's just objectively true. The DNC, as far as I don't know the DNC. Nobody from the DNC tapped me and said, summer, you should run for Congress or summer you shouldn't run for Congress, right? Where good people exist and their communities are organized,

you have the power to shape what not just the Democratic or the Republican parties look like, but the government itself. So I don't want people to think of like the D&C, the R&C as like boogeymen that make us feel like we don't have more power than we do. Because it is decentralized, yes, you may have to overcome systemic barriers. We had to do that in my district in Allegheny County. We had to do that. I've spent last, I think last year was the first time I was ever endorsed. by the Allegheny County Democratic Committee. And I won anyways, right? We were already winning, which means that people were already on our side.

It was just a systemic barrier that we had to notice. We had to address them with it, and we had to move around it, and then fix it and change it. We have since put more people now know about the party. So the Democratic Committee is the party. They know about it now. More people are evade. So you can change those things. The question is, again, in a democracy, a true democracy, power is inherently with the people.

And I think that fundamentally, the concern or the challenge for Americans is that, you know, we have had a real hands-off approach to democracy because we have trusted that our government will fund them. It might get on our nerves, right? It might not feed us. It might not invest in our schools in a way it should be. But it won't become, you know, it won't become a fascist government, right? The Nazis won't take over, right? Mussolini will not be elected, right? So we've had a hands-off approach.

It's like I elect you, you go, you figure it out. But right now, we are actually in a point where we can't be hands off. We have to be real in it. If you really want to change the course of things, whether it be the DNC or the president himself, the direction of the country itself, then we have to wield the power that's still vested in us. And that means your labor. That means your money.

That means organizing. That means sending people who you want. That means taking on the system head on. We have the power to do all those things. So I would say it's decentralized. And that does not absolve the people in leadership of leading and of leading in a way that's responsive to people. I think both of those things are happening. Lastly, Representative Lee, I know you have to run in a bit.

But I am curious just about your reflections on this last election cycle because two of the members of the squad and company, some of two of our favorites, Representative Cory Bush and Jamal Bowman, were really just, taken out by a canon of APAC money. And I remember early on during that time period, you were a third name that was discussed about a target of APAC, but you were, you withstood it. And of course, Ilhan Omar also received a lot of Israel money spending against her. She withstood it too. But how do you reflect on how you were able to overcome that in ways? And even when you contrast it with what your colleague's experience, it must have been an incredibly kind of difficult hurdle.

Yeah, you know, it wasn't my first rodeo, right? I've actually one of the first races that APEC as an actual PAC, right? Not DMFI, but like APEC, Pact, United Democracy Project. My cycle was the first cycle that they actually got in personally in elections. So not just bundling, but also through their IE spin. So I was one of the first races that they went in in. That's where they practiced all. their tactics, not to ever talk about Israel or Palestine, but to instead talk about whether

we're good enough Dems, whether we support, you know, Joe Biden well enough, things like that. Their tactics were egregious. And who they targeted was not incidental. It was not an accident. The districts, the people that they targeted. So I was the only person who outlashed them that first time. And the second time, you know, we organized. We, you know, we worked. I worked hard. At the into the day when people say, you know, why did you survive and others? I mean, part of it is that we work, but also part of it is that I'm grateful. I'm blessed. I'm lucky. People support me. You know, we were caught in our district. And I'd say that, not to say that, or to undermine me and my team, the work that we do, but it is to say that there are candidates who are brilliant,

who are equally brilliant, who should be, they are representative of their, of their constituents, of their districts, of their neighborhoods. They've been on the streets. They've been in the trenches. There's nothing that says that they shouldn't have been in Congress as much as I should have been. But sometimes that money hits different. And I want to say it wasn't just APAC against Corey and Jamal because I don't want to let any money in politics

off the hook. My issue ain't just with APAC. My issue is with all of it. So crypto PACs actually spent more than any industry in elections last year. They were the number one spender. And yes, they also went in many of the places that APAC went to.

So it was a one-to-whammy for Corey and Jamal. And for others who never made it in the first place. So that's why it's so important that it's like, listen, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't unleash big money on your progressive enemies or your progressive, you know, not those of us who, you know, you're like, we want to protect the institution so we don't want too many progressives here. You can't be comfortable with unleashing that on our district, on our districts, unleashing that into our politics and think that it won't be a wildfire because it has been a wildfire. Since that type of money has

been into our politics, you have seen an exponential rise and outside spending just objectively, right? Every cycle. So Corey's and Jamal, Jamal's was the most expensive health primary in history. Corries was the second most expensive health primary in history, and it will only get worse if we don't stop it. And that means that it isn't just a weapon against progressives. It ain't a weapon against MAGA. It's a weapon against our democracy because the interests of one interest group should not outweigh the interests of the people in their districts, the people in our country. And that's fundamentally what's happening right now.

So the outlasts it, yeah, we have to raise money. Absolutely. We have to knock on the door, certainly. We have to show up to work and we have to, you know, we have to deliver, we have to do all the things that so many other people who had been in office for hundreds of years just don't have to do. We have to get up earlier.

We have to stay ready so we don't got to get ready when you're black or brown or progressive. And we recognize that. and we will do that. I got one last question. I know you've got to go, but one last question in that regard. And I think your point is very well taken, too,

about that money, because that money's being raised, and there's people invested in raising that money and then expending it, and it's sort of like almost like when, you know, rates were at zero, still have wealthy people who want to go make their money work, and so they start creating bubbles.

And if there's not enough, Jamal Bowman's and Corey Bush's for them to deploy that money on, they're going to start deploying it on other people as well. So it's not going to just end there. But as a member of the squad, we don't hear about the squad so much as we did maybe three or four years ago. But as a member, like internally, do you guys have any theories of change? I mean, obviously, like, you're relying on organizing in your district. That's how you get elected.

and it's about people power in those districts. But within the context of the inside game, do you have theories of change that you talk about? Like, is there a strategy beyond, you know, slowly primaring and maybe very blue areas and getting more? What is the theory of change that you guys employ within the context of sort of the inside game? Well, I will say that for me personally, right?

My theory of change is not, it cannot and it will not exist. if it is only reliance on, you know, six of us talking to each other or six of us being it. It is contingent on you all, on the people, on our movement, to be a part of that. Because like at the end of the day, you know, we can't, we can't hasten the process of more progressives, more, you know, justice, pro-peace, pro-que human rights candidates making it to Congress. We have political capital, but it ain't endless. So the answer is, yeah, we absolutely do need more people because we have a Congress of 435 people, and it is at Congress by majority. So by the math-mapping, we got to make the math math, that's number one.

And but part of doing that is not just organizing in our district, but it is how do we use our districts to create a model of what's possible? And how do we then invest in other areas so that they can do that they can do that same thing. There are places around this country, and they aren't just deep blue places. because my district is not a deep blue district, right? My district is not a, you know, majority black or majority person of color district, right? It is a majority, white, majority suburban district in western Pennsylvania, which means that our policies,

our vision for the country, it works. It works in other places. And we have to make the case. But that does mean that we have to be out there. That does mean that we have to encourage investments into the apparatus of that, that help us. And I don't just mean electorally, but it does have to be electorally. I'm somebody who believes simultaneously that we have to use every single tool at our disposals.

