The Majority Report with Sam Seder - 3582 - MAGA's Free Speech Split?; Trump Goads Venezuela w/ Will Sommer & Jose Luis Granados Ceja

Episode Date: September 16, 2025

FBI director Kash Patel testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing and fails miserably to answer questions. On Fox & Friends Kash Patel fumbles his way through explaining an alleged note left by Tyler Robinson that is now "destroyed". Senior reporter at The Bulwark, Will Sommer joins the show to discuss the right-wing media response to Charlie Kirk's murder. Mexican journalist and staff writer at Venezuelanalysis, Jose Luis Granados Ceja joins us to discuss the Trump administration summarily killing another alleged "Venezuelan drug boat" in the Carribean and what message the strike sends to Latin America. In the Fun Half: Actors Hannah Einbinder, Javier Bardem and Morgan Spector speak out against the genocide in Palestine. Candace Owens comes for Bill Ackman with allegations of threats towards Kirk over Israel. Pam Bondi promises Sean Hannity that she will attack free speech and prosecute people who are 'celebrating' the assassination. 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. Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join 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: DELTEME: Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to joindeleteme.com/MAJORITY and use promo code MAJORITY at checkout.  TUSHY: Get 10% off TUSHY with the code TMR at https://hellotushy.com/TMR  SUNSET LAKE:  Head to SunsetLakeCBD.com and through September 14th, you can save 30% on all Sunset Lake CBD’s Tinctures when you use the coupon code FallTincture Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech 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/

Hey, everybody. We have a word from one of our favorite sponsors, sunsetlakesebade.com. Use the code left is best for 20% off. They're phenomenal products of Sebede. I mean, I have some of them right here, just on my desk, easy to grab. You have the gummies, different gummies.

You got, I think, here we go. These are, yes, the relaxed gummies. Sometimes I pop one of these. right before my walk home from the office and it kicks in right as relaxation is about to begin. Sunset Lake Sebeday is a great product as I mentioned. They have regenerative farming practices. They grow their product on their farm in North Vermont and it goes directly from there straight to your door. Sunset Lake Sebede takes pride in its best in business customers service as well. It's your one-stop shop for all of your hemp and sebeda needs. They grow their

own seabeday, provide testing paperwork with every order, and will help with any and all questions. They've got gummies. They've got tinctures. They've got smokables. And you just need to use the coupon code. Left is best, all one word for 20% off your entire order of Sunset Lake Sebede. if you go to sunset lake sebeda dot com Sunset Lake pays all of its workers a $22 minimum wage they are a majority of the farm and

business are employee owned they also have worked with us on a variety of different philanthropic lefty projects and done some on their own including criminal justice reform raise money on that food insecurity refugee relief local worker support worker solidarity and strike funds and more.

As I mentioned, they never use pesticides, they use sustainable farming practices, integrated pest management, so it's not the crappy Sebede that you'll see in a corner store, a burdega or whatever, you know exactly what you're getting here. So use coupon code left is best, all one word, for 20% off your entire order at sunset lake,

sebeda.com. Great product. Now time for the show. The Majority Report with Sam Cedar. It is Tuesday. September 16th, 2025. My name is Emma Vigeland, in for Sam Cedar, and 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, Will Summer of the Bullwark joins us to talk about the Trump administration's free speech crackdown and the maga fissures following the killing of Charlie Kirk. Also on the program, Jose Luis Granados Sia will be with us to talk about the administration's

second bombing of a, uh, of, uh, of, well, bombing of a second Venezuelan vote. Also on the program, FBI director and wide-awake man, Cash Patel. I added that part, is testifying before the Senate Oversight Committee today. Being asked about his expressly political firings of FBI agents, bungling the Kirk case so far and more. It hasn't even been a week.

Republicans attack free speech with states like Texas and Florida opening investigations into teachers who they claim were insensitive about Kirk's killing and on the federal level Trump and Vance call for investigations of their own into progressive organizations

and newspapers two Republicans introduced separate resolutions to censure Ilhan Omar again, for daring to mention Kirk's record of hateful rhetoric in an interview. Anything to distract from their role in escalating rhetoric. Last night, a federal appeals court denied the Trump administration's last-minute attempt to fire Lisa Cook. The Fed meets on setting interest rates today.

The UN officially accuses Israel of committing genocide in Gaza as the IDF pummel's what is left of Gaza City. Rubio heads to Qatar to salvage all peace talks after Israel bombed the mediating country. Spain threatens to boycott Eurovision if Israel is allowed to compete, which that's pretty good. the idea that what is eurovision yeah eurovision it's a big deal Russia was barred from all of this international competition but not Israel are you joking

also where's Israel right right well it kind of gives away the game that they want to compete in Eurovision right and they're in Eurobasket too it's ridiculous hmm makes you think a judge has dropped a New York State terrorism charge or both sorry New York State Terrorism

charges against Luigi Mangione. That's some good news. Trump orders the removal of information on slavery at multiple national parks, including a historic photo of a formerly enslaved man showing his scarred back. It's a down there. And lastly, Mississippi declares an infant death's emergency as Trump's CDC cuts have destroyed their medical infrastructure, particularly on women's health. All this and more on today's majority report. Welcome to the show, everybody.

It is Newsday Tuesday. Sam is out. He may have explained that he had a death in the family, so he will not be in today or tomorrow. We give our condolences to the whole Cedar clan. We love them over there, Sam, Julie, etc. Sorry for their loss. You'll be stuck with me for the next few days,

but we obviously have a lot of news to get to and some great guests coming up. We'll start just with what's happening this morning on the hill. Cash Patel this morning appeared in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Tomorrow he is slated to appear in front of the House Judiciary Committee, which will be quite fiery. I have a little bit more faith in House leadership or, you know, Jamie Ravis. asking in handling this, although Dick Durbin had some good questions here, there's a lot that Cash Patel could be questioned on, questioned on. He was asked as of this morning, I think the hearing is still ongoing about a variety of different issues, including the extrajudicial

bombing of a second Venezuelan boat with baseless claims about how, or not, maybe not baseless, but without evidence-free claims about how these were drug traffickers. The Epstein cover-up is obviously central. At this point, highly dubious. Because what kind of drug traffickers just are like 12 people in a boat? You need 12 people to smuggle drugs? Yeah. Is that how that usually works?

I don't know. I mean, I'm not a drug trafficker. They're trying to go Venezuela into a response. Yeah. They want to have a war. I mean, and also, isn't the FBI supposed to be involved here in domestic law enforcement? What the hell is Cash Patel even doing involved and needing to be questioned about this kind of action? He was also questioned about his widely reported enemies list.

