Up Next
Megyn Kelly and Anna Kasparian Expose Pressure Campaign Against Charlie Kirk Before His Death
11:27
Eric Metaxas and Dinesh D'Souza Expose Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens' Troubling Shift on Israel and Anti-Semitism
34:15
Candace Owens and Ana Kasparian Unite Against Elite Control, War Propaganda, and Zionist Intimidation Tactics
1:25:29
Trump's Legacy Over: Why His Jeffrey Epstein Response and Israel Policy Betrayed the MAGA Movement
Two commentators dissect what they view as the collapse of Trump's political legacy through his handling of Jeffrey Epstein questions and Israel policy. They argue Trump's dismissal of Epstein concerns, a foundational issue for his 2016 victory, represents a calculated betrayal of his base. The conversation explores whether Trump is being controlled, examines allegations of planned false flags, and questions the administration's threats to deny disaster relief to states that boycott Israel. What began as hope for a different kind of presidency has devolved into what they see as gaslighting and treason against American interests.
The Epstein Question That Changed Everything
The conversation opens with a blunt assessment: Trump's legacy is finished, and the MAGA movement as it existed under his leadership is over. The turning point? Trump's response to continued questions about Jeffrey Epstein. When Trump dismissed concerns about Epstein and told supporters focused on the issue that he didn't want their support, it represented what the speakers view as a fundamental betrayal.
One speaker expresses shock at Trump's social misstep, noting that Trump typically reads rooms well and possesses strong social skills. The gaslighting nature of the response—pretending not to understand why supporters care about Epstein—felt more insulting than an outright dismissal would have been. As one puts it: "I would have preferred you saying, 'F you. Na-na-na-boo-boo, you can't touch us. We have so much power.' Because then I would have appreciated the honesty."
The conversation emphasizes that concerns about elite pedophile networks aren't fringe conspiracy theories but rather patterns that have emerged in every late-stage civilization throughout history. From Rome to the present day, decadent periods feature powerful elites operating beyond consequences, protected by mutual blackmail and institutional capture.
Epstein as the Symbol of Everything MAGA Opposed
Jeffrey Epstein represents far more than one criminal, the speakers argue. He symbolizes the entire secret architecture of power—the way elites operate for their own enrichment and protection rather than for the people they claim to serve. This understanding formed a central plank of the 2016 Trump movement, alongside border security and free speech.
The Epstein case unlocked suspicions about how power truly functions: Democrats and celebrities engaged in backdoor deals, living lives of sexual degeneracy and legal immunity that would destroy ordinary citizens. This cabal of elites, insulated from consequences, became what motivated millions to take a chance on an unconventional candidate like Trump.
For Trump to now dismiss these concerns—and for Attorney General Pam Bondi to claim uncertainty about whether Epstein worked for intelligence agencies—strikes the speakers as insulting gaslighting. They point out that Trump's own administration officials and sons previously highlighted Epstein's importance. The betrayal isn't just of supporters but of Trump's own stated principles and the movement that brought him to power.
The Gaslighting That Reveals Class Contempt
One speaker notes something particularly offensive about the nature of the gaslighting: its academic quality. The dismissal of Epstein concerns carries the tone of credentialed elites looking down on common people who lack advanced degrees but possess superior common sense. Blue-collar workers who understand what Epstein represents, even without Ivy League credentials, recognize what's obvious: Epstein didn't kill himself, his network matters, and the cover-up continues.
Trump lost something almost magical in that moment—his ability to bridge the class divide. Despite coming from wealth and elite circles, Trump had maintained a connection with working and middle-class Americans. His Epstein response destroyed that connection. He suddenly became one of "them"—the dismissive elites who think common people are too stupid to understand what's happening in front of their faces.
The speaker describes it as Trump taking "a steaming pile" on his legacy, his supporters, and the foundational assumptions that got him elected. This wasn't merely lying to supporters; it was denying his own identity and the movement he claimed to lead. As one puts it: "What could move Trump to betray himself? That's what I'm interested in now. Now it's the why. What does Israel have on Trump?"
The Israel Question and Disaster Relief Blackmail
The conversation shifts to what the speakers view as the worst period of their public lives: watching the administration threaten to deny disaster relief to American states that participate in boycotts of Israel. The Department of Homeland Security website explicitly stated that discrimination was prohibited against companies doing business with Israel, effectively requiring states to oppose the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement to receive federal disaster aid.