Yeah, we do need people in government because the reality is that you can't out mutual aid the government. You can't out mutual aid or you can't out organize systemic discrimination. We have to be able to end it here or mitigate it here so that the people on the outside can be comfortable, can be healthy, it can be safe, right? It can be prosperous. But we also have to do those things. I'm a hand-to-hand person. I believe that right now, the thing that we need most are empowered electorates. My theory of change is that we need people right now from the outside.

No major change in our country has come from Congress by itself. It just hasn't, right? The Civil Rights Act, you know, the abolition of slavery, voting rights, the end of the anti-war and anti-apartheid movements all came from people moving the Congress, some people moving power, wielding power. and that to this day, which is why I believe in the power of young people that entering the time-honored tradition of student activism. I believe in that deeply.

I believe in the power of organized labor. I think that that's why, you know, the president has attacked the two things that undergird democracy, education and organized labor, right? I believe in a disciplined, you know, use of your money or withholding of your money. I believe in those things. And at the same time, yeah, we have to build more power on the insat. We have to, yeah, we do have to be in ranking positions and chairmanship.

Yeah, that's all inside game that helps. It helps the outside, not vice versa, right? Or kind of vice versa, but it is important, but it isn't the end-all, be-all. But it has to happen. We do need to be able to get more people. We need to create an opt-in for the inside, and we've been able to do that. I'll leave on this, right? Take APEC, for instance, in money and politics, when we first,

introduce the ceasefire now resolution. I think it was about seven, nine of us. All people of color, right? All Uber progressives. Maybe we got some other people who started calling for like conditional, you know, we want a bilateral ceasefire. They all are, right? But in that year, we

were never able to move. This year, we have now for the first, we had 50-something people on the Block the Bombs Act. Of those 50-something people, a number of them are people who have actually received A-PAC dollars. They've gone on the A-PAC trip, right? They have now publicly said that they will not accept A-PAC dollars. We are moving hearts and soul.

We are moving people. So I just want to mention that because of the noise outside, because of the organizing, because of the moral, the righteous indignation, the moral stance, people in Congress are getting a message. And because we are there, we're able to have the bills, we're able to have the letters, we're able to have the organizing things.

that they can now attach themselves to. So we're giving them an opportunity to come to the right side of history. Because our objective at the end of the day is to end a genocide. Our objective at the end of the end of racialized capitalism. And all of those things means we need more people in both spaces. Representative of Pennsylvania's 12th Congressional District, Summerlee, thank you so much for your time today. I really appreciate it.

Thanks for having me. Thanks so much. All right, folks. That's it for us today. You know what? Freebie Friday. Whoa. Freebie Friday. I didn't see that common.

Yeah. I didn't either. But I just thought, what, 137? Oh, boy. All right. Freebie Friday. I don't look as green on these two different screens. I don't think you look that green today.

People are just, people are just out of control. Yeah. I mean, I've probably fan of them. We have the most colorblind audience in all of progressive YouTube. That's one of the things that we post. Winning. It's a timely reference. That's it.

It's Charlie Sheen from like 15 years ago. Yeah, I didn't even remember. Charlie Sheen? Who's Charlie Sheen? It's really not that important. He did a... Matt so desperately wants to play that song. I wonder would we get like a notice for that?

I don't... I just got the opening... All we should get is a thank you note. I just got the opening four seconds of it. Marcos the Brazilian, please speak about the Netflix buyout of Warner Discovery. As a member of Yatsi, we're witnessing the destruction of film and TV industry by capitalism.

We need antitrust. The monopolies and tech are ruining an industry. I don't know the details yet. I know that what I've read is that it's splitting in half. And all of the sort of like more. entertainment-focused properties are going to be from Warner Brothers are going to be with Netflix. Media consolidation has been an ongoing problem in this country since essentially, well, I want to say Reagan, but also very much Clinton in passing the 1996 Telecommunications Act,

and it's just gotten worse from there. It's a real problem. There's just no doubt about it. There is no way these mergers that we have seen. I don't, I think under the Biden administration, you would not have seen Ellison be able to buy CBS. The Sky, Skywriter, what is it? Sky. Skylight. What was Ellison's

company? When it bought Paramount. Skydance. Skydance. Would not have been able to buy Paramount under a Biden administration. So yeah, it's a big problem. We'll have more to talk about it as we get a closer sense of like what what's actually

happening with it. In the meantime, what, we'll do some clips? Yes. We should probably do one, right? We Yes. Yeah. Poor scoppassant. I like, I don't even know if we're up to speed in terms of of the government issuing proper job data. economic data, whatnot. We had ADP the other day, which is the private payroll, not always the best indication of what we're going,

but it's basically what we have. And we know the government payrolls probably are shrinking dramatically, particularly like, you know, since we're at the end of the year, all those retirements, force retirements, whatnot. We also know that manufacturing has control. We also know that at least from the ADP, that small businesses are losing or shedding workers at an increasingly rapid rate, which again is a problem of consolidation, of concentration of economic wealth.

But there was also that Challenger data you missed it, I think, yesterday showing, which, again, it's not the official data, but this is November layoffs. They added at 71,000. And that puts it officially over the total of a million layoffs for this year with the November numbers coming according to their data. And then when you look at it in the same 11th month period in 2024, the layoff total is 54% higher. So it's bleak. Things are are bleak. And we just don't have the sort of traditional numbers in which to go by.

But again, we also know that like Black Friday, not a government, you know, indicated. but Black Friday sales were larger than they've been ever. However, we also know that it were fewer number of goods sold. So what you have is more expensive goods. And we also know from other data sources that a smaller percentage of the country is buying that stuff. And so that again is the we have such economic disparity in this country that it is, is warping the traditional numbers that we have used to measure the economy because you have a smaller number of people with more money. So they are essentially driving the economy, which leaves 80, 90%

of the people completely adrift. And they can pretend for only so long until this stuff catches up with them. It really can only catch up with them electorally at this point because they have the ability inflation can keep going up and Donald Trump is still going to put his guy in on the Fed. Here's Scott Passon with Andrew Ross Sorkin. Andrew Ross Sorkin is sort of like the

has always been sort of like the dula for the most wealthy in this country. Like I remember back during Occupy all the rich people, all the CEOs were calling Andrew Ross Sarkin saying, like, am I in trouble? Am I in danger here? And Andrew R. Sarkin went down to Sagadi Park just as a favor for all of them to find out if they were safe. And so he's still sort of serving this. And here he is at the New York Times deal book summit.

Although he does bring out some statistics here that make Scott Bessent-Bissant look like his head. spinning in a bunch of different directions. You've been talking about is that the regional presidents you think actually are not as independent unto themselves that you want. Well, no, no, I think when I was on squat box last week, Becky said, well, Susan Collins at the Boston Fed

says this. And, you know, I, that her, people in her district are having an affordability problem. I should have said, well, she's in a red state, affordability is worse. I mean, in a blue state, affordability is worse than a blue state. We can debate that, but keep going to go. There's no debate. The number of 50 basis points higher, inflation, the 10 highest, the inflation rates, they are in blue cities.