There's also this matter of that list, not questioned about his other literary works, which perhaps we can get to later. We still have his children's book somewhere around here in which he made himself the main character. I read it to my baby every night. A few days ago, the former FBI agents filed a lawsuit against both Pam Bondi and Cash Patel about their firings. And before we get to this question about the pipe bomb investigation, I wanted to read a little bit from this New York Times article this morning where they interviewed these FBI agents that are suing. Chris Meyer, a field agent assigned to fly the FBI director Cash Patel's plane until last month, knew he was in trouble over the summer when a pro-Trump influencer claimed without a wisp of proof

that he was the main agent in the Mar-a-Lago documents investigation. Can we put this up on the screen? Mr. Meyer said he was never assigned to the case. Moreover, he added, he was on a lakeside vacation with his family in Virginia when the FBI conducted its first significant move in the inquiry, the search of Donald J. Trump's Florida residence and resort in August 2022. Now, let me just remind people of what that was. Trump took a bunch of classified documents from the White House after he lost the presidential election. The new FBI under Biden made repeated requests for him to return the documents. He kept dodging doing so.

eventually they returned some and they immediately noticed that a lot of them were missing. So after trying to ask nicely and you could see that Mike Pence returned some documents he accidentally took, Joe Biden did the same thing. When they were asked and it was discovered that these documents were taken, they ended up returning them. Trump hoarded them and refused to comply when asked about it. And they were, yeah, left in the Mar-a-Lago bathroom in those. dot in those uh you can squeeze in there just be careful you use photography so uh it was clearly like a last resort action by the authorities to do this they didn't want this kind of

high profile incident but trump is such a criminal and a crook that they were forced to do so anyway this guy was not a part of this investigation but a maga influencers said it So it was inflammatory, Mr. Meyer, 43 said in an interview last week. It was false. No matter. Last month, Mr. Patel summarily fired Mr. Meyer and another top agent in the Washington, D.C. field office, who had been targeted by the right, Walter Giardina. Mr. Patel did so after being told that the terminations were unlawful and that punishing out or

pushing out Mr. Giardina, who was caring for his dying wife, she died a few days later after being fired. She had stage four cancer. Would be inexcusably cruel, according to a lawsuit filed by three FBI supervisors, also dismissed by Patel. And then there's this other piece that was just insane. Go to the part, around 10 a.m.

Around 10 a.m. August 5th, Brian Driscoll, who had run the FBI for several weeks before Mr. Patel arrived, walked into his successor's office on the seventh floor of Bureau headquarters to plead for Mr. Meyer, whom he respected. Mr. Driscoll, who had already gained

folk hero status in the FBI for refusing Justice Department orders to compile a list of agents who worked on January 6 cases, suggested that dismissing agents who had lawfully executed orders from prosecutors would set a bad precedent. Are you really listening to this guy? Mr. Driscoll asked, referring to Kyle Serafin, a right-wing podcaster and former FBI agent who made the accusation against Mr. Meyer, according to three people briefed on the interaction. Are we really allowing him to influence decisions? Yes. when Mr.

Yes. When Mr. Driscoll implored him to speak directly to Mr. Meyer, Mr. Patel refused those people at it. So he's also chicken shit.

He's firing him, but he doesn't want to say it to his face, basically. This is about, this is about, um, taking anyone out of the FBI who worked on Gen 6th. Pruning the FBI to be more maga, to be more maga.

And this was some, right, this was, uh, some of the line of questioning where Patel denied this. obviously. But compare that incredible and obvious politicization and political reasoning behind the decisions to Patel's answer here, when asked by Dick Durbin about another investigation that is still ongoing and his claims about it, which are these pipe bombs that were placed

outside of the DNC and RNC on January 6th, and they still have not been able to identify who did that um and there have been rewards put out etc but this was on january 5th right before january 6th we don't need to speculate too much but there were a lot of trump supporters in the area on january 6th just on a number if you're unable to identify who this person is and given who then what you know committed all of these lawless acts killing people the next day perhaps if the Biden, FBI, wanted to pin it on a Republican, they would have had an incredible number of suspects to do so because there were all these insurrectionists who ended up getting

rightfully prosecuted for their actions on January 6th. But no, no, no, no, the Republicans are the victims constantly. Here is this interaction from this morning. Director Patel, much like you, deputy director, Don Bongino, was a conspiracy theorist who built a lucrative career making inflammatory and unsubstantiated statements about the FBI that would be disqualifying in any administration cared about nonpartisan law enforcement. For instance, Mr. Bongino called the placement of pipe bombs outside the DNC and RNC headquarters on January 6th, quote, an inside job

and went on to say, this was a setup. I have zero doubt. And whoever goes into the FBI, better get an answer about why. Director Patel, you and Deputy Director Bonjino are now leading the FBI. What is the evidence to suggest the pipe bombs placed outside of the DNC and RNC on January 6th were an inside job? I appreciate the opportunity to discuss Director Bongino as mine record. So many on this committee in the media, jettison, are 31 years of public service prior to taking. Can you answer the question, sir?

I'm answering the question. You're questioning the integrity of the deputy director, the FBI, and mine. if you found any evidence. And I'm going to answer the question. The pipe bomb investigation is ongoing, and I'm not going to discuss the details of the pipe bomb investigation. Mr. Bongino was a secret service agent for 15 years, a police officer for five. I served this country in multiple administrations for 16 years. Let's say, like we all know the reputation our police departments have. Also look at this secret service. That's not necessarily a sign of a good person that they worked on the secret

service. I like his defense mechanism here is to first he gets indignant. Does he do the appeal to authority first or the indignance? Maybe all at once. How dare you? How dare you the like actually a senator? Right. I'm a podcaster. Yeah. Well, yeah. Who is the kind of the Senate's job. Who is now? Well, they confirmed him. But the reality is is that this guy literally he was appointed by Donald Trump in part one because he said, I'm going to go after your enemies. which he's making good on, but two, because he had this popular support behind him because he was like, I'm going to reveal everything in the Epstein files. And now he's arguably the most complicit person behind Pam Bondi and Donald Trump in its cover-up.

Details of the pipe bomb investigation. Mr. Bongino was a secret service agent for 15 years, a police officer for five. I served this country in multiple administrations for 16 years. We were also private citizens, and we are now back in government service. And what we have the ability to do is set aside our personal beliefs to deliver the mission of justice for this country. And we're doing it day in and day out. Pro, what was a question? And I find it disgusting that everyone and anyone would jettison our 31 years of combined experience that is now at the helm of the FBI delivering historic results at historic speeds for the American people. I don't think so.

31 years is not that much for two people combined. I have 10 years experienced majority. Right. How dare you question my experience? Is that the end of it? Oh, dang, when we were less, oh, just a little bit longer, a little bit longer. That is now at the helm of the FBI delivering historic results at historic speeds for the American people. So you have no evidence.

I got a lot of evidence, and I'll give it to you when I can. Yeah, looking forward to it. Yeah, that's the part I wanted. Oh, I have a lot of evidence. You know how Cash Patel over this past five days or so has really made his, a reputation, cultivated the reputation of holding evidence close to the vest. You know, like live tweeting when they have a subject in custody, subject, I was now told that subject is also a term that they could use, not suspect, okay, so fair enough, it was maybe it was the right term, but tweeted it out and then two hours later was like, just kidding, we had to, it's not the guy that killed Charlie Kirk, we got to release him. That was a Tim Robinson-style answer to that question. A hundred percent.

How dare you question my integrity? I'm seven years of doing the copy machine. Right, right. Why don't you inherently trust me, Cash Patel. Don't I look trustworthy? The guy has been revealing just all of the evidence that they're collecting. Like, I really hope that if this Tyler Robinson guy is the man that was behind the killing of Charlie Kerr. that they are able to adequately prosecute him.

But they are giving the defense attorney, whoever takes this case, an infinite amount of material to question the government. Like, the fact that he's coming out and going on Fox News with all these theories and revealing evidence and then having to take it back, how it's going to be incredibly easy for the defense attorney to paint the prosecution

and the government here as both compromise and incompetent. And Patel is making that quite clear. I mean, while we're here, just let's play this one part. This was from two days ago on Fox News. I couldn't believe my ears when I heard this answer. Sorry?

Number nine, yeah, the one you have right here. This is great. A couple of other things. I have two quick questions. One, is true, what the governor said yesterday, that he had a written note that you're looking into now prior to the assassination.

