Krystal and Saagar discuss Trump uses Alien Enemies Act to deport migrants, Trump bombs Yemen for Israel, Trump antisemitism crackdown.
To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com
Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/
Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show.
This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.
So if that is something that's important to you, please go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
We need your help to build the future of independent news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints dot com.
So over the weekend, Trump announced that he is invoking the Foreign the Alien Enemies Act of seventeen ninety eight. This is claiming wartime powers. It's only been invoked three times in the past, both all three during actual wars eighteen twelve, World War One, and World War Two, when it was infamously used to justify the internment of Japanese civilians, including others as well, Italians and Germans as well. We can put me one up on the screen. So the headline here from PBS, Trump invokes eighteenth century law declaring invasion by gangs to speed mass deportations. So his claim is that the US has been invaded by a Venezuelan gang, putting us quote unquote at war because these, you know, can only these powers can only be used at wartime, and handing himself the discretion to intern and summarily to port with zero due process anyone that he effectively wants. So right away after he invokes this, and there was anticipation that this was coming, there were some Venezuelan migrants who were sort of moved to.
This Texas ice facility. Of course, this had.
Been expected because he talked about on the campaign trail that this was coming all along. So the ACLU actually got out front and filed a suit to try to block these deportations, focusing in particular on these five Venezuelan migrants. So when Trump invokes this Alien Enemies Act, immediately a plane takes off with hundreds of Venezuelan migrants that they claim are in this trender Aragua gang, which became a big talking point on the campaign.
Trail as well.
So they take off and head to El Salvador, where they are put into a notorious prison there where you know. I mean, they're just completely disappeared, right, So there's no access for journalists, no access for.
Lawyers, whatever.
There is no proof that these people actually are in the gang that Trump says that they're in. In fact, previously they had said that some people you know and that were held at Guantanamo were in this gang, and journalists went in and turned out they weren't whatsoever. It's estimated there's only a few hundred members of this gang in the US all together, so.
It's sort of okay, that's not so very.
Unlikely that, you know, they got all of them in this one round up. In any case, there's there's no proof. They were given no due process, no ability to challenge the determination that they're part of this gang, and they're disappeared into this El Salvador prison that's known for cruelty, torture and slave labor. So after this plane takes off, a judge actually acts pretty quickly. We can put this next piece up on the screen. Judge actually acts pretty quickly and hastily schedules a hearing and says, you can't do this. You know, I don't think that you have the legal right to do this, and I am blocking all of these deportations, not just the five that the case was originally about. The ACLU, you know, immediately expanded their case to include all migrants who were held in detention. Said you can't do this, and even if there is a plane in the air, you need to turn that plane around and bring them back.
But that does not happen.
Instead, there's reporting from Axios that says that Steven Miller and Kirsty you know, they were apparently the ones that were you know, involved most closely in the execution of all of this. They debated with lawyers like, you know, should we go along with this court order or not?
And basically they decided not.
Now they claimed, oh, it was already in over international waters, so you know it's out of our hands now. Of course, this is like preposterous, and well why nonsot?
Wait?
Why, well, because do you think you take things? First of all, look read the quote in front of you.
However, that's accomplished, whether planning is turning around or not or not being the operative word.
Second, however, it's a complane took off.
From Texas, which immediately put it over international waters within like ten minutes.
Those six thirty five pm.
The flight landed at El Salvador at eight thirty five pm, making it clear that actually it was over international territory and not over the waters of the United States. Now, do you really believe that some federal judge here in Washington, d C. Has the authority to tell the executive to turn a military aircraft around?
You believe? Okay, Well, then we'll test that at the Supreme Court. We will test that here's at the United States Supreme Court.
Spathetic, how do you know the criminal?
First of all, I mean this is where Look, you said something earlier, which I think is important. You think your country is being taken away from you because three hundred something Venezuelan illegal immigrants were deported to El Salvador.
How do you what proof do you even have of that? I mean, because here's here's the thing.
Yeah, here's the thing. They all entered the country illegally.
That's there according to the government. I mean, listen, I think that is probably true. But here's what you're defending. Hundreds of people who we don't know who they are, disappeared into a foreign prison known for torture, where no lawyers or journalists could possibly go and find out who they are and whether the government story adds up with zero due process. That's what you're defending, is that Trump can summarily say these people they're gone.
I'm putting them in.
This prison and a foreign country indefinitely at my discretion, and you don't get to say anything about it.
That's what happened here. So I just don't see anything.
You can't say anything about it. I should see.
I think you should be easily challenged to the United State Supreme Court. And I think that within the context of clearly the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, from what I've been able to review, he seems well within his rights to be able to do this from a state department or terrorist organization. That's not Listen, you're arguing semantics.
I'm talking no, I'm arguing the law. Are we at war right now?
I mean it doesn't involved three times.
Look in the past of eighteen twelve, World War one, world War two, those are the three times that's been invoked. All three times, especially during World War two, quite shamefully in the internment of Japanese citizens. You think it's okay for our government to round up whoever claim their criminals and imprison them indefinitely in a foreign prison to be tortured.
Well, that round saying to me, see, you seem much more concerned earned about that than the importation of eight to ten million illegal immigrants under Joe Biden. That seems to me, my country'smen taken away. So this is what I'm saying, Like, we can play this game all day long. Do you think that's an invasion. I think that's an invasion eight to ten million.
But that's not what he's talking about.
But he's talking specifically about Venezuelan migrants.
Yes, no, No, he's talking specifically about the.
How many people are here from trende.
I have no idea, all right, that's my not even.
The roughly several hundred.
Who are we getting on CLU or from the lawyer.
From from agencies, from international agencies that track law and order across Latin America. These are not like liberal do good or These are people who are looking at the spread of gangs around the world. Okay, many actually of these people likely were fleeing violence from the very gang that you're talking.
That's probably a convenient errative. Hold on, hold on, I think that's a very convenient narrative.
In terms of who was brought to Guantanamo Bay. Okay, in prison in Getmo, the Trump administration made the same Oh these are gang members. These are the worst of the worst. Some of them didn't even have criminal records at all. Some of them who they claimed were in Trende Ragua. It was because of either they were from that state of Ragua in Venezuela and actually, like I said, had been fleeing the violence from this gang, or they happened to have a tattoo that made them think like, oh, they're just in the gang. One of the people who is who was part of this group is LGBT Venezuelan who was in prison, according to his lawyer because of his tattoo, was assumed to be in a gang.
That's what we're talking about here. So there is no.
Reason I see him being gay or whatever.
How is that relevant, because how do you think it's gonna go for him? Saga, he's an artist. How do you think this.
Is my hollowed Okay, then don't care that he's gay.
Do you care that he was wrongfully in prison and disappeared in a foreign jail cell? And there's nothing that anyone can do about it.
Author is a CLU lawyer. He's not a part of the air Trendogou you truly, I'm supposed to trust some open borders.
I believe that they rounded up in this. They successfully rounded up every trender Iragua gang member in the country.
That's it. No, I don't mission accomplished.
Okay.
If anything, there's probably a lot more than need to go now. This is actually what I'm saying is that at the end of the day, within the powers of the State Department, which has declared this in ft O, the powers within the executive are quite clear. I also not Trump literally promised to do this on the campaign trail, so this was one of the most telegraphed.
Okay, are you in like, are good with it? Are you good with it?
I mean christ random people? Are you good with eight to ten million illegal random over four years?
Changing the subject? Yes, I am. You know that I'm flying.