But just to you know, because I went to look at this. This is the Joint Economic Committee, 2000. Since 2021, the highest inflation of the past four years has been in red states, especially Florida. I'm talking about current. Current. Current. Not over the past four years. Right.

Today. Okay. I would think four years would be a reasonable trend line to look at it. Today. Today it is 50 basis points higher. So, anyway, and look, the people are voting with their feet. I have the American people on my side that New York, Illinois, California, Massachusetts

are depopulating. And they're going to places in Florida, like Florida, where interest rates are, I'm saying, inflation's up 22% of the last four years. Well, inflation, then inflation is up 25% nationally, so it's lower. I believe in New York, it was 19%. Sorry?

I believe in New York it was 19%. I don't think that's right. We can go from that. Okay. But, okay, first off, Besant is probably talking about blue cities that I would imagine inflation rates in Boston, New York, San Francisco, L.A., Chicago, are probably, inflation rates are probably higher than they are in, I don't know, Atlanta, maybe. or in Houston because there's richer people there and housing stock in these older cities, incidentally, is more limited. I have no doubt that that is, but it is such a piddling and all of the stuff that the national government is in response.

responsible for is subject to inflation. I mean, to do it state by state is, I think, sort of silly anyways, when you're talking about the president of the United States. The states themselves do not have pricing power outside of maybe, you know, talk about regulating power generation and whatnot. I would also imagine that power generation probably a little more expensive in some of those red states than it is in blue states. But the state doesn't have the ability to regulate these things outside of housing and maybe power generation. But the fact of the matter is inflation is up. And I don't think it's going to that somebody sitting in Alabama or Mississippi or in the red parts of Pennsylvania is going to go, well,

At least I'm not paying as much. My groceries are up 15, 20 percent. My health insurance is up 15, 20, 25 percent. At least I'm not paying the same amount as those city slickers in New York City. Well, the city slickers that Scott Besant is encouraging to move to a red state. You know, like he did, the relatable thing, this incredibly ultra wealthy man who now lives, I believe, in Charleston with his male partner, just in case people in the Republican Party forgot. He's a gay Republican.

But he had the ability to do that because he's an ultra, ultra, ultra wealthy person. He's a simple farmer. Yeah, right. Oh, that's right. He's a farmer too, right? He's a soybean farmer. And it's also just like not true to, I mean, there was a CNBC analysis showing that red state inflation. I think Sorking was citing there is higher in red states right now.

It's bad everywhere that you can't get, you can't, if you rent or even if you're trying to buy a house, you can't do it because capitalism has failed to provide it. I'm glad you brought up housing because there was a Washington Post article about this like a month or two ago where they showed that where the sharpest increases in monthly housing costs were last year. Um, uh, monthly costs for housing. Florida where the median household income in 2024 was 77K saw the greatest spike. then northern South Carolina, Georgia, Wyoming, Mississippi, and Alabama, or among the states that saw faster growth in monthly owner cost in 2024 than the years before. And then all of the data on where just in terms of like proportionally inflation is hitting, it shows like Texas right now and Florida are the worst.

Florida was mentioned by Sorkin, but also Tennessee, Wyoming right now. And some of the places where it's best proportionally to live for cost. coming down. It's California, New York, Maryland, and Illinois at the moment. California resistance writes, back and forth from Palm Springs in L.A. groceries are definitely more expensive in L.A. than in Coachella Valley. Yes. I mean, I think things in cities are more expensive generally than they are in more rural areas.

Also, so is labor. So you make more money there. I mean, it costs more. Yes. The supermarkets paying more in rent. The labor is more expensive. The transportation probably a little bit harder. Just uproot your life. We're not going to do anything to fix inflation.

I just hope that's what you're getting from this press or this interview. It's on you. Just go uproot your life. Leave your friends and family, quit your job, and move to a red state. If you're making money with money, which is what all these people represented by Scott Bessent are doing, They're not making money by making things. They're making money with money. You don't care about inflation.

You don't care at all. It actually might be good for you. Yeah, exactly. But I just want people to sit with the callousness of that rich guy sitting on that stage and just telling you to move because he's not going to, they're more concerned about getting rich themselves than addressing your cost of living. It's just so incredibly out of touch. let's get into some fun stuff we don't have that much time i guess that's true yeah um let's check it in on the let's i know i'm a little bored by him too although i enjoyed him like you know getting very pissy he's very mad at candace owens but this is the thing like

we have not really spent too much time on this but there is such a virulent sort of like I don't want to call it a civil war because there, like, it's almost like, it's a reality TV few. It's a balkanization. Yes. And that's what it is. That's why, like, I've been sort of allergic to covering this because it's like the real housewives in the off season.

They're just talking shit via page six and on the internet. Candice Owens has been. The housewives have the guts to say it to each other's faces. Well, well, now wait a second. But Candice Owens is going on to the Charlie Kirk show with the TPUSA top people. Toilet paper guy. The TPUSA guys. Because Candace Owens has been on the, I don't know how to characterize this, has been exploring, has been investigating,

the anomalies. The anomalies in the Charlie Kirk assassination. Now, it's like some combo, it seemed to have started out like first she thought Israel had assassinated Charlie Kirk. And I may be getting wrong, like, you know, I may be off on some of this. She had questions about whether that may have happened and trajectories and there was, you know, like somebody on Google search from Israel, searched the name of the assassin. Got to tell Israel to go to Bing. But Israel was, yeah, using Google to search, like,

searching the name of the assassin. It was unclear to me, like, what that indicated that some Israeli official was like, wait, I want to Google search this guy that we've chosen to assassinate Charlie Kirk. Just to make sure. In July,

I'm going to do the old Google search, just to make sure they're not, like, There's no bad Reddit threads about them being dishonest or something or taking money to assassinate somebody and they didn't do. Who knows? And then it was because two days before Charlie Kirk September 10th, he was going to change his position on Israel, which sort of made it like, well, how did they plan to assassinate him like three months before he was going to change his position on Israel? And then it started to bleed into like Charlie Kirk's marriage. Was he supposedly going to get a divorce? Did he like?

I miss that part. What's going on? Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. And or wait, why were there all these people working for TPSA sort of circling around Charlie? Why were they acting very strange on the day? Like, did they know was this an internal takeover? Like, I have not spent a lot of time looking into this.

because I guess I don't care enough. Yeah. Because this is all just branding for all of them. They're just positioning themselves. And I, just because Candice Owens has spoken out about the Gaza genocide doesn't mean she is a credible source. Like I see people treating her claims about this as some source material. And she's actually a lunatic. She's not switching up.