When the language was removed after public outcry, DHS attempted to deny it had ever existed—despite screenshots and archived pages proving otherwise. X (formerly Twitter) added community notes to DHS posts, pointing out the misleading claims. One speaker calls this potential treason: denying Americans in need during disasters because of their political stance on a foreign country.
The speakers note Trump rolled back the BDS-related restrictions but not the overall policy direction favoring Israel above American interests. Stephen Miller's involvement in these policies particularly disappointed those who had hoped for a different kind of administration. The contrast is stark: talking about withholding disaster relief over sanctuary cities is presented as psychopathic, but actually implementing such policies over Israel boycotts is even worse.
Gaza, the West Bank, and Netanyahu's Plans
The conversation addresses Miriam Adelson's hundred-million-dollar contribution to Trump and what she allegedly purchased: American acquiescence to Israeli annexation of not just Gaza but also the West Bank. Trump is accused of looking the other way as Israel goes "door to door" traumatizing Palestinians in the West Bank, while simultaneously punishing Americans who express outrage at Gaza.
One speaker argues that by the time current policies conclude, "Netanyahu's Israel will have eclipsed Hitler's Germany by many counts morally speaking and probably by the numbers, too." They point to the manner of "exterminating innocent children" as evidence. The speakers note the hypocrisy of Israeli propaganda using population-ratio mathematics to emphasize October 7th casualties (claiming equivalence to massive American death tolls) while refusing to apply the same mathematics to Palestinian deaths.
The discussion recalls Trump's earlier signals of potential American presence in Gaza—perhaps even a Trump Tower—which visibly displeased Netanyahu. The rapid shift from that position to giving Israel carte blanche to "take it all" raises questions about what changed and why Trump abandoned his earlier stance.
October 7th as Planned Event
Both speakers express certainty that October 7th was a planned false flag operation. They cite multiple pieces of evidence: the unprecedented failure of the Iron Dome defense system, IDF troops moved away from the border before the attack, the last-minute relocation of a music festival to the border area, pilots grounded for hours despite proximity to the violence, Israeli intelligence ignoring a detailed hostage plan, and Egyptian warnings about border build-up being dismissed.
One speaker recounts meeting someone in Israeli intelligence who casually mentioned Mossad knows intimate details about American Catholic bishops (claiming 88% are homosexual). The implication: an intelligence service with that level of penetration into foreign institutions couldn't possibly miss massive preparations on their own border. The failure had to be intentional.
The speakers suggest Netanyahu's administration planned the expansion years in advance, coordinating with events in Syria. They question whether Trump knew about these plans and when. The reactive, coordinated response from pro-Israel media figures to any genocide criticism suggests preparation and placement of sympathetic voices throughout media.
The Bolshevik Connection and Victimhood Mythology
One speaker raises questions about historical narratives, suggesting some who claimed victim status after World War II—mentioning Elie Wiesel and Robert Maxwell by name—may have actually been "working for other people doing demonic things." The suggestion is that some Bolsheviks, who had engaged in mass murder of Christians, "laundered themselves" by adopting victim identities alongside genuine Jewish victims of the Holocaust.
This leads to discussion of how victimhood mythology can justify atrocities. When a nation defines itself by historical persecution while encouraging the belief that anything it does is justified by that victimhood, dangerous dynamics emerge. The speakers compare this to why rape victims don't sentence their attackers and why orphans aren't given guns: trauma victims need "grown-ups in the room" making rational decisions, not weapons and power.
Allowing a state that "murders its own people by omission or commission" to possess nuclear weapons while believing itself to be "history's greatest victims" creates an untenable situation. The combination of enormous destructive capability and a persecution-based identity that justifies any action cannot be permitted to continue unchecked.
Jared Kushner's Investments and Family Interests
The conversation touches on Jared Kushner's financial investments in Israel as a potential explanation for Trump's policy positions. One speaker suggests Trump's concern for his family's legacy and financial interests may override his political commitments. The implication is that Trump's children and son-in-law have financial stakes that align with Israeli expansion and development projects.
This financial entanglement potentially explains Trump's abandonment of earlier, more independent positions on Israel-Palestine issues. If the Trump family business empire has significant investments dependent on Israeli cooperation and expansion, then American policy becomes subordinate to private family interests—a clear conflict of interest and potential betrayal of the presidential oath.
What Comes After MAGA
The conversation concludes with both speakers agreeing that Trump's legacy is over and MAGA as a Trump-led movement has ended. The question becomes what MAGA will evolve into without Trump at the helm. The movement captured real grievances and insights about how power operates, about elite corruption, about the need for border security and free speech protection.