Okay, then are you good?
Quit changing the subject?
That's are you comfortable part of the story.
Are you comfortable with random people being snatched up?
Why?
Okay, give me give me your proof.
Of what that they entered the country.
Give me your proof these are gang members?
I don't have to offer that proof, and actually even the government doesn't necessarily have to do that either, But.
Good with that?
With what I think being able to snatch up random people.
They're not random here, you know, they're not citizens, they.
Are you're flying with okay?
Do you think that the appropriate punishment for people who were fleeing gang violence and coming here.
Seeking about a life accord gus?
Do you think that an appropriate punishment is to be disappeared into a foreign jail cell, to be tortured indefinitely and subjected to slave labor.
What I think is that their responsibility and safety is the problem of the Venezuelan government, and that they can argue to the government of Bel Salvador and identify answer virtuals.
My question is it okay with you? Is it okay with you?
You think it is an appropriate punishment for someone who crossed our border seeking a better life to be disappeared with zero due process into a foreign jail cell to be tortured.
I are you good with that?
First of all, look, you're offering up a lot of claims where you don't even necessarily be true. In the same way you can't say for certain or whatever they've been tortured. Oh, they had their head shaven by the Salvador.
This is what this person is known.
Okay, Okay, that's again.
For I think it's look, as I continue to say, when you let in eight to ten million people and you an elect a president who says I'm going to use the alien enemies active mass deport people and stand in front of a sign and then you win the popular vote, then yeah, I am okay with it. And in fact the only problem I have with the Trump administration is that they've been prioritizing the stupid shiit like trying to deport someone like mahmod Cleer for some billionaire donors, and not the people who came here illegally. Those people entered our country criminally and illegally. This whole oh fleeing a better life is bs. There's they're economic migrants.
That's fleeing for a better life.
But there are problems, so they take advantage of our laws they illegally use.
There is a very discreet question.
Yes, I understand you think it's okay to then randomly take people.
We have zero proof that these are.
Gang members, and we should very much mistrust the government because they've been proven.
To lie about this previously.
We should trust them that they're picking up gang members when they can pick up whoever they want and imprison them in a foreign jail to be tortured. You think that is an appropriate punishment for crossing our borders trying to achieve a better life.
No, I think that the look I mean once again, I think it is clearly within the executive purview to be able.
To do it.
Stop lodging with the executive p think it's because do you do you think it's right or wrong?
There's the world is not so black and white?
Would I have preferred to do you think it's preferred that they release the list of all of the names and the dossier for each one of these people. Absolutely would actually make it the history onic coming from a lot of.
Liberty, you think there should be, and that that's the whole point of having to do so that they can have an opportunity to prove the things you're saying about me are not true. But instead, don't you think it's telling that they had this plane ready to go so that they could avoid any of that scrutiny and that they are now disappeared into a foreign prison where there is no ability to know who these people are. And by the way, there were children as young as fourteen who were part of this, because the Alien Enemies Act says it's fourteen or older. So you're talking about not just grown men. You're talking about you know, teenage boys here as well. Like that's that's what we're talking about. We're talking about the government claiming and ability to in turn deport with summer elite with no due process and holding the foreign prison whoever they want because we have no way to know who these people are. We don't even know for sure that they're Venezuela.
And we don't know we're where we enter illegal This is what I'm saying. The level of concern you have for a bunch of illegal immigrants is it's honestly maddening to me that you think it's okay to let eight to ten million people here at a level many human crimes. Okay, that's great. That's the job of the United Nations. Our job is to protect our country. The United States Constant as well as the Alien Enemies Acquistion me a multiple constitutionals.
Tell me how it protects our country. To hand the president the ability to randomly round up and whoever he wants.
How do you know that what proof have you been given of.
What that these are Venezuelan nationals are actually there is proof that they were Venezuelan nationals.
But beyond that.
Now, again, we can criticize process in here all day long, but I do think that is a philosophical trap where look at the status quo that.
We were living in.
Fifteen to twenty million illegal immigrants who entered this country, eight to ten million of them over a four year period, or resounding popular voute victory for a person who said I am going to mask okay poor. In fact, I think this is probably one of the most popular things that Trump will do. And if liberals want to mount a great fight on this, this is I say, be my guest, But because this is the irony of the situation, I.
Don't know whether it would be popular or not. I actually know, I.
Actually doubt that.
I doubt that disappearing people into a foreign prison is that popula. Maybe you're right, you know what, Slavery was popular at a time. Yes, ce creation was popular at a time. You know, Hating gay people was popular at a time. Like sometimes things that are popular, can be bad, can be immoral, can be a massive authoritarian, fascist power grab. This is one of those times. And I think it's insane that you can defend taking whoever they want and.
With zero due process, defying a court order.
Well, no, that's yeah, no, no, no, because.
Again because it's actually it's very up to interpretation.
I would be more sympathetic to your view maybe if it wasn't for the Kelly who is the head of Al Salvador coming out and saying whoopsie and the White House amplifying that with regard to the court order being defied, like they openly and brazenly defied a court order here that said you have to turn the plane around. You cannot do this. So if these are hardened gang criminals, prove it, wouldn't you want to prove it. Wouldn't you want to show everybody look at all of these monsters that we found, that we're now getting rid of, that we're now deporting, that we're now falling through on our promises. No, they want to hide it. They want to do it under the cover of night because they want to hide who these people are and do it under the cover of night because they know that these are not No, I'm talking about the specifics of who these people are. These are not gang criminals when they went when journalists were able, and this is probably why people were pulled from Guantanamo. When journalists were able to go and check, oh, who are these people that you say, are these hardened criminal monsters that you put at Guantanamo Bay with no rights? Guess what they found. Many of them had zero criminal records. The ones who they claimed were gang they were not gang members. Some of them were fleeing gang violence. And yet we're just going to disappear people now and defy court orders and say whoopsie and send it to you know, this brutal human rights violation, torturing, slave labor cesspool.
I think you know, you know, the funny thing is is that you know, as much as you love miss Shinbaum over in Mexico, Bill Kelly is the actually one of the also most popular.
Leaders in Latin America.
He dropped his crime rate from something like six thousand murders ten years ago to one hundred and fourteen just in the last year, overwhelming amount of success. So for all of this, he's overwhelmingly popular and it turns out that like, oh, whenever you lock a bunch of criminals up, crime drops is actually shocking. Beyond that, again, the histrionics and the level of concern always comes to applying the maximum force of the beauty of the United States to people who criminally entered our country.
I genuinely wish there was the same level of concern for our citizens.
But this is where the liberal like entire concern strategy just frankly why it loses at the ballot box. It's genuinely internationalists and globalist. It is open border almost to its core, looking at these people as if they are full deserve the full protections of the United States and or are equal in equivalent US citizens. Well, you know under the alien under the Alien Enemies Act, if they are trend to AGUA members, and no, they don't actually have due process rights. In a similar way, for some mirror deportation are now I mean, okay, are we being invaded right now? You're to say, exactly, so there we go, water playman.
Imagine that two hundred people from a gang is an invasion and that puts US at war like that is insane. And so here's here's the thing.
Okay, you you hate these people, you want.
To know, You're fine to deport everything, imprison them in a foreign jail sale where that can be torture.
We got it. Okay.
Do you realize though, that once the store is open, like, it's open for everyone, not just for Trump, like when civil rights go, that's it, they're gone.