But she's going to meet. about to kill her because she says his wife is is a man secretly right i mean she's nuts who knows uh but she's going to t p u s a i think is going to have like her on to to discuss these things but i i i'm interested in this only to the extent that i think it's very healthy for america if all these people are on different pages and attacking each other and here is interesting because Tim Poole, who last we checked, is not a partisan, according to him, right? And he's an anti-war, sort of more libertarian. But here he is, apparently, he's very mad at Candace Owens because she's harming the

Republicans midterm plans by doing this. And it feels like Tim Poole's just trying to stay relevant. by getting into this. So I don't know. Here's Candice Owens talking about Tim Poole. 28. And it's because she's a piece of shit. Because instead of saying, guys, let's come together and forgot to work together. She says the stupidest, retarded crap. And now everybody's running around divided and broken. For what reason? For literally what reason? Because they killed Charlie Kirk in broad daylight. And we don't care about your stupid midterms. We just don't care. Like, they really? This is how they view Charlie Kirk.

Was anything in his life real? Tim Poole is going off right now because he's like, it's not the time. You guys need to be mules. You need to keep voting in the very corrupt people that are lying to your faces right now about what happened to Charlie Kirk. It is not the time because it is your job

to get people into office. This is what I mean when I suggest that nothing in Charlie Kirk's life was real. So he really thinks he's doing something there. And actually what he's doing is proving my point. these people just saw Charlie as a means to an end, okay, as a political horse that they could ride. And so for whatever reason, they got tired riding him. And now they're angry because they also were going to whip the horse, the ghost, the ghost of Charlie Kirk, and say, we still need you to shore up votes.

And it's inconvenient that people who actually cared about Charlie and saw him as a, I don't know, human being, human being want to know why he was public. executed in front of us and why we're being lied to about everything. That is why Tim Poole is upset because midterms, it's going to be my fault. Not the part of the feds for feeding us BS. It's not going to be the fault of Turning Point USA for lying and thinking that they're brighter than us and seemingly not caring about the investigation. It's not going to be the fault of, I don't know, maybe actual politicians like Donald Trump, who's the President of the United States and look us in the face and said,

are we still talking about the Epstein files? No, that's not his fault. The fault is Candace Owens for wanting to figure out who murdered her friend. Don't you guys get it? Like, we're just an algorithm. Why do you care so much about humans? Like, why are you a human? Like, if somebody who really dies, you need to focus on midterms.

Okay? That is the point of a Tim Poole show. It doesn't matter what you are going through at home. I want you guys to hear this, okay? I don't care if you have family members that are dying, families who have died, if you have children that you care about. Okay. We got the point.

I mean... Tim Poole cares too much about electoralism. Candice Owens is about the movement, baby. I want to say, I think they're both exactly right. I agree with everything that they all say. And I just want to stay here and say, I think they should keep doing this. I think they need to hash this out.

Keep pushing, Candice. I think I think I think I think Candice I want to keep going she should she should follow her agree they shouldn't care about the midterms she should listen she should follow her heart and Tim Poole who really like I I think it's good that Tim is finally coming out of the closet and admitting that he's a Republican yeah he's always been a partisan Republican it's just that he's had a different style of doing it before and now he's come out and doing it Listen, in terms of like him being anti-war, didn't he say to you that he was more, he was left on war? Let's play this. Because this is a really interesting position to be. I don't know where it is, but I'm- This is number, no, this is number three. Oh, number three.

Okay. He came out and he said to you that he was to the left of you on- I can recap it's like for a second. He was, this was over Ukraine. He was very against the funding of Ukraine. I was more supportive, specifically in mid-2023 when this happened. happened. And then I said, he said, I am to the left of you on the issue of war. And I said, okay, but what about the issue of Israel? We should cut off funds. And he goes, I don't know enough about that. I do think it is interesting. He's only studied. To be fair, he only got his

doctorate in Ukrainian-Russian relations, not in Israel, Palestine. There's no idea with why he got later of income from a certain state. And to, and just to flash forward to today. When he was saying that to you, incidentally, he was making a lot of money. Yes. Coincidentally, it's completely coincidence because he had no idea. He was making hundreds of thousands of dollars, ultimately million of dollars, from the Russians. Right. And it just is interesting to me because like when we talk about Candace, you know, she was friends with Charlie. That can cloud your judgment. Tim Poole, since that debate I had with him, has new friends. You know, earlier this year, it was reported quite extensively that Tim Poole was meeting with Benjamin Net. Yahoo, we know that Tim Poole has taken foreign money in the past, sensitive foreign money that is also related to two major conflicts that the United States is involved in, met along with Dave Rubin, Sean Spicer, Bethany Mandel, and others at a meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu in April 2025, and his son, Benjamin Netanyahu, who is, by the way, of conscription age, but is spending the genocide in Miami in a high rise, also a major, major fan of Tim Poole as well. Friends can cloud your judgment.

All right. Let me just weigh in on Tim's behalf. Have you contemplated that he met with Benjamin Netanyahu to find out more about the Russian Ukraine situation? I haven't contemplated that. Okay. Okay. They talked about the guitar situation. That's my case.

Yes. Right. And that's my case. All right. Let's hear Tim Poole. Anti-war Tim Poole talk about why. we should invade Venezuela. It's looking more and more like war with Venezuela is on the menu, boys.

Donald Trump has given Maddo. For a second. Why does he now deliver the news as if he's doing like some type of wrestling, like ringside wrestling? Zoo time. What is that morning zoo? Morning zoo. It's the central anxiety here because Tim knows that he is ostensibly supposed to be an anti-war person so he can throw it into guest's face like he did with Emma,

but he also supports Donald Trump. So he needs to have his reservation sort of be parenthetical. And his reading of the news, just very enthusiastic. No, you know what it is? Just reading the menu, boys. It is. There is a slight ironic quality to the way he's doing it. It's a detachment.

It is a detachment. It's interesting because, you know, a lot of my friends, when comedians would have trouble doing ads. like when you go into do a voiceover you're like this is just too cheesy and I don't believe this and I cannot I have to indicate in some fashion

and so you get into an announcer voice and because it's I'm actually playing a character here and so let's look of what's up here with what's going on with the ongoing possibility of war in Venezuela everyone

because that's what it is it's the detachment He's doing this at arm's length, and he's either subconsciously or even consciously, I'm going into my announcer voice. Let's go over to the big board and check out what's happening over there. Or actually, I am getting a report. Let's go to Kathy Pomegranate, who is reporting live from... What's that Trump up to now? Yeah.

With Venezuela is on the menu, boys. Donald Trump has given Maduro an ultimate. to made them to flee Venezuela's land operations loom. Warships are reportedly entering the area, and Donald Trump has de facto closed the airspace around Venezuela. Now, a lot of people are debating this, but it is in fact. Let's just check in with the words de facto. Can we get a definition check on de facto?

He claims that Donald Trump has de facto closed airspace there. In fact, no, what Donald Trump did is he announced it on truth social. And saying that you're closing the airspace, that is not a de facto. De facto is what is in reality. So in facto, it was not de facto. Back to you, Tim. Act of war to declare. Now, a lot of people are debating this, but it is, in fact, an act of war to declare the airspace

closed over a country for a variety of reasons. And the reason Trump is doing it likely is because, as the U.S. prepares to engage in military operations in Venezuela, we don't want anybody getting mixed up into crossfire. You're going to have flights traveling from various countries that are going to go over Venezuela, usually because. because you're just, I don't know, flying from Brazil, Mexico or something, if that route makes sense. I don't know. Donald Trump is basically saying, we are about to launch air strikes.