Those concerns don't disappear because Trump betrayed them. The question is whether a new formation can emerge that remains faithful to those original insights while rejecting the compromises and betrayals that have characterized Trump's second term. The worst few days of their public lives have forced a reckoning: the movement must "pivot and recognize whether or not we can emerge as something else."
The anger in the conversation is palpable—not the anger of people who feel they backed the wrong candidate, but of people who feel their correct instincts and concerns have been validated while their chosen champion has abandoned the field. They saw the problems clearly; Trump simply wasn't the solution they hoped he would be.
Video Transcript
his entire legacy is over. I think it
really is over. I think Maga is over.
There's no question. I mean Maga with
Trump I guess
leading the movement is completely over.
I don't even I genuinely I'm trying to
process what's happening in this
administration. Obviously this is
Israel. We have been infiltrated by
Israel. I'm wondering if maybe we were
always infiltrated by Israel and we just
weren't paying attention. But the first
remarkable fumble and this was shocking
to me because Trump
generally speaking has good social
skills and is able to read a room
correctly. I would say that, right? For
him to come out and say, "Why are we
still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?"
was a fumble that
>> I don't want you as supporters.
>> That I just go with somebody somebody
tweeting for him. Do they have something
on him? Is he actually sweating bullets
because the Trump that I know is smarter
than to try to gaslight his supporters.
So what did you What is your read on
that when he did that?
>> When he said, so here's the thing.
Uh
the the the grand uh you know pedo
theory or whatever. This this idea that
um there are elites
wielding
extraordinary power in the shadows using
uh uh evidence against each other of
whatever or have wizard
This is not a conspiracy theory. This is
how every civilization in human history
has become at the end at the late
decadent period just before things
collapse. It is not unusual or crazy or
right-wing or uh uh
um or or lunatic to say,
"I kind of think there might be a secret
cabal of like uh powerful pedophiles
running the world." That's exactly what
happens in every empire in history. It's
what happened in Rome. It happens in all
of them. So it isn't weird or or or
strange that people would imagine that
might be happening now uh as our
civilization looks as though it may be
crumbling.
It's not weird to to think that.
It was also a central plank of Maga.
It's why it it's why 2016 happened. It's
one of the three or four things that
made 2016 happen. This idea that the
Democrats in particular, although
probably we didn't want to know too
much, but you know, or maybe we did, but
you know, probably some people on our
side, too, but but mostly the Democrats,
celebrities, political establishment,
were in cahoots with people like Jeffrey
Epstein
doing backdoor deals,
not passing laws or or or or
not running institutions for the people,
but rather for their own enrichment,
engorgement, and power, and they all
also happen to be wrapped up if not in
outright pedophilia, at least in sexual
degeneracy and and so on and so forth.
And and this is kind of a a rump of
people at the top of society, the
elites, who live basically beyond
consequence, who live free from worry
about the terrible things they do,
things that would end the life of
anybody else because they are insulated
by this,
you know, by the world in which they
live, and everybody looking out for
everybody.
That strikes me as a demonstrable fact
of reality and not necessarily anything
to
So, this is this is this is a plank
along with the border
and a few other things
free speech that become the motivating
social
energies behind 2016. Why it happens,
right? Why Trump is possible at that
moment. Why people are open to voting
for somebody so unusual in politics. Why
people were prepared to take the risk.
Epstein is the key that unlocks the
secrets, the secret architecture of our
world, the way in which power is
structured and operates over all of us
and over
and for its own benefit and for the for
the enrichment and engorgement and
protection of a couple of people. He
represents in one person everything that
we worry about, that we fear, that we
strongly suspect is happening, and that
we're probably right about. He's a
symbol for all of it. And
it's for Donald Trump who we had
previously assumed was somebody who just
got us when nobody else did
to turn around and say, um, "I don't
understand why people are going on about
this. I think it's just bad people. Uh,
my former supporters, uh, if you if you
if you if you if you're into this, I
don't want your support."
>> Ugh.
>> When I heard that my response was very
simple.
Okay.
Okay.
>> Yeah, mine was a bit more
>> more explicit than
>> It was I just was like I said this to
Tucker Carlson a few days ago. I would
have preferred you saying, "F you.
Na-na-na-boo-boo, you can't touch us. We
have so much power." Cuz then I would
have appreciated
>> be mad.
At least be mad.
>> I would appreciate the honesty, but
gaslighting us. Like going back to this
Sigmund Freud technique
>> Pretending he doesn't know.