You look, did he have a note? And the other one question is, the person that was texting with him about, I have a shot and taken out Charlie Kirk, can that person be charged? So I'll take those in reverse. The charging decisions are up to our great partners at the Department of Justice and the Attorney General

who have been wonderful providing resources during this entire process, and we'll let them speak to any charging decisions. But we, the FBI, are investigating. As I said, our investigation is ongoing. We're interviewing dozens and dozens of suspects, subjects, witnesses, and the like, and continuing to examine forensic information, including cell phone data and DNA analyses. And once we make those findings handed over to our partners, as we're doing in real time,

they'll make those decisions. And I'm sorry, Brian, I forgot your other question. You had a written note? Did he write a written note before the assassination attempt? That's what the governor said yesterday. And what did that say if you could share that with? say, I'm sorry, so what I was, what I'm able to say is I addressed it partially earlier is that the written note, we believe what did exist, and we have evidence to show what was in that

note, which is, and I'm going to summarize basically saying, I, the suspect wrote a note saying, I have the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and I'm going to take it. That note was written before the shooting. Evidence of existence, we now have learned, existed before the shooting, was in the location in the suspect and partner's home. But we have since learned that the note, even though it has been destroyed, we have found forensic evidence of the note, and we have confirmed what that note says because of our aggressive interview posture at the FBI.

Remember? It gets sucked in. The manifesto just gets sucked in. So it's gone. We just have to trust their forensic team, led by Cash Patel, the QAnon podcaster to accurately replicate

the manifesto where the shooter said what they were their motivations allegedly in killing Charlie Kirk we're supposed to trust that this guy is going to and his forensic team they'll do a spark notes version

of the manifesto one of the guys he's got a photographing memory just trust him right I mean can't you Dan Bonnjini and Cash Patel are on this. Cash Patel can just remember everything

by the sheer size of his eyes. Evidence of the note was in the location that... Scanning it. What's not to trust here? That was a great sentence. Like, the evidence of the prior existence of the prior existence of the note existed in the location that we looked at, but doesn't exist anymore, but our guys are on it. Like, okay.

No further questions, Your Honor. The defense attorney, I got to say, I would imagine that there are many defense attorneys that are looking for a high-profile case like this with such incompetent folks in the government on the other side. In a moment, we'll be speaking to Will Summer, but first, a word from some of our sponsors, delete me. Delete me is a product that I started using before I even joined the majority report, basically as soon as I started doing this, kind of semi-publicly. It was recommended to me by multiple people in our industry because it is a quick, easy, and safe way to remove your personal data online

at a time where surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everybody vulnerable. Delete me makes it easier than ever to make sure that people do not find personal information about you online. With your address, phone number, family members' names hanging out there on the internet, it can have actual consequences

is in the real world, and it makes everybody vulnerable. More and more, online partisans and nefarious actors will find this data and use it to target political rivals, civil servants, and even outspoken citizens posting their opinions online, given what we just talked about. Delete Me helps you protect your personal privacy or the privacy of your business from doxing attacks before sensitive information can be exploited. The New York Times Wirecutter has named Delete Me their top-fit pick for data removal services. Thanks to delete me for sponsoring the majority report. And delete me, I don't know

what I would do without it. Seriously. It's really, I think, prevented some harassment towards me that, you know, I won't go into detail about it, but you see what they catch. You see the information that is not out there, that could have been leaked, etc. And it gives you a detailed report and I just I think it's important especially in these times as they mention to make sure that you are protected online take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for delete me now at a special discount for our listeners get 20% off your delete me plan when you go to join deleteme dot com slash majority and use promo code majority at checkout the only way to get 20% off is to go to join delete

me.com slash majority and enter code majority at checkout. That's join delete me.com slash majority code majority. A link below in the video description and episode description and at majority.fm. Get 20% off your delete me plan when you go to join delete me.com slash majority and use promo code majority at checkout. And lastly, let's face it, people especially men will life hack

everything except one thing toilet paper consumption using a tushy bidet means that you will leave the bathroom so much cleaner than when you walked in. Let's get into it. Sam is not

here to give his famed hello tushy bidet ad reads or tushy ad reads, I apologize. But he is quite a fan. And I don't do that kind of thing, obviously, because I'm a girl, but I have heard from men that that experience

is lovely, especially when you have this kind of attachment here in the United States where we're just behind the rest of the world. You go to Europe, they have them installed there in hotel rooms and restaurants. Here in the United States, we've got this crappy toilet paper, but unless you have a Tushie Badee. Tushie is the everyday luxury bidet that instantly transforms your bathroom habits and bottom health for life. Tushy's elevated bidet collection nurtures your bottom with instant warm water that never runs cold, a soothing

heated seat and UV sterilization for next level hygiene. Whoa. All Tushy Baday is easily attached to your existing toilet without the need for additional plumbing. Instillation is simple. It takes about 10 minutes to complete. Cleaning yourself after using the bathroom is now hands free.

You just sit, you cleanse, you dry using the built-in air dryer, and instead of wiping endlessly, Tushie endlessly. presumably removes 99% of bacteria while protecting your natural skin barrier. Because fresh water, that's the best way to do this kind of thing. So I hear. Every hello Tushy bidet comes with a 30-day hassle-free return and a 12-month warranty.

Thank you to Tushy for sponsoring this episode. Remember, A-Hole is the only a dirty word if you wipe. For a limited time, our listeners get 10% off their first bidet order when you use code TMR check out that's 10% off your first biday order at hello tushy.com with promo code tmr link down below in the video and episode descriptions again that is code tmr for 10% off your first bidet order at hellotushy.com promo code tmr again hellotushy dot com slash tmr get 10% off tushy with code tmr quick break and when we come back we'll be joined by will summer We are back and we are joined now by Will Summer, senior reporter of the false flag newsletter.

Will, thanks so much for coming on the show. Hey, thanks for having me. Of course. So you have been across some of the right-wing reaction to obviously the killing of Charlie Kirk over on false flag. You know, we were saying this briefly in the break. I hesitate to talk about splits in the Republican base sometimes because they're much better at kind of, you know, putting those things aside and coming behind their dear leader Donald Trump. But it appears like, at least really with like the young online right wing space, the reaction to the killing of Charlie Kirk has caused some rancor between, you know, these media personalities that feels like it's building off of like existing fissures really around the issue of Israel.

Yeah, that's right. I mean, I think fundamentally here, there's kind of a frustration from a lot of these figures that the shooter or excuse me, the suspect has not been like, I don't know. a member of DSA, you know, it's not like really visibly, and certainly is not, is not trans himself. Like, they really wanted like a, like a blue hair, SJW type. And then it's, it's a lot more muddled. I think there's a lot of questions remaining. And so instead, they sort of seem to be turning to a lot of conspiracy theories. And as you said, I mean, Israel is kind of like the main fault line, particularly for young, young Trump supporters or youngish. And so as a result, I think this idea that Israel killed him or that there are a lot of sort of unanswered questions.