Not necessarily going to happen, but that's basically the idea. So now you're restricting domestic air travel over a country, which is going to restrict trade. It's going to cost a lot of money. And you're basically saying, prepare for war. Hillary Clinton famously was warned of this back, and I think it was like 2015, 2014 or 15. What? She said she wanted the airspace over Syria closed. And she was warned that would be a declaration of war, not just against Syria, but against Russia. Now, this is different. Little Dems do it too, actually. I mean, that's unbelievable how much they fall back on that. I, it's like, I don't know. He's talking about the no-fly zone over Syria from, I understood. But was he upset about that? the time, it's just very odd to use that as an example.

Right. Which is why they're saying like now it's, uh, it's, see, well, the Democrats do it too, so it's not so bad that's right. And listen, the war is on the menu. And there's a lot of times where Democrats have come in and ordered off that same menu. I do like that he's quoting the orc, uh, from Lord of the Rings, right? That's what it, the means back on the menu, boys.

That's from Lord of the Rings. Skid Mark Twain writes in Schidmark Twain writes in I'm outside in single digits wearing a beanie had to take it off when I heard Tim's voice But wait a second, let's go back to Tim as he's telling us about What's going to happen with the war Even though he is very much anti-war He's going to be talking about this as if it's like what

Whoopsie Daisy let's see how much carnage we get down there Go ahead. And she was warned that would be a declaration of war, not just against Syria, but against Russia. Now, this is different. In Syria, in Tartu, you have a Russian naval base. So they do have air capabilities. And if the United States shuts down that airspace, that's affecting Russia. Venezuela may or may not have some of these same elements, but it's not as direct.

Wait, wait. Wait, wait. Wait, wait. Shutting down. Venezuelan airspace is not as direct to Venezuela as shutting down Syrian airspace is direct to Russia. Right. So you can shut down basically any airspace of any country under the standard as long as it doesn't have isn't in the middle of a proxy war and doesn't have the backing of another major superpower. Okay. Okay. Which means the U.S. can do whatever the hell it wants unless Russia likes a country. Let's not get bogged down with something like that.

Let's get back to war is on the bed. Go ahead. That airspace, that's affecting Russia. Venezuela may or may not have some of these same elements, but it's not as direct either way. What element? The U.S. is signaling hard. Ladies and gentlemen, war is about to land. And Maduro, you got a choice to flee, which is absolutely crazy.

Apparently, Maduro, the Venezuelan dictated. Can we get to the part where Tim stops just reading of the first paragraph of the article he's found on this? And move into the part where he expresses his opinion of it. Do we have a time code, Mr. Time Code Master? We got a couple minutes before the first ad, so he must put it before the first ad breakout. Okay, let's check in over that. Which is absolutely crazy. apparently Maduro, the Venezuelan dictator, they call him,

who famously once ate an empanada on TV as his people were starving, is asking for global amnesty. Can you pause it? Let me tell you what's really. I know what you're thinking. How big of an empanada was that? Trump is bulldozing a part of the White House for a ballroom as he cuts the health care for tens of millions of Americans.

But not is just something Venezuelans eat. Can I just tell you that that empanada was made out of pure gold? And he ate it right on camera. Tater, Lee, which is absolutely crazy. Apparently Maduro, the Venezuelan dictator, they call him, who famously once ate an empanada on TV as his people were starving. Is asking for global amnesty. Now, let me tell you what's really sad about Venezuela, my friends.

I've been there. I had to flee the country. Weird story. What? They accuse me of being a spy because they're communists. Their country used to be the wealthiest in South America. They have a lot of black gold down there, a lot of oil. Everybody wants it.

Donald Trump says, we're going to get it. And that's likely the big reason for all of this. But I'm not going to be so naive to say it's just that the U.S. is basically going, let's steal their oil. What the U.S. is basically saying is your stupid communist system is restricting the oil trade. We're not going to have that. I'm not excusing U.S. foreign military. What's the difference?

We're not going to steal the oil. We're just going to destroy the state ownership of the oil so that it can be taken. We're just going. We're not literally going to steal the oil. What we're going to do is open it up to be monetized by our own people. We're going to redistribute the oil from the communist country. We're not going to steal from your house. We're just going to break in the door.

And then my friends are going to come in. steal from your house. Okay, so I will say we could go for the next couple minutes here to watch the intro where he does not issue any condemnation, or we could jet ahead about eight minutes. Let's jet ahead eight minutes because we'll get back. Because war is touching down or land. It's 11 past the hour. It's 11 past the hour and

68 degrees outside. Make sure you bring Windbreaker, though. It's a little windy. Meanwhile, we're getting back to the ticking the oil from Venezuela. I'm not doing this properly, okay? Maduro, however, and his ilk don't have that view. He hasn't looked at his country over the past 20 years and said, wow, we've destroyed the standard of living in this country. I should let someone else try. He says, I'm going to eat an empanada on TV.

So again, that's not to justify any kind of U.S. intervention. I'm actually opposed to it. Trump should be doing this. a fan. No new wars. Again, this is 10 minutes into the video. He has, well, I'm just going to give you about 10 minutes worth of reasons why we

should probably do it because this guy's eating empanadas on television. But I just want to remind you that I am against this even though they have screwed up the entire world's oil trade. I don't think that Trump should be doing this. Not a fan. No

wars? We can't feed the poor, but we got money for wars, as a saying goes. I say, focus on internal... What is it good for? I've always said that. Hey, let me... Let me also just, now that I'm doing a 45-minute story on Venezuela, neglect to mention, as we talk about empanadas being eaten on television, the 20 years of economic sanctions that the United States government has imposed on Venezuela. as well, the multiple coup attempts that we've been engaged in there. Incidentally, those sanctions also shared by our good allies across the pond, as it were. Okay, anyways, just forget, I even mentioned that.

It's a good question for Tim Poole fans. You know, like when you think about this authoritarianism of these scumbagged communist regimes, as Tim calls them, has our, as America got more or less, does it get more or less authoritarian when foreign influence becomes a concern of the private? Like it becomes clearly more authoritarian. That's why. That's how this authoritarianism gets formed. You know, divisions, how can we, how we can mend this country and preserve it.

Oh, we can be done. But one thing about, you know, you can't feed the poor, but there's money for war. It's like, how about we feed the poor and also don't do wars? But that's what I was saying to him back when we had our debate, where it's like, how can you say that you are anti-war and support the funding of Israel, which is the top recipient of our military aid? I'm not familiar with what you're talking about. I'm not familiar with what you're talking about there. Timson credit for not wanting to wait into areas.

He's not an expert. He's not an expert than that. Yeah. There it is. Back on the menu. Back on the menu. And apparently, Emma was correct. I saw those I am.