They're going to deport who exactly illegal immigrants? Okay, fine, that's why if Biden or Kamalain Hanris or whoever in the future wants to are it could be somebody who is here legally, fine, that's fine.
Would be comfortable with them picking up whoever they want and summarily deporting them.
So this is because we keep on the protection of legal or.
The Americans process where we even know who these people are. But yes, of course, if you're here you have some rights. Otherwise it would be like crazy. You couldn't just have some foreign tours here and then just like torture them for the hell of it. That would be insane. If you are here, yes you have some rights. If you're an asylum seeker, yes you have some rights. One of those rights is due process. And this is the thing. It's like, you know they pick this. They paint these people as all gang members, which they're not all gang er. There's zero chants that they're all gang members. But in any case, they paint them as that because they know that this is like a hated group and then those you know, rights get stripped away. And if you think that it just stays with the group that you happen to like, hate or not care about, or think deserve to rot and get tortured in a foreign jail cell, that's not what history shows us. And some of the most shameful moments in our history have been when a you know, hated group is targeted, like Japanese internment during World War Two, which is the last time that this law was invoked.
What's the key difference between that those were US citizens who are having their Supreme Court or their constitutional rights violated natural born us.
Is there any level of cruelty to migrants that you would not justify?
This is what this is what I'm saying. Deportation is not cruelty.
That's deportation. They're imprisoned in a torture chamber.
Okay, well it's else.
Is there any level of cruelty you would not justify?
What I justify like chaining them up and hanging them from.
Their tortured They were sent for being prisoned.
They were sent to a prison.
Salvador has agreed, apparently like on some fee basis, to house these people while they're there. It is now the problem the Venezuelan government. And by the way, actually, if this does go to the US Supreme Court and they uphold what you're saying, you know what, I'll say, Okay, bring them back, go ahead, let's do it.
Strike it down. You can bring them back to.
You no moral companies outside what the Supreme Court tells you. It's okay.
You look again, this is why I think this level of like frankly like moral where would the line udicous?
What would be too okay?
So let me ask you that how many illegals have to murder? What's the correct number that is justifiable in the crystal ball universe for the number of illegals to enter the United States?
How many murders is that okay? To balance with increasing economic ge.
Aware that is it?
One doocumented and documented have a lower crime rate.
Than the native right, so they should actually be here to.
Stop smearing them all if.
There shouldn't be here, then the number should be zero, correct. I think the trustful number is zero as the number.
We need to actually have an immigration system where I would let more people in, yes than is legally allowed now, but yes, I would have borders. I would want to know who's coming in. I would want to make sure that criminals weren't coming in.
Well, none of that now, and I didn't see any of this level of history onics that was happening.
Well, two hundred people are.
Sent to be tortured by our government, but they're interesting. That's something that doesn't upset you. Like, is that not upset you?
I don't think that they're quote unquote being tortured. I think they're in a prison now. Second, again, I think that there are tens of millions of people who crime only entered our country, circumvented our laws. We have no idea in the similar way that you're talking about here, who are who are either committing crimes. Let's say it's less than the native born population. Nobody knows if that's actually true or not. But even if it is, why is that acceptable number? And you think zero that is the appropriate pology.
I think that justifies sending people to be tortured in a foreign person.
Keep saying there's evidence in the similar way there's no evidence.
Do you think that that justifies do our government claim it? No, our government claiming the power to disappear people into a foreign prison set.
I will tell you this.
I will I think that, considering the circumstances of the election and the genuine insanity of the status quo that we're in, that me, along with many people who saw what Trump was running on, agreed with this idea put forward that every power of the United States government should be brought to bear to toport people who entered this country illegally. So I think that is open affirmed at the ballot box and is within this U. S.
Law.
You are good with random people we don't know who they are, they get no due process, being smeared as gang members we don't know, and being disappeared into a foreign prison that is known for torture and slave labor.
I mean again, I'm just going to say, like, so you're okay with people who are coming up, but actually answer, ironically answer, hold on, this is acause.
We have because we had people come.
We have no idea who we had people come. That was we need fat because we also need argument. We also need some dishwashers. Company needs to build our house.
Because people with authorization, we should have fascism.
It's just it is not fat. It's ridiculous.
This is where But where is the what would be too cruel? What would be where you would say, you know what, this is wrong?
You know what? There should be due process? You know what these are?
Yes, I I don't think that they should be. I don't think they should be in this country. But I do think that we.
Deserve the not the perfect example, somebody who is here screened by our government, not only do we know who he was, somebody who has due process rights as a legal permanent resident who was arrested and is being deported for a BS free speech reason.
Perfect.
There you go say, we're I think we're going to talk about a case soon on some h one B thing. I think the government acted outrageously on that one. On this one. This is what you just This is what people really don't seem to get is when you sit there and you just justify again, how many people are okay to just be able to come in We're supposed to take their word for what is Oh I'm fleeing violence, and you apparently get to stay here for twenty five years and say it isen' ship in a job.
It's a complete bullshit circumvention of any.
Your tension is that that justifies claiming wartime powers to disappear random people?
I think, I mean, I like how the phrasing is here. I will interpret yours in similarly bad faith, which is that you think it is okay for criminal illegals, pedophile, rapist murders, all of who have been proven to have crossed the illegally and under the various island status quo.
I am fine, and it's okay.
For them to meet here. I think they should be deported.
But but we don't know who these people are.
Because we don't know who these people are, and this administration has already been caught lying about who these people are. They've already been caught. There is zero reasons to believe them. In the entire country, there are probably three hundred gang members who are types internationally, like I'm telling you, there are multiple estimates from independent groups who track gang violence across Latin America. Their estimate is best estimate is that there are a few hundred members of this gang. So your faith that they got them all in this one round up, I guess we can mission accomplished.
It's all done.
And then they brazenly defy a court order and brag about it and celebrate it. Like I just I just don't, I truly don't understand how that can be justified. Like, I get your upset about the number of people came here. We have a difference of opinion about that. That's fine, But in response to that, we think it's okay to just send.
A group of people to be disappeared and tortured. How is that? How is that acceptable?
How?
How in what world is that acceptable? I mean, in what a world is it acceptable for anyone to be torture?
Whatsoever?
Are you?
I mean, I don't think you're okay with that in general? So why when it's this group of migrants, is it like you could do whatever you want to And I really don't care.
Well, we didn't do whatever we want to, and we put them in the custo of the l Salvadorian government.
In a prison.
It's not the same.
Thing, No, we in a prison that is known for torture and slavely.
Yes, you can say it again. Okay, again, it's not the US who's doing this, And yes.
The US is doing it.
We facilitated their deportation.
Of course, the US contracted with Bukelli to put them in this prison.
Yes, so they're in the custody the l Salvadoran government. They were deported. I think legally, we'll find out at the US Supreme Court. So what are you going to say if the US Supreme Court, which I fully expect them to uphold.
The My moral compass doesn't depend on what the Supreme Court says.
He then court support the Supreme Court candidate who does.
Has had dread Scott you know.
I mean there's a record, there is a record of terrible decisions from the Supreme Court. Okay, it doesn't require a Supreme Court decision to know what's right and what's wrong. And I think to take people with their due process where they don't get to make the case. Hey, I'm actually just I'm seeking asylum. Here's what is Here's why I have this tattoo, here's you know, I'm actually from that state.
I was fleeing the gang violence.
Like that would give the government an opportunity to prove what bad embrace these and why they deserve punishment.
Fate the testimony of the lord, like, oh he's getting again.