>> Pretending he don't know. Don't know why
we're upset. You fully know why we're
upset. You fully know why this matters.
In fact, it was your administration
people that you now put in your
administration who have communicated the
importance of Jeffrey Epstein. Remember
what we're talking about?
Yeah.
>> it. You did it. You did it.
>> Your sons did it. And so there was just
this moment where I wasn't just
frustrated, I was angry. I was actually
angry. And then the stupidity, which is
required for supporters to believe when
Pam Bondi then looks over and says, "We
don't know if he was working
>> Come off it, love.
>> Wouldn't you rather then they just say,
"F you"? I would prefer that.
>> Yes, you're right. You're right.
>> It's more respectful to just say, "F
you."
>> It is And at least at least with "F
you", you can say, "Well, there must be
a lot going on. You're
I'll talk to you when you calm down."
At least you At least there's an
opportunity to circle back. And and to
forgive.
And to and to to assume that something
must be It's like, "You're going through
a lot." You know,
something something. Give us something
to cling to, but no. Cold, calculated,
repeated, "I don't want you." Okay. Um
this was a betrayal not just of his
supporters, their priorities, and um uh
and his own promises.
But, it was
it was an attempt to deny one of the
reasons that he got elected in the first
place and pretend that it didn't exist.
And this is a level of lie, a level of
audacity
that is so disrespectful
and so outrageous and so extraordinary
that it leaves you wondering
All right, what have they got on you?
What's going on?
>> There was something about the
gaslighting, too, that for me felt very
academic. And what I mean by that is
just in in my life and my experience,
you find these people who believe so
much in their degrees, right? They're
they We rule over you because I have a
master's degree in this, and I'm smarter
than you.
>> Blind faith in credentialism.
>> Yes, credentialism, without question.
And I will tell you right now, the
blue-collar people are smarter than
them, okay? These people would die if
they had to go out and hitch a hitch a a
tent in the forest, literally. They
wouldn't be able to survive on basic
skills.
>> Or even do a middle-class job. Be a
traffic agent. They wouldn't be able to
>> They wouldn't be able to do any of this
stuff, right? Common sense is so much
more admirable. And when he said that,
he basically looked at people who have
common sense, right? Who recognize
what's happening. They maybe don't hold
the degrees of, you know, your ilk,
people that graduate to, you know, from
U Penn, and their sons go to U Penn.
But, they know what Jeffrey Epstein is,
and they know what Jeffrey Epstein was.
And so, he lost
>> And they know he didn't kill himself.
>> he didn't kill himself. And so, he lost
something that was almost magical about
him. Again, like the the ability to be a
person that that comes from this class
of people, but to be able to speak to
the blue-collar work worker, to the
middle class. He lost that. He suddenly
became one of them in that moment.
>> agree. And in in a sense, he he
took a a steaming pile of, you know,
what, uh on his on his legacy, on his
supporters, and on the on the the
the
underpinning assumptions that he was
voted in office
uh on the basis of
he he
he denied who he was. He didn't just lie
to us. He didn't just deny us. He denied
himself, too. Um that betrayal was a
betrayal of his own movement, of his
legacy.
This was to say Trumpism was fake, it's
not real, it's all crazy, you're
lunatics, I'm the president, shut up.
That was a betrayal of his own
uh place in history.
>> And let me ask you And that's why it's
so unforgivable.
>> What could move Trump to betray himself?
That's what I'm interested in now. Now
it's the why. What does Israel have on
Trump? What Is it Israel? I think it's
Israel.
>> Interesting leap to make, but um not
really. Because the last 48 hours, the
last 56 hours um have been the worst
uh you know, to the extent that I you
know, I've had a
life in public life, I've had the worst
couple of days of my life. To see
somebody who, you know, I had a bit of a
wobble in 20 whenever it was, you know,
I'm not going to lie about that. Um you
know, and and I've I've even um
served other candidates for high office,
you know, in the meantime.
But but you know, I began and thought
that I would end my political life um at
least you know, the extent to which I'm
in public life with Trump.