Was correct about her citing the, what are the Lord of the Rains trilogy? Oh, no, everyone thought you were right. that we didn't get the deep cut for the Lord of the Rings. It's not that deep. It's not a deep cut, Matt. And not in the extended version. Not a deep cut.

So you're saying if this was you, it would be pretty embarrassing. If Caitlin Collins spoke to me that way, it might break my heart too, too intimidating. If this was you, you'd probably never show your face. Yeah. I'm going to retire. Um, Oh, yeah,

we might as well while we're here. Uh, Chris Cuomo, listen, you got to feel bad for Chris Cuomo. All right. This is a pity party. None of this is going the way that he thought.

It would. Right now, you know, you go back four or five years, Chris Cuomo's thinking, I'm going to be on CNN for a long time. But, da,

and then if you go back six months, Chris Cuomo's like, at least my brother is going to be a mayor of New York. city and and none of that's happened and so now he's like i mean this is if you were to take a tope and put it on uh uh tim pool's head take his beanie off put a toupee on there and you know also he would need like a weight regimen for probably around six months plus human growth hormone a lot of protein A lot of protein shakes and whatnot. This is what you would get.

Here is Chris Cuomo trying to sort of like justify the unilateral bombing of boats of people we don't even know. And not only do we not know who they are, we haven't even heard an explanation as to who the administration thinks they are. They're just like rando narco terrorists who are coming. from presumably not just from Venezuela some from Trinidad and Tobago

and the administration doesn't like feel like they need to A, even say who they are specifically B, under what authorization they're doing this. C, like what's the rationale? Like what is this supposed to achieve?

And here is Chris Cuomo defending it by saying, by projecting onto others what was the truth of him when he was on CNN, which is he never paid attention to any of this shit. It's an irrational negative assertion to generate outrage instead of insight. That's rage bait. But what about Venezuela and what Trump did in Venezuela? That's a war crime.

Since when do you want to go to the mat defending drug dealers? I don't remember you guys doing this when we were killing everybody in a burq in Afghanistan and Iraq. We didn't have social media back then, though. This is so stupid. Who is you guys? You guys is him looking into a mirror that has like a sort of kaleidoscope because he was actually in a position to have the loudest voice of anybody in this conversation right now. But just, yeah, notice how the, I mean, first of all, you were dead on about how much he sounds like Tim Poole. It's hilarious. The same argument of what aboutisms where they don't have an argument on the merits, so they have to just gesture towards liberal hypocrisy. And notice who these arguments are geared towards. They're geared towards conservatives who want to look like to basically explain it away. And I just think it's interesting that when people are down on their luck in their careers, it seems like 95 to 99 percent of the time they go in this. particular direction where they take the opportunity to do these incredibly cheap gestures towards

analysis, which is just about like allowing for conservatives to have some sort of example that makes it so that it's a wash. It's the liberals are hypocrites. I'm going to go all the way back to, I don't know, perhaps there were some Democrats back in the time that were supportive of our war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. There were. If that's who he's referring to as you guys, It's like, yeah, those people are dinosaurs within the party like your stupid-ass brother, and we want them out. He was on Good Morning America from 2006 to 2009, and I am quite sure he did probably zero stories on the drone wars in 2008. I am quite sure. He did zero stories on a critical story.

stories on the drone warfare through the Obama administration when he was on CNN. I mean, give me an effing break. Go ahead. Everybody in a burqa in Afghanistan and Iraq, we didn't have social media back then, though, not the way we do now. We did have, hold on. Keep them up there. We did have mainstream media of which you were a literally like the top 5, 10% in

terms of having a platform in the country. Also, what's the addition of in a burqa? I mean, just, just, I mean, what does that add? What does that add to your commentary? That's part of his way of maintaining a little bit of distance. Because I thought you were being critical about those, about thought you were being critical about people not standing up for the slaughtering of civilians, which would include women in burqas. I know that's so scary to you. It's just the message is so muddled. Are you against that? Or are you trying to dehumanize them to your audience by mentioning that They have a different style of dress. That's the timpulness of this.

This is such a thin thing. And you can just tell these guys when, like, if you're the luckiest sort of like servant, if you can tell a rich person a concept like rage bait, because they'll get so excited about, oh, yeah, this is just rage bait, people being upset about indiscriminate killings where no evidence has been provided. Yeah, that's rage bait. But you're also upset about this second bomb on a drug boat. Okay, so how's that rage bait? Well, because they're making it seem like it's such a big and important deal to them when these were not people who were that upset about who Obama was killing with his drones. Oh, my God. Oh, my God. Well, first off, that take is fresh at the oven. Yes. No, Tim, I mean, Tom Cotton literally said it. That was exactly what. Oh, yes. It's stale. Very stale. Sorry. Sorry. It's hard to keep up with these funny people like you guys. They like it when they like it when they like it. They like it when they.

liked it when Obama got away with that stuff. They wish they could still do it. It's like when Zionists say, like, well, you know, nobody got upset when America exterminated its native population. It's like, well, yeah, we actually have a big problem with that. But that's what they're trying to do with that line of argument is that you can't call us out on it because you did something like this too. Like, that's basically, it's just it's just negates any debate about it. You know, and what's amazing is, is that the left-wing critiques of Obama and, uh, and Trump now were the, the same. It was proportional to the amount of criminality that we're dealing with. I mean,

Obama did commit war crimes. This is such an insane war crime that you even have Republicans that are starting to turn on Pete Heggseth based on what they've seen in that classified briefing. Jack Reed was saying it was deeply disturbing. They saw them treading water and trying to turn over parts of the boat for minutes. And then there was a strike that came in and claimed that they were trying to call for backup and assassinated them. But yeah, I guess it's liberals who have have emotions about this kind of thing. God forbid. The guy who wrote the book,

or the guy who wrote the article today that we're talking about, Charlie Savage, literally wrote the book on the rise of presidential authority and secrecy during the Obama administration called Power Wars. Like it's, I mean, not that he's like a crazy leftist, but it was like shows like ours that were interviewing him about that.

Yeah. Well, what are you going to do? It's all rage bait. I mean, if I didn't cover it back when I had a huge platform, and people are talking. about it now it's rage bait

is he off of news nation is he just in the no he's on news nation but i mean it's not cnn or a bc he's got a second job barry wice is cb s i am convinced that half this stuff that we've seen over the past month or two with van jones and the wall and the dead babies and all auditioning auditioning for the zionist platform

and uh you know i hope it pays off of them augy's left paw hey sam and emma and crude can i get some funny sound effect to make me laugh currently sitting in an ICU waiting room hoping my father gets better. I used to send him videos of Sam's debates and he really liked what you said, especially about Social Security. He really made a late in life left wing turn. He hated Trump, finds Israel disgusting and was pro choice. He enjoys some of your content as much as I do. Here is a show far going out for your dad. No, nobody knows what that is though, Matt. Matt's trying to

play a pop song by a esteemed jailbate. Yeah, it's a song called jailbate by an artist named Olivia Nessie. Literally. That is not a sketch. Here's my remix. Open conversation is the way of humans connecting.