I take what I take is the proof previously that this government lied, and the proof also that the fact that they disappeared these people and clearly don't want us to know who they are and don't want us to be able to evaluate. If they were able to prove these claims in court, then they should do it. And even then though I mean personally I don't think people should be tortured, but in any case, they have a lot stronger justification for what they're doing here.
We are not at war.
This is not an invasion of two hundred gang members, Like what are we talking about here? And if you can, if you can claim these if this president can claim these powers, any president can claim these powers, zero due process rights, to just disappear whoever they want into a jail cell in El Salvador where they are beyond the reach of any journalists or lawyers or anywhere.
Then why that's what we're talking Why did the United States Congress not repeal that lawt or is invothe three times if they thought it was such a horrible threat to do process.
I mean Listen, were when we were leading up to this election, and I said I thought Trump was a fascist and authoritarian. You said, I think the institution. I think he's authoritarian, but I think the institutions will constrain him. Yeah, where are those institutional constraints, because what we have right now is a court ruling that the president just decided. I'm just not going to do that. I'm just going to go out. I mean, it was open to interpretation.
I remember you even saying previously when a judge was like, hey, you need to stop all of this. But it's not, let's say, feasible, because something is there. It's a lower court here at the district level. It will get challenged and it will go all the way to Scotus letus down. No, I'll tell you this, well, first of all, they might be coming back, because if the Supreme Court does say that that was illegal, then yes, the United States should actually not only have to comply with that order, they should fully pay bring these individuals back, and then we can go through that. Secondly, as we said, the idea that they're quote not complying is just not true. Put B four pleas up on the screen from the White House. The administration quote did not refuse to comply. Moreover, as a Supreme Court is made repeated clear federal or sorry. This isn't actually in a statement, but it's on the other side. This is the only current flight that's supposedly planned, considering that after the plane land was then over international waters, as they're claiming, it will be adjudicated sometime soon as to whether they're going to be held in contempt a court or not. This is not some ongoing policy there from the US government with respect to mass deportation flights of every Venezuelan like you are claiming, So they are actually complexed. This is now that the law has been now that the judge of judicial courses, you may have the similar point for the level of histronics if they were doing it every single day for the next ten years or it's our ten days, this up until it goes, but.
It hasn't happened.
This is not even the only court order that they flouted in the past number of days. And a B seven up on the screen another deportation that a judge blocked. Judge demands Trump admin explained why a doctor was deported despite an order. This was an doctor who was here on an H one B visa citizen of Lebanon who was detained at the border and deported again in spite of the fact that there was a court order not to mention that this comes on the heels of you know, I mean usaid. There were all kinds of court orders saying, hey, you gotta you have to unfreeze this money. You got to pay these contracts. The government wouldn't do it, wouldn't do it, wouldn't do it, wouldn't do it.
And so you have.
If you don't want to say it's open defiance because they're still coming up with a cover story, that's fine. But it's pretty clear from the reporting that they knew what they were doing, They had the ability to turn the plane around, and they just decided we're not going to listen.
Uh yeah, Well I don't think I honestly think it's a crazy precedent that a lower federal court judge could be able to decide that a military aircraft can be turned around over international water. I mean, imagine, like, what is somebody in the middle of a bombing operation.
You're going to go to a judge and say, hey, actually, you got.
To turn that around because would circument the very basics of the United States government and executive authority.
Government agencies were in charge of this flight. The order applied to those government agencies saying, no, you can't do this, like you have to turn these planes around, says turn the.
Plane around or not, and however that.
Is however it's accomplished.
So if there's a plane in there and then you have to turn it around, like and they and again the reporting from in the room is that like they knew that they had a choice, and they thought they had they decided they get they decided that they were just not going to listen. I think that this is a new chapter in what our country is. If you can just claim claim we're at war and use it to just crush whoever's rights you want and send people to foreign prison cell with the expectation that they will be tortured and held indefinitely, I think that's wrong.
Yeah, well, I think the rorshack test here is that I think the last four years were ten times more outrageous than any potential implications of this.
You were okay with it. I was not.
The people decided to vote for somebody who thought they wanted to have deportation.
At the end of the day, we had a situation again.
But this isn't about the deportivation, but.
It really is actually about.
Getting rid of all the laws.
And this is about saying, you know, taking people, we have no proof of who they are.
And does it not make you think the fact that ninety nine percent of the border crossings have dropped now under the Trump administration, despite the fact that there were no.
News that was before they did this might need to do it.
Is that not evidence that Joe Biden was genuinely did have some executive authority to quash whatever was going on the comp The story that we were told was that he was fully enforcing and complying with the law when eight to ten million people were allowed to enter our country illegally. The Trump administration has not, even in violation of any executive order or any judicial authority that I know of today, has been able to implement remain in Mexico and other policy to facilitating ninety nine percent drop. We didn't have to be doing any of the stuff we are right now if we had a previous president who didn't allow all these people.
But we don't, many of whom many of whom didn't commit crime.
We don't have to be doing this, but we we didn't have to be doing We don't have to be doing this now. Well, I mean, so you don't think it's it who is making.
At the end of the day, You don't think it's an urgent crisis that there are eight to ten million people who were illegally. I do, and I think a lot of voters certainly agreed that was the number one or two reasons a lot of people.
And you think that trumpet the ballot box.
Okay, and so let me just be clear. You think that that quote unquote crisis justifies getting rid of civil rights claiming wartime authorities and you know, rounding people up without us knowing who they are or what they have quote unquote supposedly done, having a chance to defend themselves in court. You think it justifies a suspension of core civil rights. And you know, again, it's that the discretion of like Trump and Christin Knowman and Steven Miller whoever they want to round up and make a show of.
If this were applied to let's say five million people and their government was openly defying an order continually as this were happening. I may share a similar level of your concern, But we are talking here about two to three hundred people, at the very least many of which are gang members.
You know that illegally a single one of them is a gang.
Well, you don't know that it.
Even or not all right, and so like. That's my point is that at the end of the day, and you know what, that's the word for it. Unfortunately none of us know because they entered the country illegal.
None of us know because they were denied to process after the country and they were journalists or lawyers to be able to access them.
You again, you seem to think that we should provide and have the same level of concern as a country for people who violated our laws who come here.
Yes, I think, yes, I believe humans deserve human rights.
That's true. I think that human You don't know.
I think that the United States has a sole obligation to look out for the interests of its US citizens.
Okay, a soul.
So that means no one else human rights matter.
No, that's not what I said.
What I said is that at the end of the day, the government and national sovereignty demand that citizens have control over their country, we lived in a status quo where that was basically violate, And you think that this vagrantly.
For claiming, this quashing of rights is necessary to achieve that goal, and you think that that's worth it. I mean, I just think when you have a situation like this, it's just two hundred people, So who really cares what happens to them? Like, do you understand that if it is upheld at supreme, we aren't just talking about a few hundred people. It will be, however many people they want it to be who are sent to this you know, torture chamber in El Salvador.
Not necessarily the plan.
Actually a lot of this is also to pressure the Maduro government to accept its own citizens, which it refuses to do.
This is look, I.
Think that the philosophical argument in all of this really gets back to what do you think that the government's purpose is. You seem to think that the America is like some transnational No.
I think the governments, which is supposed.
To be just be pie in the sky and we're supposed to be I think I don't think that the interests of all of these criminal leaders.
No, no, no, no, I don't I think that people have civil rights, including people, by the way, and this is true who are here who are undocumented. It certainly applies to people who are visa holders and who are legal permanent residents. And I think that our government should be in the business of following the law and also of preserving civil and human rights.