about what happened. It has really been proliferating. And who are the main purveyors of this? Because Candace Owens is the obvious answer. But we have figures like Tucker Carlson, who have been much more critical of Israel from the right than the more traditional party, I guess, influencers. Although it's not necessarily taking a ton of a toll, at least in polling as of last month. month in regards to the Republican base, it's certainly not, like, they're not as pro-Israel as they were, say, two years ago. But overwhelmingly, the cohort of voters, you know, Democrats, independents, and Republicans, the Republican base is the one that's most supportive of Israel

by, like, 50 or 40 points. Yeah, I mean, I think fundamentally what's happening here is you have these sort of more Israel critical voices. And I mean, in Candace Owens' case, like, sort of wildly anti-Semitic as well. And so in the right-wing media, and so Tucker and Candace, I think, would be sort of the leading avatars of that. And they are realizing, I think, that Charlie Kirk's memory is going to be something really valuable going forward to sort of a plethora of right-wing causes and what that means. And so, for example, so Tucker was on the sort of J.D. Vance hosted Charlie Kirk show. And he said, you know, essentially, I'm sick of Benjamin Netanyahu talking about Charlie Kirk and Israel and saying, oh, he was such a great supporter of Israel. And then Candace Owens, who is sort of setting herself as sort of a bizarro air to Charlie Kirk,

because she's not going to be allowed to take over Turning Point USA, stuff like that. But she's trying to sort of claim that mantle anyway. And so she put out a video basically saying that Charlie Kirk had had this, a lot of tension with pro-Israel donors, that Bill Ackman, the billionaire, had confronted him over it. And she's not saying explicitly, this is why he was killed. But it sort of the, it sort of leads you to believe that there's sort of an insinuation there that, you know, in the days up, up ahead of his death, there were these threats made to him. Well, I would not be shocked if here it is. Here's your, your tweet response

to this. billionaire Bill Ackman says Candace Owens has slandered him with her claims this afternoon about tensions between Ackman and Charlie Kirk over Israel in the days leading up to Kirk's assassination. She did have a response where I think, you know, she made a variety of different accusations, including an $150 million campaign that she says was going to be directed at Tucker Carlson for his critique of Israel. So, you know, I don't believe any of these people, but I'm rooting for the fight. Well, that's often the position I find most live in watching the fight. Yeah, I mean, I think it's tricky with Candid Soans, because on one hand, she says things are totally nuts. Like, you know, she's claimed that Brigitte McCrone.

is not only trans, but is part of sort of a medieval cult that has traveled across Europe of undermining the underpinnings of Western civilization. I'm sorry, trying not to laugh. Okay, go on, yeah. But at the same time, occasionally she's roaming across Europe. Anyway, keep going. Exactly. And so, but we have to like, often sometimes, like I figure like Laura Lumer,

it sort of she can say things that are sort of like revealing about the internal dynamics of the right and things that proved to be correct. So even before Charlie Kirk was shot, it was clear that there was, some drama between him and some donors and some people on the right because he had this kind of gatekeeper role. And so if you were invited to speak at Turning Point USA, much more so than CPAC these days, which is sort of irrelevant, it meant like you were, okay, this is within Trumpism, you are a sanctioned figure. And as Tucker Carlson has become more critical of Israel and said sort of things about, I would apologize to the family of Osama bin Laden for the U.S.

killing him or, you know, offer my condolences, people have been kind of panicking about the idea that he was going to be allowed to speak at a turning point convention, I believe, in December. And so there was pressure on Charlie to block that. And now what Candace is saying is that basically Bill Ackman had stepped up in a bigger way and said, you know, we're going to have this event in the Hamptons, which, you know, of course, that gets into a whole other thing about, like, how much money is flowing into this world.

I mean, I know you guys that the majority report are always having your Hampton's retreats. Obviously, Soros funded to. And basically, she claims it was like 100 influencers. were gathered there, and it was clearly in her saying, you know, she's saying this was kind of the get in line, here's the line on Israel talking points, and basically that Ackman confronted Charlie and yelled at him. You know, he's denied, Akman has denied that. And Turning Point USA and a bunch of kind of figures around it have come out to say that's not true. But this event did happen, but it was sort of on friendlier terms. So it's hard to know, but I do think it offers a

glimpse into sort of the pressures and, again, the money that that is behind Turning Point USA. Well, I would not be shocked if that meeting did happen, and it is as is characterized, given what we know about Benjamin Nenya, who actually, you know, there has been reporting that he met with Dave Rubin and Tim Poole earlier this year. His son is a major fan of Tim Poole. And they are definitely concerned about the cratering support for Israel, given the fact that just this morning, the UN said they are committing genocide in Gaza. it is completely basically, it's undeniable at this point. And if you're a young person online and you're consuming more of those

shows like Candice or Tucker versus, say, Fox News, you're going to be much more abreast of that fact and you're going to see images of these children being slaughtered. And what Tucker and Candace have been doing is presenting an alternative narrative to the more humanist vision

on the right. We've spoken about this on the show before but like, when our show talks about how we believe in a democratic Israel with Palestinians and Israelis having equal rights, what are they talking about? Oh, it's Israelis discriminating against Christian Palestinians. Or it's Jews in America subverting our democracy because they support Israel. It's always pitting different groups against one another. And it feels like the influencers you're talking about are seizing on that opportunity in ways that I think we should be very concerned about because this is just what

I think the left has spoken about, where when you conflate Zionism and Judaism, this is the eventual reality. And they are the outgrowth of that. That's a great point, Emma. I mean, I do think that they are seizing on this. And certainly, you know, someone like Nick Fuentes, who's even further right and more anti-Semitic, is they're seizing on this to say, you know, look what the Jews are up to in Israel. I mean, it's not like these people are such bleeding hearts for Palestinian children. But they're saying, you know, they're anti-Christian. Here's a video of, you know, Jews in Israel, like spitting on a visiting Christian tour group. And then they're saying, now look, if they have so much power there and look how they use

it, and then let's look at the United States, where we're going to say they control the media, they control everything here. You know, like, for example, they become really focused on, like, the idea of American politicians visiting the Western Wall, the idea that this is like an act of humiliation or some of submission. So, I mean, it really is like, it, it, it really is, like, it, they're using it to grow anti-Semitism and I think criticism of Jews in the United States. And it's very concerning. But I think you're right also that Netanyahu is clearly like very keyed into American influencer culture, right-wing influencers. I mean, at the point where you're meeting with Tim Poole, I mean, that's like a couple of years down on the list, you know? I mean, it's, it's not a Fox News host. And so that's a big deal. And so the, I would not be surprised if both the Israeli government and, and, and, and supporters,

like Bill Ackman were really concerned about the prospect that someone like Charlie Kirk would even become neutral on Israel that would start saying, you know, voicing a few more criticisms. And in that way, you know, you can, you can see why they would be mad about that. Right. And then, but it's the causal connection being drawn by the right that is the problem here. And I find it interesting that that's where they want, where some folks want to go. I mean, you have people immediately say on the right, the more traditional Republicans even, like, Ben Shapiro went on Bill Marshow and said this shooter was of the left and Bill Marvall people pushed back on him saying you don't know that Ben but that's the line from the Republican

party right now without evidence claiming that this shooter was ideologically left and is that split like you know pronounced among these right wing kind of commentators as well because you mentioned Fuentes, where does he fit into all of this? Because there was speculation that he might have been a Groyper. We don't have enough information to really know what his ideology was at all. But Fuentes seems to kind of be a little bit in the background here, but is a specter over the whole debate. Yeah, I mean, I think Poenthe's is going for, you know, the past few months or a few weeks, he's been going for kind of like almost like a more respectable approach.

Like he's been really kind of dismissing. he's kind of having his like sister soldier moment to the right. I mean, he's saying like, you know, you guys are crazy for believing these conspiracy theories. And in this case, he's saying, I'm not seeing evidence that Israel was behind it. So there's kind of some triangulation going on here. But, you know, I think you hit on something broader, which is that you would think, you know, given the, that the right would be really keyed up for this, for focusing on the shooter. But it seems like there's maybe not enough in the suspect's background to focus on

yet. And, you know, as you said, they're making all these claims about the left. But we haven't seen, you know, with the exception of George Soros, we haven't really seen like a proper noun. I mean, Cash Patel was just having his hearing. They're saying, oh, we're going to have to go after these leftist networks. They're not saying anything. I mean, I think a good heuristic here would be, you know, with the Epstein files where the right would always say, if there was something between Donald Trump and Epstein, Biden would have leaked it. And so we can just assume there's nothing. Well, I think in this case, I think if there was really a smoking gun or, or, you know, a real proof here that the suspect was really sort of liberally focused in a way that

they could capitalize on. We would have seen it already. I think that's right. And we were just covering this morning just like how Patel is approaching this investigation. It's just a gift to the defense. I mean, I, I've never seen such a nakedly political and unprofessional investigation like this and the rush to propagandize it feels very desperate to me in a way that I think you know broadly when we're talking about the different theories on the right what has been the feeling about the free speech crackdown that is being promised by Trump by Pam Bondi by the widow of Charlie Kirk's wife who is saying you know widow of Charlie Kirk saying vengeance vengeance vengeance all over the place.