That's just your first day listening to the show trying to translate what the hell you just did. Instead of happy birthday. Matt asked us to all sing jail bait to him when he walked in the office. You're going to have to take it up with me. Oh, my God. We've got to get it. We've got to get an air. We've got to get an AI version of Chuck just started rapping. Oh, my God. We've got to get an AI version of Chuck Schumer's singing.

the song. Oh, my God. Strongly worded letter. Yeah, write that down, Matt. Write that down. It's the only thing we execute of all the ideas of the guests go into the ether and like. Oh, what idea we did execute was whistles. Did we talk about that already?

Oh, no. Let's do that. Speaking of execution of ideas. Augie's left paw, I'm dying. This is great. All right. Glad we could help. Oh, Max Vax says, crime, crime, drop, please.

I thought that during G when he was like, this isn't a war crime. It's a crime. Cool crimes. Do that again. Crime, crime. It's like a Halloween song. Fantastic. That baseline is fantastic.

God. It's so great. Folks, we are, we have a new piece of merch in our merch store. And again, you know, we're trying to get the resources to try and help connect people. The Discord's a great place to go.

We had so many people who reached out to us about doing a 3D printing of these whistles. And I would encourage you if you are, if you have the capacity to print 3D whistles, go to the Discord, find some rapid response groups. We have a lot of people in the Discord who are members of rapid response groups, immigration, immigrant rapid response groups around the country, and hook up with them. and you know 20, 30 whistles, 50 whistles can be very, very helpful.

We got some, we got them as low cost as we could, and we're not, you know, we're selling these at cost. And we had the printing on there was donated, basically. And these are, we got whistles, which with the, with the, lanyard because I've been reading a lot of like, you know, like in some of these communities, it has been both blowing the whistle when you see ice is very helpful. And also wearing the whistle sort of indicates both to immigrants and to other people that like you're part of, you know, a community that is looking to fight ice. And people are getting more and more

savvy about this. There's been a lot more time for rapid response groups to organize and to plan. And here is, so you can head over to our merch store, shop. MajorityReportradio.com. Pick these up. And the orders are going to ship in about a week or two from now. So you'll get them, I don't know, I guess by Christmas. I don't know if people would give this as a gift, but not a bad idea. But here is, just be careful, because apparently the new talking point from ICE is that blowing these whistles, a little bit racist. Here we go. You have any idea how racist it is to blow a whistle at workers that are probably legal? You're just alerting them that ICE is here, and they're probably legal.

That's very racist. Sassy walk-up. You know, when you see this, you start to realize, like, all of these guys, not all these guys, but a ton of these ice guys are just doing it for their, their effed up ideological reasons. Yeah. Like, this is, owning the boys. We don't know where they went. I mean, that's my point. Like, yeah.

Proudman. Owning the lips. That's what the guy is saying. And the guy, I just explained, like, they see ice. People are blowing the whistles. And he's saying to presume that their undocumented immigrants is racist. Let's be clear. Why do you approach them then?

Let's be clear. Every time you see an ice guy approach these places, they are doing so because they see a brown person. And every time they grab somebody's ID and find out that they're an American citizen and let them go is an individual. of they are illegally and unconstitutionally stopping these people because they're doing it based upon a racial profile. They don't know this person's immigration status. They don't know who the person is. And the idea that they can suspect someone's immigration status by virtue of the color of

their skin or the fact that they're doing some type of labor is is unconstitutional. It's immigrants like in D.C. There's a story. Immigrants that are visually identifiable as Latino, like Guatemalans, are targeted way far beyond

their proportionality for who, the undocumented population in that city. The Supreme Court said that it's legal for them to use those identifying markers to racially profile them. So this is, where we don't have the legislature to fall back on to protect these communities. This is why this community solidarity has been really important.

And it's the silver lining of this moment. People are coming out to support their neighbors. And I just hope that is a durable kind of political project going forward to. Let's see. What else we got here? A really quick, fun one could be the last. Or I was going to say the 24, the Somali, the meme. I do that maybe next week.

All right. Should we do this number 17? This either is interesting. I mean, there's also 12 and 11 and silly ones. Oh, Cash Patel going out of his way to prove everyone that's got a girlfriend. Yeah, let's do this. 11 and 12. Did you know Cash Patel has a girlfriend?

Yeah, she's actually... Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. She's a boxer, right? And there's a threat. She's arrested. I can't. She's a wrestler or a boxer. But a TPP USA influencer also.

And, yeah, I, and the, you know, the, the, I was women for these guys. The flying to go get his girlfriend and partying with her. I, let's, let's do this number 11 is more fun, I think. I did see Cash Patel say that if you attack the legislative bodies of this country, you are going to be rolled up by the FBI. He didn't finish the statement and say, then ultimately pardoned by the president.

But here is, and this is impressive because Donald Trump fell asleep so many times during the cabinet meeting the other day. It's also like a lot more mainstream people are talking about the bruise on his hand and probably anticipating that it's a function of some type of intravenous drug that he gets on a monthly basis, perhaps to deal with oncoming Alzheimer's, slow it down. But he's clearly deteriorating physically. Yep. Mentally, it's harder to assess because the guy's always been sort of a lunatic anyways.

But he's clearly deteriorating physically. and so much so that even Sean Hannity now has to defend Donald Trump's drifting in and out of the cabinet. Right? And defend it because like I don't think Sean Hannity you could find a more sycophantic Trump person in media. Remember we got those texts from the Dominion lawsuit? He was the collaborating with the Trump administration directly on coverage. And so the fact that he feels like he has to even talk about this means this is traveling. You know, they said all the president's slowing down.

Okay, I have known Donald Trump for 30 years. In this term, recently, I have talked to him at every hour of the 24 hour day from 12 midnight to 2 in the morning, 3 in the morning, 6 in the morning. And he's almost always awake. Sean, there he'll pause it for one second. pause it for one second let's just take this at face value the president is not sleeping at all what it's not important wait a second i'm up every night he's not like you i'm focusing on the crisis of all the somali immigrants doing tick-tok videos right there's many simailles How about this?

Like, why is he awake 24 hours a night? Like, this was a problem when my mom was, you know, having Alzheimer's issues. Like, not sleeping, getting up, like, walking around. Like, why is this a, why are they selling this as a, he's so healthy, he's not sleeping at all? You are being confined by the realities of human biology and existence. Now, what Sean Hannity is doing is more like what you would see in, say, North Korea, where do you know that Kim Jong-il does not have or did not have a butthole and he just, it just goes and evaporates into air? I mean, these were some of the rumors that were said. That's like a version of what he's doing there. He's so, he's built different. He doesn't even eat. He doesn't need to sleep. Yeah. Yet, yeah. He gains at least two pounds a week. midnight to two in the morning, three in the morning, six in the morning. And he's almost always awake. Sean, he'll call me, Scott, I didn't wake you, did you? No, sir, I'm always awake

at 152 on a Tuesday. You know, he said all the... That's okay, great. And what's the idea? Well, that covers that scandal. Yeah. All right, boom, buried, moved on. He's always awake at three in the morning, just not at 10 a.m. in the middle of his cabinet meetings. Right. Right. It's a bold response to, hey, why are we seeing like I sleeping all the time? Like, I never sleep. I should have tried this argument with my math teacher.