Yes, I think that that is.
I think when we let go of that, I think that can quickly go to a very scary place.
I just don't think that that's true.
And that's why I can't just hand wave away. Oh it's just two hundred people, So who really the hell cares what happens.
I had to listen to four years of leftists talking about Joe Biden, and then in that time period I hear to fire the Supreme Court, fire the parliamentarian, forget about norms. We need to legalize weed by executive order. We need to make it so that Harvard kids get free student loans. I mean, come on, have I not been listening to Brianna Joy Gray and all these people talking about this for years.
They never cared then, because that was for ends that.
You thought were justified. This is a similar way. It is a crisis according to the government and the United States, populace, I would say, considering how the election happened, those elections have consequences, considering they literally said he was going to do it and then invoke the same law to facilitate that. That is genuinely not only a matter of what of doing what you said you were going to do, But beyond that, when you think at the basic level of where the concern and all that should come from, it is just obvious and clear to me that your concern falls with protecting I mean, actually, you know, is this lookout.
For due process?
Suppose it due process rights of criminal illegal gang aliens present in the United States, as opposed to the eight to ten million people who enter the country illegally. I will think that the latter is a bigger problem every single day of the week. If we lived in a perfect world, do I think that they would have published the dossier of all the individual names, et cetera.
Absolutely, you know, we process here all day long.
I'm not critic.
Do you think do you think this is what would you say if you think? Do you think this is moral and right?
Do I think it is moral and right in what sense to deport people who are here present illegally.
Yes, I do know, not to deport them, to send them to this person.
I think it is I think it is right to facilitate a mass deportation of the people enter this country.
Illegally, something I think it is moral right, and I think that I think it is going right to send these two hundred and fifty people to an El Salvador prison that is known for torture, with.
No evidence that there are evidence that they're being tortured, I.
Said, and I said very carefully, an El Salvador prison known.
For torture, that they should be sent there.
Do you think that is?
You think it is moral and right for two hundred and fifty people with no due process rights to be flown to be kept in this El Salvador prison known for torture.
Yes, you know why because I think it falls within the government purview and the promise of the government that was made by our currently democratically elected president to do everything in power to make sure that people who enter the country illegally are deported and.
At the end, so everything, so everything in their power. So if that meant we were going to just lie, it's you know, Venezuela won't take them back and the prison and El Salvador is full. So now we're just going to line them up and firing squad.
We're just going to that's a ridiculous state.
No, it's not because you said it's going to be.
You know, they can do whatever.
It's actually not within their powers.
Okay, the point, but what but they're they're claiming these wartime powers, right, so you know if if you say, okay, well there they have the right to do whatever they possibly can to facilitate this. Like where is the line of what would be too far of where you would say, you know what that is? That is against my moral compass, that is too cruel, that is wrong. And even if there was some legal, you know, legal fig leaf that they could claim that, you would say that was too far.
I think you just named it. And I'm not for mass murder.
I'm not for it, But you're for you're okay with if they get tortured.
Well, no, I didn't say I'm okay with their getting tortured. What I'm saying is that I'm okay with deportation. And at the end of the day, what happens outside the borders. Let's say we send them to Venezuela, which apparently is so horrible as you're saying. And we deport them to Venezuela and the Venezuelan government tortures them. Are we called criminally responsible for that or moral responsible?
That's ludicrous photograph. You have to see the no no, no no.
I actually don't because we're.
Not contracted with the El Salvador government. We made an intentional choice to send them to this.
Okay, but whys ability?
Let's say we send them back to Maduro, they get off the plane and Maduro shoots him in the head.
Is that supposedly?
I mean, personally, I think that they should.
That people who are here, you're allowed to stay.
Should be able to claim asylum and continue with the temporary protected stats that they've had Venezuela, Haiti and a lot of other places.
Absolute vast majority of these people have bullshit asylum claims of which they are adjudicated.
Yes, how are we supposed to adjudicate that? Right now?
Where currently there are forty seven thousand beds for ICE which are already a complete capacity to even facilitate deportation.
There are five almost million.
Surge immigration judges, so that you have increased capacity to be able to adjudicate asylum claims.
So and in the interim, what happens they get to stay here illegally, Yes, exactly, which at the end of the day you think that's fine.
I don't think that's yeah. Yeah, and luckily and the vast majority of people do not agree with it.
And you think, though, in response to that, that it's okay to not just to support them, but to send them to this prison with the expectation that they're likely.
To be tortured.
I mean, you can say that you're not going to put words in my mouth I am for a deportation, but again I do. This is why I find this incredibly tiresome. At the end of the day, you were fine. Not just you, many liberal Democrats and others facilitated the greatest social experiment in modern American history. Let's increase the foreign born population, the vast majority of them illegal immigrants, of who we have no idea who these people are. They're coming over here, many are committing crimes, and then we'll just decide that we are going to pretend none of it ever happened, that actually we're for border security or increased immigration.
Judges that's another question. Why do you now want.
Orderly deportation when you were fine with disorderly or disorderly mass migration. If that is the case, then this is an explicit acknowledgment that the previous status quo was both outrageous and was genuinely detrimental to the interests of the United States. But since they're here now they have to stay. It's all convoluted and it makes no sense.
Okay, this is.
Depoor tastes of people who are here illegal, but.
The specifics matter of how it's done.
Would you not say?
Well, and so what.
I'm saying in my definition on Pacific is pretty different.
Can we can disagree very much on what the proper levels of migration are and how that should be handled, et cetera. Now where you are where we are, and there's a question of how you respond. One way to respond is to use the actual, like normal legal tools available and avail yourself of those while maintaining civil rights in the country. The other one is the one that Trump has chosen here to claim wartime authority when we're not at war and to summarily deport people that we don't know who they are. In defiance of a court order to a foreign prison where they are likely to be tortured. There was nothing about what led up to this that necessitated that reaction.
I think that it is again very tiresome and hypocritical, especially coming from people who I know I wanted Joe Biden to use extraordinary interpretations of.
Did I want Joe Biden to torture people you didn't want to?
Did I want Joe Biden random Did I want Joe Biden to randomly disappear people into a prison somewhere where no lawyer can or journalists can reach them to figure out who the hell they are what's happened?
No, of course I did.
Yes, you only want them to mass legalize marijuana, which they didn't have the power to do, or to write off student.
You really see the difference between like legalizing marijuana and torturing people. I mean, these are two like qualitatively very different things I underlook.
I think that the central problem is that you really think that you're just morally correct in this one. And at the end of the day, it's a legal question which is both up to the Supreme Court and a popular question can be in which the vast majority of people do not question with the position that you hold.
It can be both a legal question and a moral question.
Okay, that's fine.
I think that if you want to hold that opinion, I think that's perfectly fine. You made that opinion clear. Many people have hold your opinion, have held that clear.
Luckily.
I think it's been destroyed at the ballot box correctly, because it is one that is both detrimental to our country and genuinely just ridiculous and falls apart on its own logical phrase.
Remember Trump saying that he was going to send.
Me literally alien I don't think.
I don't remember Trump running on shipping random people to a foreign prison to be tortured somehow. I don't remember that being a core part of his pitch. But you know what, even if it was, and even if people voted for that, again, there are certain things that have been popular throughout our history that were wrong, and I think that it's important to say that at the time when it's unpopular. I think it's important to be able to see those things and to call them out in real time. Japanese internment being one of them, being the last time that.