They have no idea what's coming. To me, it feels very defensive, but also quite troubling because you have the vice president and the president saying they're going to go after leftist groups and media organizations, which we would fall in there, well. So something the monitor. I mean, going back to her speech after the assassination, I mean, it was notable to me that she said they, you know, to the people who are behind this. I mean, there's really no evidence anyone at this point, but besides the,

the suspect could have been behind it. You know, you're right. The way the investigation is being handled is sort of like a way to court right-wing media has been very bizarre. You know, it didn't get a lot of attention, but Dan Bongino went on Megan Kelly yesterday. And it's really bizarre. I mean, you can get this sense that sort of his podcaster instincts are winning out

over his deputy director of the FBI instincts because she'll say things like, well, can you just confirm the suspect's roommate's name for us? And he goes, okay, you know, I guess. I'll do it, which in what situation would an FBI official, you know, you have the roommate supposedly was not involved, is cooperating, is just, yeah, I'll put the, I'll put the name out since, you know, everyone is talking about it. You know, it's really strange and sort of talking about the conditions of the suspects jail. But getting back to the free speech thing you mentioned, it's very strange. I mean, obviously, Pam Bondi has been facing a lot of backlash today for saying, you know,

we're going to have to crack down on hate speech. But more broadly, I mean, the right seems very comfortable with a lot of the way the rest of this has been phrased about we're going to go after these networks. People who are calling us Nazis, we're going to go after them. I mean, things that are clearly illegal. And then, you know, also, you know, things that would otherwise be illegal like, you know, the administration's trial balloon about banning trans people from having guns. You know, I think Pambandi's mistake was phrasing it in sort of a liberal coded way about hate speech. I saw one guy who's kind of a maha figure say, you know, we don't want hate speech crackdown. We want purges.

We want roundups. So it's not like these people are really that concerned about this kind of incipient fascism. I think that it's only because they've been taught for so long to be concerned about hate speech crackdown that this is what set them off. Yeah. Do we have that actually, number eight here? It might be a good idea to the Pam Bondi on.

Or maybe it's, I'm sorry, what's the number on with? Katie Miller. Is this the right one? Yes. Yeah, yeah, yeah. This was the... Sorry, guys. I'm trying to find this number. Eleven. Okay, yeah, let's do 11 here. So you referenced this, Will. Wanted to just play this for the audience. This is Pam Bonnie, the Attorney General of the United States. On Katie Miller's podcast, for those that do not know, Katie Miller is the white. of Stephen Miller who there was an article

in the Rolling Stone over the weekend that basically shows he's functioning as the president Stephen Miller Trump is so lazy and is outsourcing

essentially everything to him so they have this podcast that no one watches and I look at the views no one's watching this but it's all over the news right it's just there as

for them to clip yeah exactly it's just a propaganda outfit it's not like Katie Miller has a great charisma as you'll look you're about to see um only 2,000 views in a day exactly with the attorney general on this podcast. And that's like the highest profile interview she's done. Yeah exactly. This was the headline coming out of this because as you mentioned will she made these comments about

hate speech that she had to walk back this morning. Especially with kids. It's a lot of work to show up to a college campus right for so long colleges allowed when a conservative would go on campus right they go with all this police and security these universities are complicit in allowing conservatives to be harassed on campus and what happens when you allow a university to harass conservatives and don't expel or don't take an action is what happened last week it is and and you know on a broader level that the anti-Semitism what's been happening at college campuses around this country is disgusting it's despicable and we've been fighting that we've been fighting these universities left and right and we're not going to stop there's free speech and then there's

hate speech. And there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society. Do you see more law enforcement going after these groups who are using hate speech and putting cuffs on people? So we show them that some action is better than no action. We will absolutely target you, go after you if you are targeting anyone with hate speech, anything. And that's across the aisle. I mean, look what. happen. Think about Josh Shapiro. What happened to Governor Shapiro? I talked to Josh multiple times. Democrat governor, Jewish. They firebombed his house. All right. All right. We got it. I just want, first of all, the pandering there to Katie Miller, who is a Zionist Jew herself as well

as her husband, Stephen, seems pretty clear there. I don't, and the way to make it bipartisan by bringing in Josh Shapiro, oh, now you're concerned about violence against Democrats when it can be used as a propaganda outfit, because they know right now, of course, the pro-Palestine movement is centered, at least in terms of activist groups. It's on the left. You might have some, like, anti-Semitic, anti-Israel voices on the right, but they're not really in the organizing movement. So this is a way just to further go after the left, bringing that in there. But she's lying. Hate speech, you cannot. This has been, uh, uh, delisement. over and over again in the Supreme Court.

I think Oliver Wendell Holmes had it basically said this in the 1920, something like that, where hate speech, it's protected until it crosses a specific line. But this was her statement walking it back today because, as you mentioned, Will, this is an issue constitutionally. Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is not protected by the First Amendment, she says. It's a crime. Well, that's not what you said there. That's called making a threat. Yeah. Hate speech is not a concept that exists in First Amendment kind of case law and jurisprudence. And this has already been discussed, we can take that down, laid out in our law. That, yeah, incitement and harassment and that kind of thing, that's illegal. But hate speech actually is protected.

Right. I mean, you can see she's walking it back there. I mean, there was a huge explosion from the right. People were saying, you know, particularly I thought it was interesting that Turning Point USA people were saying, you know, she should resign, be fired. So they don't like the hate speech. And I would say they also didn't like when she said that if you run an office max or something and you refuse to put to post to print a Charlie Kirk Memorial sign that the Justice Department will come after you, which is very reminiscent of baking the cake for the gay wedding from their point of view. So, you know, on the other hand, you know, there's been a lot of backlash and she's backtracked.

But Trump backed her up today. I mean, in a gaggle, he said. I believe to Jonathan Carl from ABC, he was asked, you know, what do you think about Pam Bondi saying she'll go after people? And he says, well, maybe she'll come after you, Jonathan, Carl, if you keep it up. Because you're a hater too. You do hate speech. You hate on me. That's what they mean by hate speech. They mean criticizing conservatives. Trump said it the other day. You call us Nazis. That's hate speech. Is it or is it an accurate portrayal of your freaking ideology? Yeah. I mean, it's getting very sinister. And, you know, like I said, I mean, it seems like the

White House is sticking with her. I thought it was notable that Laura Loomer, who is in some ways sort of a proxy for the White House as well. I mean, she hates Pam Bondi's gut. And she was out today saying, well, I think Pam Bonnie made some good points. So I think it's clear the talking points went out. There was this initial kind of complaining for the right-wing influencers, but now I think they've been reined in. Maybe they're going to run with this hate speech thing. So yeah, lastly then, Will, where do you see that going? Even when we have some of the more high-profile conservative, I guess, online podcast influencer space being a little bit queasy about this explicit war on free speech. It seems like at least in the institutions of power, they're going to have

the backing of the Republican Party and clearly the White House for this, I mean, attack on the First Amendment over Charlie Kirk's killing. You know, it's difficult to know because they haven't, with the exception of George Soros, they haven't really said anyone. or that they'll be pursuing. But I think it's notable. I mean, J.D. Vance was going wild yesterday, mad about this nation article that was critical of Charlie Kirk's legacy and saying, you know, we got to go out to the people who are funding this.