Like, look, I'm almost always away. It's just when I, in this class, I doze up. I was up all night playing video games. And, uh, that's why I'm sleeping. It's like, Matt seems high. It's like, well, I only smoke like three days, three hours a day. I wonder what he's calling Scott Bissant about at 1.15 in the morning. He's not nervous about anything.

What's going to God? Why? Who are we going to fire? What? How do we stop the? I didn't fix the nitrogen in my raised bed. I know you're a farmer. Do you have any ideas for that?

Do you know what Melania is? late night gardening. I'm just walking through the rubble in the West Wing. Scott, what happened? He's right. Where is it? His wing.

I know. The crazy dream. I think the White House was attacked by a bomb. What's going on? Scott, are you awake? They're trying to kill me. They brought me some cookies and milk to go to sleep and they're trying to kill me.

Okay, I got to go. Remember the Hillary Clinton adds about who would you want answering the call at three in the morning? Trump's version is, who do you want, manically calling this is exactly at three in the morning? Your cabinet members are three in the morning. Scott, have you seen my phone? I'm borrowing. They took one. Hey, you don't let me post that truth show show right now.

I'm calling from Laura's phone. It's just prank phone calling people. Scott, hi, it's Roy Cohn. Gitch kidding! Oh my God, you could probably actually get some info out of Trump if you prank called him as Roy Cone at a certain hour. Exactly. All right, Scott, I just wait.

It's three in the morning. I'm just trying to see if you're asleep. Okay, you are? Okay. I'm going to go. Future reactionary, yes. Lord of the Rings, Emma. There you know.

Carl Barks. Hey, Sam, your apples are in danger. Click this link now to buy Apple insurance. That is the easiest way to wipe out his account. Yeah. The great Apple debate. H-GtVS. A Nigerian Apple merchant just hit me up.

Grimes. I'm walking. down the street in Tallinn, Estonia, laughing my effing head off, listening to crime crimes. The locals are looking at me weirdly. Al-Connipshin. Venezuela and food is so good,

something that really needs to be back on the menu. Marcos the Brazilian. We read that. June Oliver. Canada has lots going on right now with an increasingly vile liberal government agenda, an NDP leadership race, etc. journalist Rachel Gilmore would be a great guest for the show, especially if you want to chat with her about how she made the top of that Charlie Kirk hit list. Yeah, we just take her name down, Rachel Gilmore from Canada. Left is big pharma plug.

Not sure if you've seen the chaos over at the FDA, but it's absolutely insane. Commissioner Marque just chased out his fourth director of the Center for Drug Evaluation Research, which is part of the FDA that regulates all drugs, most biologics, and most combination products. For comparison, CDER directors usually last a minimum of four years. The latest director was a 26-year-old, 26-year FDA veteran, Dr. Rick Pasder, who, initiated the widely successful oncology center of excellence. Now Mark McCarrie has appointed Tracy Beth Hoag, whose recent work led to the claims by Venné Prasad, director of the FDA's Center for Biologics, evaluation and research that at least 10 children died because of the COVID-19

vaccines. Most people don't pay attention to the FDA much to my chagrin, but given the impact of their work, this would be like sitting in a restaurant waiting for your food while simultaneously there's a massive kitchen fire, knife fight, and orgy happening amongst the crooks of the cooks in the kitchen right next to your food.

We should say there's already now pushback on that 10 children died because of the COVID-19 vaccines. I heard Vanet Prasad and my alarm immediately went off because I'm pretty sure he's not I mean, he's the guy trumpeting so. Yeah.

MPG, happy birthday, Matt. DNC, Google Pundit, oh my God. I think new Matt was like 25 when he started on MR. Amir Tyke. 27. Yeah, it's crazy. Was that the age? I joined too.

Must be. Same with Brian. Right? Plus or minus. All right. Five more. LA accent. Can the president bomb pharmaceutical companies, CIA?

Really cool. Last night, WFP interviewed three New York 10 challengers to plus, including Dan Goldman. Ulyneoy, Bradlander, Alex Viles. Are they all running against Goldman? No, I think that was just a hypothetical. I mean obviously lander in terms of name recognition is going to be strong but if he I want to see what DSA does before we see

you know how we're gonna I think was would be the DSA one there a Uline was the person who like could have maybe challenged him last time well no she should have she could have won that primary but it was it was Mondare Jones chose to run in that district yeah the the the we've got to avoid that this time. The left vote splitting.

Coordination, okay. Please. Apex Shakur, there seems to be an element of expediency and laziness with both ice and boat bombings. Rather than engage with criminal prosecution, summary executions are much faster, but at the cost of U.S. moral authority or whatever may be left of that. I would say zero. The packet today has a story about why they're doing the courthouse stuff and makes complete sense because courthouses check you for guns. Yeah.

they oh and why are they going after moms why are they going out like 70% of the immigration arrests that they have done for people with no criminal record and we have not heard of one shootout with these immigrants immigration these ice people not one and supposedly going out for the tough hombres that's amazing when you think of all of these gang members violent criminals not a single one of them has fought back against the ice arrest that's how good our boys in blue are at picking their battles exactly all right three more coal from Cincinnati happy birthday matt i wish your soundboard was available unlike like rm browns it's so good many times in my life blasting and I'm staying in the race would have come in clutch. Future reactionary. Pretty sure the Dems held the house from the mid-50s, so it was 40 years of control.

You're right. Emma thanking is a glass of wine in one hand and a remote in the other. Isn't this basically what Jordan Peterson was saying years ago? We can't gender mix in the workplace because of rouge and lipstick. We don't know what the rules are. Can I just take it out? I do it. It's just the boys.

You're out here trying to make it seem like you are excited that I'm around you. Don't deny. Your red lips are indicating you're sexually aroused. Don't deny it. You're provoking me to think of blow jobs. All I'm sitting here is thinking of like of sex because of you. Phil. It's just completely out of line.

Look what you made me think. Look what you made me think has worked. Like how many benzos you made me eat just to be able to handle being around you. Man, that's the side of the time. I can't even go to class now. Women should only wear red lipstick in the home. And that's the other thing he said, too, though, like, I guess the problem with, like, didn't he say something to the effect of, like, a part of the problem is I don't even know what people's gender are.

I don't know how to talk to them. I don't know what gender you are. I don't know how condescending to be. I mean, he's basically trying to cultivate a panic in people and say that's actually like just, you know, you could just be cool. If I am not aware that I'm talking to a woman, how do I know it's time for me to talk down to them? Poly Marxist, Sam is green because he's getting into the Grinch spirit in preparation for the war on Christmas, indeed. and the final I am of the week. I'm a nuts.

Hey Sam, what if Trump's hand bruises are not from medical infusions but are from cellular extractions collected to be stored in vials for creating Trump clones for future administrations? I know this can happen.

I saw the Woody Allen movie Sleeper. I think it's from backhanding J.D. Vance. Matt, Brian, Emma, a great job this week, folks. See you, Monday. day.