And certainly, you know, I was excited
about that. You know, you see you see
people like Stephen Miller on TV and
you're like
um
uh but to hear him in the last few days,
and so I think you're maybe maybe right
about that country, to hear him say in
the last few days um that um
that he you know, that that that
to get the message that um his
administration was going to deny um
disaster relief funds to states that
don't um uh, uh, do whatever, Uh, you
know, to to to say to to you know, to to
to insufficiently, um, uh, um,
uh, um,
>> Yeah, see if you're boycotting Israel
>> and you get
>> and you get hit by a hurricane
Häagen-Dazs in the fridge instead of Ben
& Jerry's, you know, you're screwed. Um,
you know, like I mean, that level. And
and then the same day after having, you
know, um,
uh, committed treason in the morning to
commit genocide in the afternoon
>> And this just
>> by saying, uh, you know,
by giving indication that Israel be fine
to go and just annex Gaza, a place where
they have been
>> Miriam and By the way, just so
everybody's clear, they're also going to
take the West Bank. Miriam Adelson came
to him and said, "No, we're not just
taking Gaza, we're also taking the West
Bank and we want you to look the other
way and here's a hundred million
dollars." So, they're currently going
door to door and traumatizing people
that live in the West Bank, right?
Palestinians that live in the West Bank.
And Trump is pretending he doesn't know
that's going on and now
penalizing Americans who should
rightfully be outraged that we pretend
we with the leaders of the free world,
you know what I mean? Everybody you want
to live like us. We've got it all
figured out. It's so we have so much
high morality and yet you look at what's
happening in Gaza and all of our
politicians do not have the stomach to
say what is so obviously true.
>> And what is obviously true is that by
the time this is over, Netanyahu's
Israel will have eclipsed Hitler's
Germany by many, many, um, many, many
counts morally speaking and probably by
the numbers, too.
Because the way that that country is
behaving sound, you know, it's the kind
of thing that that you know, people are
like, "All right, come on, calm down."
But no, I mean it. Um, the
manner in which they are exterminating
innocent children.
>> No, it has eclipsed it. Somebody showed
that they were using this measure, like,
you know, Israel and their propaganda
was using this measure for October 7th
saying, "This is the equivalent of this
would be like by rate killing this many
people."
>> Well, you get Mark Levin and go on TV
>> And they were like, "That would be the
equivalent of murdering 44 million
Americans."
>> If Mark Levin can go on television and
say that some losing you know 300 IDF
soldiers is equivalent of 3,000 American
soldiers, I think perhaps we'll take the
same approach to mathematics.
>> And now they're not doing that that
approach to mathematics anymore.
>> Um yes, yes, they've said that but but
it interesting isn't it the outcry to
both and the one that Trump rolled back
and the one he didn't.
He rolled back the uh
Zionist virtue signaling.
Uh uh meaning
okay, fine. Let's cut that bit out of of
the of the uh of the Homeland FEMA terms
which they then tried to pretend that no
>> Oh yeah, let's actually show that. Let's
actually cuz they think we're the stupid
again. He just thinks everybody's so
dumb.
>> Unbelievable.
>> But they actually had the language on
the DHS website where they you were not
you were going to be denied the funds
and I'm I'm just trying to see which
line this is on. On the left-hand side
is that the Israel
Oh, here it is. Yeah, it says
with companies doing business in or with
Israel or authorized by licensed by
organized under the laws of Israel to do
business. Discriminatory prohibited. You
can't boycott these companies. Then they
just delete it and they actually went on
Twitter and tried to gaslight the
public.
This is like it's it's going it's going
full Zionist now. They're like we had it
on the website. We're going to disappear
from the website and then we're going to
say, "What are you guys talking about?
We never had that language." You know
what it's the the Homeland Security
is now getting
notes added on X for lying. Readers
added context they thought you might
might like to know this is misleading.
DHS terms and conditions only now
removed the section stating boycott
means refusing to deal, cutting
commercial relations, or otherwise
limiting commercial relations
specifically with with Israeli
companies. That was the language they
removed it and the Homeland Homeland
Security had the nerve to pretend that
it wasn't there. That is extraordinary.
>> That's the one that they rolled back
because that's the one that actually
doesn't really matter. It's offensive
and it's if it if it had been carried
through
and and and if they if it if it had been
um
uh
honored, and there had been a disaster,
and the state hadn't been ready. I mean,
it was because of this, I think maybe
you could say
it's treason, but it just is. I think
it's fair. I think it's fair.
>> is treason? Even having the language on
that website
>> maybe it is. Maybe it is.
>> I've been I've been careful about this
word, cuz I didn't like it when it was
floated all the time. This is treason.
It almost became comical.
>> close.
>> Treason treason This is the closest I've
been to saying, "No, actually, if you
are were going to deny Americans in need
supplies during a time of need because
they are within their own free will
deciding that
>> than bad enough. It's more than bad
enough. And I think it probably is that.