I mean, that's obviously protected free speech. And so I think Cash Patel was talking at his hearing about pursuing the money. So it seems like a very Victor Orban type thing of pursuing, you know, essentially the funders of liberal activism. Well, I mean, they, that. Didn't Elon already do that with Daesh? Yeah. There are fewer. It's easier because it's just the entire right-wing media apparatus is funded by billionaires. So it's quite, it's a lot easier to find liberal groups to attack in that way.

It's horrible. But I really appreciate your time today. Will Sumner. I also want to say, you have a great book we interviewed you for in the past. If people want to check out your work on QAnon, trust the plan, the rise of Q&N, and the conspiracy that unhinged America. If you want, like, a text that gives you a sense of the intellectual undergirding of our FBI director and, you know, what he really studied before coming into power. And, of course, check out the bulwark and Will's work over there at False Flag, the newsletter as a part of the bulwark. Well, thank you so much for your time today.

Really appreciate it. Thanks for having me. Of course. All right, folks, quick break. And when we come back, we will be talking about the attacks on the Venezuelan boats. Be right back. Thank you. We are back, and we are joined now by Jose Luis Granado Seya, Mexican journalist, staff writer at Venezuela Analysis, and presenter on Simuros, on Mexico's Canal Ence.

Jose Luis, thanks so much for coming on the show today. Oh, thank you very much for inviting me. Of course. So yesterday, Trump announced that his administration had bond a second boat that they claim, without evidence, was carrying drugs from Venezuela. They killed three people this time. They killed, I think, a dozen or 11 folks in the first attack on the boat. Just the first boat. Just give us your reaction to this new.

and how this is a clear escalation by the administration to try to goad Venezuela into some sort of response. Absolutely. I think this is very much the intention. I think what we're seeing is the United States, once again, acting in a rogue fashion in the region in order to advance its interest. I think these attacks on these boats, even though they're in an international water, according to the U.S. government, clearly constitute a violation of international law and also a huge violation. violation of the sovereignty of Venezuela because this is clearly aimed at them. What we're seeing is extrajudicial executions carried out by the Trump administration as part of a broader agenda that goes back to previous governments. We're talking Biden, Trump, Obama, aimed at intimidating and ultimately trying to oust the government in Venezuela in order to cut away and damage their influence in the region because

as much as Venezuela has suffered greatly under the U.S.-led sanctions campaign, obviously we've seen the fallout of that with the migration crisis, well, it still represents a threat to U.S. hegemony in the region. And that's why they act with the way that they are, but this is definitely an escalation, and I think that's the most worrisome part, is what's next? I mean, the first attack was worrisome, but this second one, I think now we can say constitutes a pattern.

And that pattern is forming U.S. policy in the region now, which is that they're willing to do anything, up to and including violations of international law. Well, five U.S. F-35 stealth jets were dropped off in Puerto Rico on Saturday, and this attack on the second boat happened on Monday. What are you hearing about this show of force by the United States, and I would argue, belligerence, but like what they're also trying to indicate really militarily and in addition to these attacks on the boats to the Venezuelan government.

Yeah, it definitely speaks to the links that they're clearly willing to go to. We also saw recently the decertification in the narco-trafficking fight in neighboring Colombia. This, I think, what we might be witnessing is the beginning of what we could call a strategic retreat by the United States into its traditional sphere of influence. Obviously, Western Europe, but even then we see them aligning differently. but certainly Latin America, I detest the term, but they have always viewed Latin America as their backyard. And I think given the rising influence of China, especially here in Latin America, there's only a handful of countries now, whose number one trading partners in the United States,

the rest of them, it's China. I think what they're seeing is to try to retreat into this hemisphere where they feel like they can exert more influence by any means necessary, right? We saw that with this administration a bit of an abandonment of soft power in the region, you know, the defunding of U.S.A. and the rest of it. Not that I'm a fan of this of the work that U.S.A. did in the region, but it shows what their priorities are. It's to use physical force, military force, in order to send a message. And I think the message is also for all the region, not just Venezuela and Mexico in particular, I think, as well. Well, I'd love for you to expand on that point about Mexico because I hadn't

considered that. But it's funny that they're trying to present this as like a shift in U.S. foreign policy. And I guess it is, but it's more, as you say, a return because while our interference in Latin America may have been in the form of coups and in the form of like the CIA doing these covert actions that were just as bloody, this is, I guess, just a open display where there's a lot of those things in the administration where it's like they take the things that left wing folks were critical of like U.S. Empire about or whatever. and they just own them and expand upon them. And it feels like open militarism with Venezuela is an admission of the policies that you

described, the sanctions regime of previous administrations, the attempts to overthrow Maduro's government, like that was obvious to everybody. And so now they're just openly doing it. That's exactly right. And I think it is a way, a sort of a reflection of the kind of prevailing authoritarianism that defines this administration in Washington. right now of wanting to do things however they want and the consequences be damned. I mean, I really think we have to emphasize just how outlandish it is that they are attacking

small vehicles, small vessels, right, that apparently in the case of the first one, we now have information that there was actually two strikes to kill the survivors after the first one, and they were actually retreating. Even if we were to accept this notion that they're putting forward that this constitutes an imminent threat, which of course is not believable, but even if we were to accept it, you know, it's clearly an international crime what they did to attack a boat that was retreating, that's fleeing. That isn't even a combatant. These are civilians that may or may not. There actually is no evidence that there is any drug traffic in happening. It's quite suspicious. There was 11 people

that might have actually been a human trafficking operation, given the amount of people that were there. And it's ludicous because we saw Trump say, well, the proof is the bags of cocaine and fentanyl that were exploded all over the ocean. I mean, it's almost like they're laughing at us in our faces because to begin with, there's not a lot of cocaine that's trafficked through Venezuela. That has been a deliberate exaggeration as a means to manufacture consent, but also there is zero fentanyl that comes from Venezuela.

Fentanyl's production is actually mostly concentrated within the U.S. itself, with the precursors, or actually here in Mexico and then cross over. So they really are just kind of going beyond the pale in this regard. And I think we should mention, right, who are the actors? Yes, of course, it's Trump.

But who's really calling the shots, I think, when it comes to this? It's Marco Rubio. Marco Rubio is relishing this opportunity as Secretary of State to finally go after all of the people in this region that he has always focused on back when he was senator from Florida, all these left-wing governments in the region that have been a thorn in the side of Washington. And he's clearly on a campaign to affect them all, even the more moderate governments like in Brazil. We saw Landau, his deputy secretary of state, saying they're trying to rescue Brazilian democracy because they did the right thing and convicted a coup plotter in Ja'Irbosun. for his attempt to subvert constitutional order in Brazil. This is the United States government behavior in Latin America Day. Can you talk a little bit more about Rubio?