Big law was ultimately used.
That's a huge diff fence Kormatsu, the Supreme Court decision and Japanese in tournament was used against citizens of them.
But the Supreme Court said it was fine, So it wasn't it fine? People voted for it, and the Supreme Court though it was every time.
I'm so righted about it, and the Supreme Court also has apologized or reversed its own decision on that. I'm not saying that it's a perfect institution or that any of these things are good and bad, however.
But isn't it possible to have a separate moral judgment outside of what the electoral results said and the Supreme Court been upholding them.
Yes, of course there is.
I just don't think that this is the similar situation in any way, and I think that you're ignoring the broader context which led to this entire thing, of which, frankly, in my opinion, is far more morally reprehensible. Is to let in so many people with no idea who they are, many of whom commit crimes, and then to just sit and only get outraged whenever a popular revolt against that happens, and have to know outrightage I am there at the time of which I know that there was none on your part, and definitely on rage.
I am outraged by the idea that government could claim such broad powers and that all of us could be subject to their whims.
And you know, I think what we also were United States citizens is just not remotely common.
I think what we've seen is I don't think that's true. And here's look, I think what we've already seen with the case, for example of Mackmoud Khalil is it's like, okay, started off with you know, they thought he was a student visa holder. It turns out he's a legal permanent resident, and it's like, oh, but he's still not an American citizen. Well, now they're investigating all power or the ones at Columbia as being the pro Palestine protest as being terrorism. Well, that is very much about American citizens. And so that's you know, number one, Yes, I do care about human rights.
But they're not What do you mean they're American citizens at Columbia. You're saying they're investigating people there.
For yes, they're investigating what. No, they're investigating whether the pro Palestine protests that happen on Columbia constitute terrorism, with the implication being that anyone who was involved with them could be charged with crimes related to terrorism. So my point is that when when civil rights are violated, it doesn't just stay in one corner, It doesn't just stay with this group that you happen to feel comfortable with. And yes, by the way, I do think, you know, torture is wrong, and I do think due process is the way things should be done, so that the government has to prove the claims that it's making in court. And I think it's outrageous that you know that that didn't happen in this instance. And I don't care that it was just two hundred people that were disappeared into a foreign prison without any due process whatsoever. So and nor do I think that it stops there, like they're going to court to try to be able to pursue this path continuously, you know, And and so yeah, that's I think that this is a I think this is a very frightening authoritarian, fascist power grab. And I think that our institutions have not only proven inadequate to be able to stem the tide, but also the Trump administration clearly uses whatever opportunities they can to defy court orders and pursue their own ambitions here.
I think that I understand where you're coming from, and I could see how people liberals or whatever could feel that way. What I would ask again is to see how did we get to this extraordinary situation, and you should make some serious political calculus, in my opinion, to look to the past and to not call out many of the outrages that have happened and the status quo changed that Joe Biden and many other liberals facilitated by allowing so many people here illegally and then to just you know, cry tears whenever the logical consequence of that comes to bear. It just seems, you know, very rewriting of history, and one where it's also it fits very well, I think with my AOC point of the future, when she was creaming and crying in front of those deportation facilities under Donald Trump and went viral, or whenever her fist was raised and she was justifying theft and crime during BLM, they thought, as you did, that they were morally correct, as you feel out in this moment that not only was a rejected at the ballot box, but it was one that both actually led to worse outcomes because what did Biden do Yes, Even with all of this mass allowing of people in, he continued many policies from the Trump administration, of which they fell silent then at that time. So it became clear that this is not true moral standards or whatever. It's about political convenience. And throughout the through line of all of this comes back to the status quo was irrevocably changed under Biden. It became not only a popular but I think an imminent and dangerous thing to the fabric of the United States. You just allow these mass criminal illegals here. We have no idea who they are. The vast majority of them don't speak any English, The vast majority of them don't have any idea occasion. They have no able or you know, real ability to fit into the US economy beyond the service sector, which you know that seems a little bit demeaning to me, and was not only affirmed but then used to the best of their abilities their powers the government to facilitate deportation. And the crazy thing is you and I are arguing is if ten million people are being deported tomorrow, that's not what happened at all.
All of this court order is being complied with today, they're not continuing to It's going to go to the US Supreme Court.
All of this will face judicial scrutiny the Supreme Court orias, and will come back.
I'll sit here and I'm relatively.
Certain the government would comply with that order that would bring these people back, and then this alien enemies with this alien enemies thing will go through the legal process. But the point is is that all of this, I think again comes back to a dramatic change to our country, of which I think you were fine with and I think many others were, and then are shocked at the genuine consequences of what that means when it interacts with.
Them not have what does he not have agency in how he responds to things, Like you want to say, this is like somehow Biden's fault that Trump decided that Trump decided that he was going to use a wartime power grab in order to facilitate the summary deportation of migrants into a foreign torture chamber like Trump.
That is on Trump.
Now you can object to how Biden handled migration, and that's fine, but it still is on Trump the way that he responds to that situation, and he responded with authoritarian power grab and defiance of the courts and disappearing hundreds of people that he claims are gang members with zero proof and with a lot of proof in the other direction, in order to be tortured in a foreign person cell.
Okay, that's on him.
I don't think that, well, you know what, You're right, it is on him. It will face legal scrutiny. I think it will also if you totally disagree with it. People are welcome to run for office and to revert if you want to bring all these people back, you know, Okay, be my guest if you win the if you win the election. But I mean, at a certain point, it is one of those where I don't think it's deniable that not only was this something that was literally promised to do, that was telegraphed that I think falls within the bounds of legal scrutiny of the way that it was carried out, and which one is genuinely addressing a real problem that is facing the US. I just think the biggest difference between us right now is that you think that previous one was not actually a problem or was extremely diminishable and is not one which requires extraordinary action, and I'm somebody who does I think that that was genuinely affirmed at the ballot box. Not only that, but falls within the bounds of where a government scrutiny can And it's just going to have to be not even in an agree or disagree situation, it is going to be one where I genuinely am curious not only to see how the Supreme Court handles this decision. And if the government does openly flout that U let's say, they refuse to bring them back or they continue to do this, then I think we will be in a very similar situation to the one that you're describing as some sort of like imminent crisis. But I just don't think that we're there yet, and I don't think that we are going to get there. I don't think so, not the way that this is all currently being handled.
All Right, So we argued about that for a really long time. So we're going to skip a couple of things. The ECON and the Israel block are both going we'll get to those tomorrow, but we wanted to update on Yemen, so let's go ahead and get to that.
So the United States has decided to start bombing Yemen again for what purpose, Well, we'll get to that. So they released some video of the latest operation that Donald Trump ordered in retaliation against the Hoothy's disruption of shipping lanes.
Let's go and put this on the screen.
You can see that this was released from Scentcom Operations firing multiple missiles and projectiles onto Yemen, targeting hoo They leadership, including the use there of the US aircraft carrier.
Which is in the region.
These were some of the videos from Yemen that actually came out showing the strikes. The retaliation was ordered by Trump for these attacks on shipping lanes. Let's go and put this up there on the screen. Released from Trump's truth social account today, I have ordered the United States military to launch decisive and powerful military action against the Houthi terrorists and Yemen.
They have waged an unrelenting.