And I think that fits into the theme here of what we're talking about this, just being an escalation of previous policy as opposed to an entire departure from it. Rubio's history as, you know, a pro-capitalist kind of descendant of Cuban exiles has color. his entire career in both when he was a senator, I think he was on either armed services or I'm forgetting exactly what committee he was, but this was a central pillar of his career. And it sounds very much like Stephen Miller,

but it may not be. I mean, this is also a way to kind of undercut Maduro and economies that close them themselves off to U.S. capitalism and using a blunt force to do so is important. Absolutely. And, you know, whenever Rubio comes up, I think it's important to mention that he often talks about being the child of Cuban exiles, but his parents actually fled the Batista regime, not the Castro regime. And so he's, you know, instrumentalized it because it's useful politically for him, right? That's his intention here. But yes, he's very much the one who's the driving

force right now behind this policy. He said it himself. It was one of those, they said the quiet part out loud moments. While in Mexico, he was here on a visit, official visit, and he says, well, this old strategy of simply interdiction, of capturing and arresting, it's not working. So we're just going to blow them up. You know, it's basically trying to intimidate all of the actors in the region through the threat of force. And I think the fact that we've now seen it twice, and not to mention as well, this one's actually, in some ways, somewhat more severe, was the, the, the, the, the detention of a fishing vessel that was in Venezuelan waters, right? And so they seem to have no regard at all whatsoever for respect for sovereignty. And I think that's really important for the

entire region to pay attention to. Marco Rubio is somebody who will not respect the sovereignty of countries. He may say so, you know, like he did when he was here in Mexico, but it's clear they don't actually believe any of these words. And so I think the region would be well poised to pay attention to this and respond collectively. You know, we've seen some attention. attempts at a regional response. You know, we do have the community of Latin American and Caribbean states, the alternative to the OAS, called Salac. But even there, there was not a unanimous statement because there are some countries in the

region who think that strategically their best option here is to align themselves with Marco Rubio and his disregard for sovereignty. But that's a very dangerous road to go on. I mean, ultimately, it could spell an attack on their own sovereignty. The U.S. has often turned on. its own allies as soon as they're inconvenient. And speaking of allies, it's quite interesting, right? The entire basis of all of their work right now is the alleged drug trafficking that's happening when their closest ally in South America is Noboa in Ecuador. And that has become

the key transit point for the distribution of cocaine throughout the world. It's happening in the ports with the complicity of the state most likely, and that's their ally. So it's really hard to take them seriously. And really we have to understand what this is. It's U.S. imperialism. It's the U.S. trying to exert its influence over counter-hegemonic governments, be it Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, but even, you know, other governments like Brazil or Mexico, where even if the slightest bit of resistance against Washington's agenda in the region, which is, of course, driven an interest of securing resources and cheap labor, is threatened by these governments. Can you expand a little bit more on what you were saying about attempts at solidarity and Mexico's

role in it as well? Trump on the campaign trail repeatedly threatened to invade and bomb Mexico, one of our closest allies. We share a major border with them, also in terms of trade relationships. Shinebaum has not, like Trump has not been able to bully her in the way that he has other leaders in part due to her enormous popularity, but also because the United States is really dependent on Mexico. So how could this be sending a message to Mexico where, for my estimation, Mexico has all the leverage over the United States, right now. It's absolutely true. Mexico has a lot of leverage and Shinebaum has been really crafty and using that leverage to be able to

negotiate with Trump, given how difficult it can be to negotiate with him. You know, he even reluctantly admits that he was a fan of her predecessor, Lopez Obrador, and that, you know, she's cut from the same cloth, but even then, you know, lauding her with a lot of positive language. But it's precisely that. It's because of the relationship. The U.S. can't, in this moment, afford to have, Mexico as its enemy, right? Trump won government, Trump's previous administration, made a lot of moves that made it. So actually, China stopped being the number one trading partner of the United States, and it became Mexico. A lot of that manufacturing came here. So today, the number one

trading partner of the United States is Mexico, and that does give Mexico a lot of leverage, right? But in the terms of why this is also a message for Mexico, of course, this first attack happened on the day that Marco Rubio was meant to have this visit here inside of Mexico with the president. And And so a lot of analysts suspected that the timing was no coincidence. And, of course, because there are hawks in the Trump government who are interested in precisely, as you said, to follow through on this Trump threat during his campaign to invade or to bomb, there are a number of actors inside of his government who are convinced that that's the solution in the same way that there are people who are convinced that the solution

is to bomb boats in the Caribbean, that this is the only way to deal with the narco-trafficking issue. Of course, that's a red line for the Mexican government. violation of the Mexican sovereignty would basically spell the end of the U.S. relationship with Mexico. I mean, is it a line that cannot be crossed? And if it is cross, I mean, you can say goodbye to all cooperation on the border, on migration, around trade, right? It would be devastating. And that, of course, would have an impact, right? I think things are really starting to catch up now in terms of the error of Trump's ways when it comes to managing the U.S. economy and blowing up

the relationship with your number one trading partner would likely spell a sharp increase in prices. that would be reflected very, very quickly. I don't think that, you know, wholesalers or supermarkets or the rest of it could actually absorb those costs. And so they're playing with fire. And I think they're trying to say, well, look, we're willing to do it. So you better play nice with us and, you know, cooperate with us. And there has been extensive cooperation.

And they've established this high-level bilateral meaning where they'll be able to update on a regular basis. I think that's really important because I do think that a lot of the people who want to bomb Mexico are not aware of all of the questions. cooperation that is actually happening in the really deliberate, determined effort that's happening here in Mexico from the government to maybe a degree that actually could be criticized with the mobilization of the National Guard and all the rest of it, the containment of migrants at Mexico-Southern border. All of this is happening at the behest of the United States. And so strategically

here, the Mexican government is trying to basically keep the monkey off their back, trying to keep the United States from demanding even more. But it is getting tricky. There was an article not too long ago we talked about the discontent that is inside of the Mexican government because it does seem like the U.S. is asking the impossible. They want Mexico to solve the drug problem in the United States when there's only so much that Mexico can do. Really, the problem is on the other side, the demand side. It's not so much the supply. And hopefully the United States can rectify its behavior and treat this issue of addictions in the way that it should as a public health concern, right, of actually informing and working and rebuilding social cohesion, which I think plays a large

role in the sort of, you know, turn and the addiction crisis that does exist in the United States, right? There's nothing Mexico can do about that. What the United States is asking is the impossible. And I think really it's important for them to realize that Mexico actually is doing a lot, but there are lines that cannot be crossed, which is, of course, if they decide to send troops or drones or bombing, all of that would be a disaster for the U.S.-Mexico relationship. well I mean it occurs to me that it really is using first of all Venezuela has major oil reserves we haven't touched on that at that point but at this point but it's using the tactics of militarism in the Middle East that was also motivated by oil shockingly and not wholly but in many ways yes and using the war on drugs framework that has been

reserved for the Americas, domestically against its own population here in the U.S., but also, of course, the war on drugs and the militarism and how it ravaged Latin American countries. And then using our bombing, taking our bombing tactics from the Middle East and applying it here domestically, So that we're ensuring some sort of like dominance over the region that I think you can also fit our immigration policy into where it's like we want to exploit labor over there.

And we're going to make sure that labor is exploited in your country and not and yeah, in our country to a degree, but we'll extract and we'll deport all these folks back to Latin American countries and you will be subservient to us. This is the reality we're going to create, and we will punish anybody that does not accept that reality. That's where we're at at this point. That's absolutely right. And it's, you know, it's kind of tragic, right? It's a combination of two very failed wars, right? The first, the war on terrorism and the war on drugs. And this combination as if somehow that's going to miraculously produce a better result.

But it is. It's the same logic that we saw applied, you know, in West Asia, the Middle East, of wanting to control resources through force. And in the case of Iraq, right, up to it, including invasions. And so, you know, Venezuela has been very diligent in defending its sovereignty and its right to decide what happens with its resources. And that's the part that irks the United States the most, because, you know, they're not able to engage in that value transfer that you were alluding to previously of basically super exploiting here in the South in order to bring all that value into the north and, you know, line the pockets of capitalists in the United States. And so, you know,

I don't, if you would ask me my opinion around the success of this, I think it's doomed to fail, right? This kind of strategy didn't work in the war on terror and it didn't work the war on drugs and somehow thinking that they're going to bring them together is going to actually attend to this problem. Of course not. You know, and if anything, the increasingly worrisome domestic situation is going to make, I think, the United States act even more erratically and bring some of those really terrible precedents into this region. You know, for example, I think about the assassination of General Soleimani from Iran, you know, that was clearly a U.S. operation in that sense.