Campaign of piracy, violence, and terrorism against the US and other ships, aircrafts, and drones. Now, the problem with this is the assumption that apparently you think you can deal with this Houthi problem with just bombs and missiles alone. In fact, Jeremy Skahell flags something which is genuinely incredible to me, which is that just in the last thirty years, the US has used more missiles for quote, air defense in combat against the Houthies since October twenty twenty three then it used in all the years from Desert Storm in the nineteen nineties. So we have not only bombarded Yemen just ourselves in retaliation for these hoo They attacks. It's also ignoring that the Saudis did not bomb Yemen for what five straight years as supplied by the United States, causing who knows untold amounts of death. The problem that they assume is that there's a military solution to this entire problem, and instead they refuse to pursue a diplomatic solution, one which had been working whenever there was a real Ceasemirre and Gaza, there's no Hoothi attacks. Now their argument there is, oh, we're allowing blackmail. It's like, well, absent a literal US combat invasion of Yemen, which I don't think is worth it, this is the only option we have diplomacy, or we could have ceasefire policy, but instead we've decided to just basically like flex the muscles and all that. And people are saying, oh, are you arguing against the legitimacy of the operation. No, that's not what we're saying. What we're saying is we tried this. We tried it at a bunch of different times. All of this has been tried by Obama, tried by Biden, by Trump, at Trump last time around. We're almost eight years to the day since Trump launched a combat invasion in our combat operation in Yemen in the first term, and in that time period, the status quo has not only changed, it's actually gotten worse for our overall interests. The only time that anything is stopped has been a diplomatic solution in Gaza, and it's increasingly clear that there are huge headwinds in the diplomatic solution, in the diplomatic solution way against both from the Israelis and sections of our own government, that are going to make it less likely that we pursue that, and in that event, we're going to have more problems in.
The Middle East.
Yeah. So Trump's statement here is also very misleading because actually, there haven't been US ships that have been targeted by the who thies ever since that ceasefire was instituted. I mean, this is the thing they always the media and the administration always tries to hide the ball, and both this one and the last one, by the way, which is that the Huthis have been very clear this is a response to the Israeli assault and genocide in Gaza. So when the ceasefire was on, guess what, there were no hoothy attacks, not on US ships, not on Israelis ships, et cetera. What has changed is not only has that ceasefire broken down israel Is bombing in Gaza, but more specifically, they are blocking humanitarian aid. They have reinstituted, with our support, the total and complete siege of Gaza. So the who Thi's that? Okay, well, this is how we're going to respond. Not even actually I don't think they directly originally threatened US ships. It was we're going to you know, we're going to resume our threats versus Israeli ships. And so, you know, rather than us coming in and say, okay, well, let's get back to the ceasefire and let's actually pursue the ceasefire that the Trump administration negotiated. And by the way, age should be able to get into Gaza. You should be you know, collectively punishmenting and starving an entire population. Instead, we decided to effectively do Israel's bidding here and bomb the Houthies now, putting our own ships at risk. The Houthis have claimed retaliation, sort of unconfirmed whether they were successful in that or not, but there's no doubt that our ships, and they're saying both military now and commercial flagged ships are at risk in this passage. In addition, I don't want to gloss over the damage that our strikes did. You know, Yemen is the poorest country in the region. Capital city Sana is very you know, this is a beleaguered area to begin with, and the strikes reportedly killed thirty one people injured over one hundred more, most of them were women and children. Not a lot of indication that it was like, you know, super precise military targeting. There were certain civilian targets that were hit. There's a claim that a cancer hospital was hit as part of these as part of these strikes. So you know, the US is being accused by the Houthies of committing war crimes here as well, but all in the service not even of our own interests, but to back up the Israelis in their desire to continue this season and blockade of the Gaza strip.
Yeah, let's put D four up on the screen. This was from the who these they said quote regarding the implementation the operation was in response to the US aggression that targeted several government directorates with more than forty seven air strikes, and then put D five up there as well in terms of them vowing retaliation against the United States. I mean, look, do we think that they're going to sink an aircraft carrier? Yeah, probably not, But are they going to require more anti ship missiles or other things used on behalf of the United States? And the problem, as we again have shown, is that we have tried the full court military press solution here.
That's what Biden tried to do. He tried to solve this at the time.
You can't really deny that, to be honest, considering the number of munitions and the number of bombing runs and retaliations and all that were.
To restore global shipping.
We simply don't have the ability unless we literally occupy Yemen. So at this point it just comes back to me that they're basically falling into the same trap where yeah, it's convenient to bomb them and just be like yeah, okay, you know, we tried or whatever, and then we just keep doing this like tit for tat approach. It's not getting us anywhere. We have the same economic consequences, the same military issues as well. I mean, you know, we never talk about this, but every time you fire one of these projectiles it costs a million bucks or a million five for what reason. You don't remember when we shot down all those missiles on Israel's behalf. I mean, it costs over a billion dollars just in that single operation, not to mention the depleting of stocks for what purpose, not hours last time I checked. So it just continues where when you continue to like fall in this direction, you're not moving forward to any solution which is in any way both acceptable to the people who are firing the missiles who get a say, not saying it's a good thing, but they have a say as long as they have that ability without us being able to change that unless we pursue a diplomatic course in Gosam, which I don't think.
I don't know whether that's going to happen or not.
That's a whole other can of worms here, but this would be more evidence to me that that should be pursued and unfortunately, will probably be taken in the opposite direction.
Yeah. Well, the point about cost is an important one right now at a moment when this government, this administration is supposedly pursuing this path of usterity. So it's like, we don't have money to send out all the Social Security checks, but we do have money for We always have money for us. This money just magically falls out of the sky. It's never any problem funding these sorts of things. And by the way, if you look at the Doge, there's a chart out there of like the contracts they've canceled. Next to none of them have been from the Pentagon, I believe. Of their claimed savings, it's zero point zero five percent came out of the Pentagon, which no surprise given that Elon is one of the Pentagon's larger subcontractors.
So there you go.
All right, Well, I'm sure you've got some looks here more at Elon anti semitism, Crystal, what are you taking a look at?
Well, if you had to sketch a portrait of the ideal type of person to be your neighbor or your community member, your fellow citizen, you'd be hard pressed to find a more compelling resume than that of Mackmoud Khalil.
He was born into a refugee camp in Syria.
He defied the odds to ascend to one of America's pre eminent Ivy League universities, met the woman of his dreams while leading a group of volunteers, including some Americans, to educate displaced Syrian children who were in Lebanon. He had just completed a master's of public administration. He was all set to settle into his new life at a new job and as a new father. He and his wife, an American dentist raised in Michigan named Nor, are expecting in April. Even more telling of his character are the little anecdotes offered by friends and fellow students who submitted letters to the court, which paint an image of Khalil that is the polar opposite of what the government would want you to believe about him. So the government says, he supports from us well. An American Jewish woman who believes in the importance of Israel as a Jewish homeland told the court quote, I can state with full confidence Machmud has never expressed the port for hamas the government says his activities fuel anti Semitism.
Another Jewish student told the court that on.
The contrary, when a protester veered into anti Semitic rhetoric, Machmud was the first person to object and to intervene. Now, Mackmud himself went out of his way to tell CNN that his goal was to uplift both Jewish and Palestinian people, saying he saw the liberation of the two peoples as intertwined. Quote, you cannot achieve one without the other. The government, in attempting to remove Mackmud, is saying he would be a detriment to our society at large. Now, in my personal opinion, you see a person's character in the way that they treat the people around them in day to day life. Letters to the court say that Machmud is the kind of guy who would bring the doorman in his building chicken, tea, fruit and cake to help him break his fast during Ramadan, That he built community with fellow Jewish students attending Shabbad at their homes. That he was engaged in American political life. He was looking forward to being able to vote and to participate. Look, maybe the government uncovered some secret life that's going to turn the impression that many of his classmates and friends shared of a conscientious activist committed to tolerance and non violence on its head.