And so we're seeing this happening here. And I do think that it's something to consider, for example, in the case of Venezuela, with these threats, with this bravado, you know, this bellicose language. I don't think the troops that they have mobilized near Venezuela are enough to invade. I don't think that that's what's on the table, to be honest, right? It took 15,000 troops to invade Panama. It'd be much more difficult to invade Venezuela, and so far it looks like they only have around 4,000. But they could go for a decapitation strike, you know, keeping key leadership, the defense minister, or even up to Maduro himself, right?

And it would be incredibly destabilizing. Oh, my gosh. Yeah, it would have ripple effects in the region. It would be terrible. and it would actually even, I think, cause some of their allies in the region to think twice about their relationship. But I don't think it's off the table. I mean, we're talking about a government that is acting in a qualitatively different, more aggressive manner. This is in a rogue-like fashion of up to and include and could be this kind of attack.

You know, obviously, you know, they're taking precautions, but, you know, I was just talking with my colleague, Sira Pascuala Marquina from Venezuela analysis, and she made a really good important point that I want to to bring here, which is that, you know, as much as Maduro and Padrino and Dosado Cabeo, you know, these key figures in Venezuela have to protect themselves, it's also important that the people see them, right? Because Venezuela's military doctrine, this anti-imperialist doctrine, is about the union of the armed forces with the population. The population has to see their leadership out there. So there's only so much they can do. It's not like they can hide in a bunker all day because of this threat. And so, you know, there is this risk. But of course, speaking of the

Venezuelan population. We've seen their response to these threats, seeing them sign up to join the Bolivarian militia. We've seen them doing training exercises. Their doctrine is very much like the armed, if there is an invasion, they will call on the millions of people who form not part of the militia to defend their country. And I think you very much would see that, right? If anything, it would just provoke greater unity for a government that obviously is dealing with economic fallout as a result of U.S. sanctions. Well, not that I would expect the Trump administration to be aware of this kind of thing, but there is a deep and rich history and understanding in Latin America about the United States' role in overturning democratically elected governments. And if we were to

just, we did so and have done so many times under the, like with some level of plausible deniability, at least like that was the CIA's perspective on it, we're going to just openly assassinate people associated with Maduro. If that's on the table, like my concern is, is that I would imagine that Venezuela is starting to prepare and have some sort of training, right? That, we don't know how this administration can justify anything. They could say these are the narco-terrorist training when it's just clearly Venezuelan troops needing to ready themselves because of threats from the world's largest military right in their backyard. Absolutely.

Yeah. I mean, they would use any kind of justification. I think that's part of what we're seeing. right now, to be honest. I think that's what they're building for. They're literally trying to manufacture consent in this sense. And I bring it up because I saw this extraordinary image from an article from Juan Froero from the Wall Street Journal, which was this map of, you know, sort of the Caribbean region and all these arrows shooting out of Venezuela to try to give this impression that Venezuela is the center point of drug traffic in the region. It's not true whatsoever. The DEA says it. The UN says it. All of this is trying to kind of lay the foundation. They want to see, for example, how much criticism are they actually going to receive

domestically for these actions that they're taking? Fortunately, we are seeing some pushback from this or that, you know, representative saying that this is questionable. Congress is the only one who's authorized for war resolutions. They should hold the government to account and ask for clarity around this, around these strikes. You know, it's not believable that these are imminent threats. These boats cannot make it from Venezuela all the way to Florida, for example, And it's quite likely they were actually headed to a different Caribbean island. And so I think that we need to demand more. And also the U.S. population should demand that of their representatives.

Do you really want to walk into another military quagmire? Will you be bogged down and you'll be hated by this region, which appears to be all that the United States really has left in the world in terms of close relationships with regional leaders? Well, thank you so much for coming on today. Jose Luis Granado Seya. you can check out his work over at Venezuela analysis and down in Mexico's Canal Ence

forgive me for my poor pronunciation as always Jose Luis thanks so much for your time today thank you so much I'm glad to we had this opportunity to talk about this with all of you absolutely thank you with that we are going to wrap up the free part of this program and head into the fun part of the program this show relies on your support please if you can become a member join the majority report.com. It really helps us stay afloat and you know

keeps us maybe a little bit more independent that the soros money is going to they're going to go up for soros money now so we need you to step up. It was a little right it's a little worrisome the Trump administration wants to investigate our friends over the nation so if you want to help us out please do. First they came for my chorus money. Yeah. I take my soros money. I'm supposed to pay my rent. God damn it. Well, I mean, that's what happens when you're in that rent-stabilized apartment for $7,000 a month that Andrew Cuomo says you're keeping from a homeless person could be staying in for, you know, they've just paid, they would just have to pay the $2,500 a month. Yeah. Anyway, join the majority report.com.

Matt, what's happening on Left Reckoning? Yeah, Left Reckoning. We have a huge show tonight, including a professor who is fired for, I mean, basically being on these. Socialist's Zoom conference down in Texas. This is unrelated to the Charlie Kirk firings. Also, Tom and Ishajohn talking about the same topic. We just talked to Jose Luis on and more tonight. Left Reckoning, patreon.com slash left reckoning.

And also Brian Mirr on talking about Bolsonaro. So we got a full show tonight. All right. See you in the fun half. three months from now, six months from now, nine months from now. And I don't think it's going to be the same as it looks like in six months from now. And I don't know if it's necessarily going to be better six months from now than it is three months from now. But I think around 18 months out, we're going to look back and go like, wow.

What? What is that going on? It's nuts. Wait a second. Hold on for a second. Emma, welcome to the program. Hey. Fun pack.

Matt. Who? Fun pack. What is up, everyone? Fun pack. No, me, Keen. You did it. Fun pack.

Let's go Brandon. Let's go Brandon. Funhaap. Bradley, you want to say hello? Sorry to disappoint. Everyone, I'm just a random guy. It's all the boys today. Fundamentally false.

No, I'm sorry. Women's... Stop talking for a second. Let me finish. Where is this coming from? But, dude, uh, you want to smoke this? Um, seven, eight? Yes.

All right. Meek? Is this name? Yes. Um, um, is it me? It is me? It is you. Um, is it's me?

I think it is you. Who is you? No sound. Every single freaking day. What's on your mind? We can discuss free markets, and we can discuss capitalism. I'm going to guess how like. Who libertarians?

They're so stupid, though. Common sense says, of course. Gobbled euk. We fucking nailed him. So what's 79 plus 21? Challenge met. I'm positively quivering. I believe 96, I want to say.

857. 210. 35. 501. One half. 3-8s. 9-11 for instance. $3,400.

$1,900. $6.5,4, $3 trillion sold. It's a $1. zero-some game. Actually, you're making think less. But let me say this. Poop.

You're going to call satire. Sam goes to satire. On top of it all? My favorite part about you is just like every day, all day, like everything you do. Without a doubt. Hey, buddy. We see you.

All right, folks. Folks. Folks. It's just the week being weeded out, obviously. Yeah. Sundow guns out. I don't know. But you should know.

People just don't like to entertain ideas anymore. I have a question. Who cares? Our chat is enabled folks. I love it. I do love that. Look, got to jump. You got to be quick.

I get a jump. I'm losing it, bro. Two o'clock, we're already late, and the guy's being a dick. So screw him. Sent to a gulaw? Outrage. Like, what is wrong with you? Love you, bye.

Love you. Bye-bye.