But frankly, I'd be surprised.
The worst thing the Internet has been able to unearth is a video of him flipping off a camera, a great American tradition, but actually the government demonization of the clean cut Khalil is a perfect emblem of the up and down left his right way that they have approached their authoritarian crackdown here because at the core of their current illiberal power grab is the weaponization of the liberal value of anti bagratry and specifically anti Semitism. They are stripping the rights of all freedom loving people, citizen and non in the US in the name of targeting anti Semitism. They've taken the authoritarian bent in Wolkism and cancel culture at its worst and turned it up to full fascism. Now, if you think you're safe because you trust this present, or maybe you hold the correct opinions on this issue, think again. When rights are taken, they're taken from all. And the trumpetman has already moved from threatening foreign students to threatening American citizens in a single week.
It is truly chilling. In addition to.
Their arrest of Khalil, consider the sweep of their power grap around anti semitism. In just the past ten days. They stripped four hundred million dollars in funding from Colombia and placed its Middle Eastern Studies department in receivership, while completely ignoring laws requiring notification investigation in those guarding academic freedom. They sent letters to sixty other universities threatening similar crackdowns if they do not comply with vague demands to effectively combat anti Semitism. They're deploying AI to crawl through social media accounts in order to find additional targets for deportation based on wrong think on Israel. Perhaps there was a result of this effort, another Columbia student on a student visa was forced to flee the country. Her greatest involvement in pro Palestine protests was liking and resharing some posts and signing on to at least one open letter calling for Palestinian liberation. She described herself as quote Justin Rando, not anywhere close to a protest leader. Four, the Department of Justice announced that the government is investigating whether to charge American students who participated in pro Palestine protests as terrorists. Academic freedom destroyed, due process, jettisoned free speech, crushed power, consolidated, all under the guise of fighting the alleged bigotry of people who were disgusted to see our government complicit in mass slaughter of civilians. Even many diehard Zionists are sounding the alarm. Eli Lake, who is nothing if not committed to hatred of pro Palestine protesters, tweeted this quote. If Maka Khalil is charged and convicted of an actual crime, he should be deported. If his crime is just the expression of support for a terrorist organization, then this pageant is grotesque. And yes, I realize that their harassment of Jews, destruction of property, etc. Is not protected speech, but the legal argument thus far amounts to saying permanent legal residents can't say anything that the Secretary of State believes undermines US foreign policy. That is a horrendous violation of free speech. And as much as I despise campus solidarity with baby stranglers, I love American values more. Bill Maher, to my somewhat surprise, also weighed in on behalf of Khalil, viewing the assault on him as an attack on free speech.
Then there's this issue of Mahmoud Khalil. He is one of the protesters, the Palestinian protesters, and I don't agree with his point of view, but you know what, if you're an honest person, you have to defend him if you believe in free speech, because that's what free speech means. I say it all the time when it's on the other foot, and I can't change because it's now this guy. It's defending the dirt bags you hate. So this guy, now here's what's fire. And I love this organization that's the foundation for individual rights and expression. And they go after the left a lot mostly, but they're honest. They said, if the government has got anything other than just somebody who is saying things they don't like talking about this guy, they need to show it now because otherwise the harm to First Amendment freedoms will be serious. And I think that's true. I don't think they have anything on this guy other than he's saying things that I can't believe kids believe now. I did not see this coming, this bizarre alliance of jihadism and wokeism, you know, infatada is the only solution. Really, Infatada is the only solution global. And that's where this guy is. I think it's horrible. He hates this country, he hates Western civilization, and I defend to his death the right to.
Say protecting speech you don't like is, of course the whole point of the First Amendment. What's more, doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Jews are not safe when disfavored groups start getting singled out, criminalized, rounded up by the federal government. Neither, for that matter, is anyone else. Today it's them, tomorrow could be you. Once a president claims the power to punish any speech that they don't like, there are no limits to what that can ultimately mean. Today it could be anti semitism, Tomorrow could be anti racism. Today, it could be DEI wrong think. Tom could be climate denial. Today, it could be affiliating with Democrats. Tomorrow it could be affiliating with Republicans. The next step in consciousness, though, is to realize that the mass campaign by people like mar and Lake to demonize those with legitimate criticisms of Israel as violent, hateful, and pro hamas is exactly the ideological framework that made the current crackdown possible and easy. In Eli's tweet, he even says that Khalil expressed support for terrorists, which appears to not be true at all. But once the pro Palestine protests were portrayed by the liberal Biden administration as being effectively hamas, it did not take a large leap to criminalize anyone who was affiliated with them to throw visa holders and permanent residents out of the country altogether for participating or even for liking the wrong tweet, even those like Khalil who appear to have been completely law abiding. In fairness, though, I think if it wasn't the anti semitism ruse, it would probably just be something else. After all, It's not like this is the only way Trump is consolidating power and crushing descent. The anti Semitism pulued is one branch of Trump's broader authoritarian push. He certainly doesn't care about actual anti Semitism. He regularly himself uses antisemitic tropes by tying all Jews to the actions of Israel. As one example, his co president Elon spent in an augeration day giving two Nazi salutes and got in trouble before that for saying that an anti Semitic conspiracy theory was quote the actual truth instead play acting concern for anti Semitism. It's just the most convenient excuse flying around to hobble his enemies, crushed descent, undercut what he sees as a rival power base in the university system, to stoke fear and garner compliance. Now, Trump promised in his campaign he would pursue retribution, that he would terminate the constitution, that he would act as a dictator, and, judging from his actions one way or another, he intends to make good on that pledge. Whether you're a media outlet that he deems illegal, a law firm with the temerity to represent one of his political opponents, or a government agency with an unacceptable number of liberal staffers, he wants you afraid, alone and cowering crushed. He will use the power of the state and his crew of loyalist gooons to achieve that intended result. If crying anti semitism helps in his campaign, he is happy to weaponize it, and it seems like he's just getting started. The move to invoke the Alien Enemies Act of seventeen ninety eight claiming wartime powers not used since Japanese internment suggests that this dark turn is really just beginning.
Next, we're going to.
See whether this all fuels public backlash that could stem some of the worst abuses, whether the courts can act to sufficiently forestall the authoritarian slide, whether the liberal institutions are remotely up to fighting an organized, lawless illiberal power grab. So far, though, the indications are not all that promising. Looks like when Ice grab mock Mood, they didn't realize he was a Green card holder, and likely didn't realize how unimpeachably upstanding he would turn out to actually be sort of living embodiment of the American cultural melting pot, good neighbor ideal. But whether it was intentional or not, making an example out of mock Mood, ultimately it does serve their interests. If they can get away with it, then really no one else can feel safe, no matter how many Shabbats they attended, how many times they uplifted their Jewish friends, how courageously they protected them from hateful conduct, how academically accomplished and impressively credentialed, no matter how pregnant or how American, their wife happens to be. Everyone citizen and non will get the message that nothing can protect them. If the Trump regime decides they are to be punished, and that is precisely the point now. The only question that remains is will they get away with it? And it really is wild once you dig into who this guy actually
Is, how he is the and if you want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at breakingpoints dot com.