But it doesn't actually matter because I
mean, of course it would matter to the
lives if it happened. But the it's based
on a on a on a the BDS thing is it's all
virtual signaling, right? It's a leftist
um thing. And then when when if if if
states are are having sanctuary cities,
something that you were elected to do,
and you want to withhold funds, I
wouldn't hold withhold disaster funds
over that because that's mental. That's
absolutely psychopathic. Um
just because somebody lives in a state
that has sanctuary cities. I live in
California.
>> Right.
>> What what if there's an earthquake?
You're going to let me plunge down a
ravine?
>> No, sorry.
>> Yeah, like that is psychopathic, and
that's that's what we were hoping to to
defeat uh by keeping um
the the the drunk out, but
And and the last one. Um but the the the
two female presidents stopped by Trump.
You can't take that away from him. Uh
but but
that is psychopathic enough, but but it
that's the one ultimately it's it's it's
it's kind of virtual signaling in the in
the in the gesture, you know.
Um but the one he caved on was that. The
one nobody has had a thing to say about
was giving the nod to Israel to
effectively uh move in and just take
over huge And and and how recently it
was. Think how recently it was
that Trump, irritated by disrespect and
um
and and and bad behavior from Netanyahu,
was signaling, when he was here,
that maybe America would have a presence
in Gaza. That maybe that that would
there would be a Trump Tower in Gaza.
Not to to to to Netanyahu's visible
displeasure and surprise. Saying some of
this stuff, right?
And and how how soon how quickly we got
to the stage where Trump has said,
"Yeah, just kidding. They can have it
all."
>> I think it's performative. I I think
Trump's family is invested. If you look
at Jared Kushner's the the money that
he's spending right now in Israel, I
think that's what Trump is more
concerned about, which is is his
family's legacy. I obviously in my
viewpoint, October 7th was planned. It's
a false flag. They always had the fact
that Miriam Adelson came to him before
>> isn't a doubt in my mind.
>> Of course it was planned. This is Israel
has connected so many false flags in the
past. And and then the fact that he's
being investigated for that and they're
keeping everything hush-hush, saying
it's a national security risk about how
he was feeding talking points to your
country's going through this and you're
feeding talking points and you're being
investigated for corruption
pertaining to what happened on that day.
I mean, it's very obvious.
>> There are rabbis in Jerusalem today who
are saying just this. There are rabbis
in Tel Aviv who are saying just this.
There's no explanation for the Iron Dome
mysteriously not working after its you
know, flawless record.
What why pilots were kept
>> the troops from the border.
>> Right. Moved that music music festival
to the border. So they had lots of
lovely young new balls to kick pathetic
victims. Why the IDF was grounded for
hours in an area where they could almost
hear their own family members in the
nearby housing.
>> the hostage plan and they just ignored
it.
>> It is it is not
>> Egypt's warnings that there's a build-up
happening on the border. We're just not
interested right now, actually.
>> Suddenly this
Let me say this.
>> Not interested.
>> Mossad knows I like how you call it the
Mossad, which is correct.
The Mossad know they know how many
American Catholic bishops are
homosexuals.
To the man.
Because I bet I met somebody who works
in Israeli intelligence who told me, "Oh
yeah, it's 80%." I said, "What?" "Oh,
88% of American Catholic bishops." And I
said, "What do you mean 88%?" He said,
"Oh well, we we you know, we checked."
I was like, "What do you mean you
checked?" For them not to know what's
happening on their own border
is ludicrous. It is unbelievable.
>> And that would make sense because when I
very innocently tweeted, "No country in
the world has a right to commit a
genocide." It was it 2 years ago or a
year and a half ago, and
they were they were so reactive, which
is such a thing. They knew what was
happening the entire time. You know,
they had their people in place and to do
gaslight the public, their media members
in place. You had people like Dave Rubin
who reacted to this tweet like I said
something so crazy. Like I I thought
that was obviously true. We should never
be supporting a genocide. And I believe
that every every moment of October 7th
was planned. And I'm not even just like
months in advance, years in advance that
they had planned to expand Israel's
borders. Same time with what's happening
in Syria. Everything seems like it was
part of a broader plan.
And Trump, I have to ask the question
whether or not he was aware.
>> he know and when?
>> What did he know and when?
>> Yeah, I think it's reasonable. And
to to
you know, to to
to try to claim
that
there's this blind spot where suddenly
they just had a failure of intelligence.
And but all these other I mean this is a
country that has gone so far.
An administration, Netanyahu's that is,
that's gone so far that they're now
willing to sacrifice their own citizens
in order to
increase their borders. Well, where does
that
Where do I remember that from?
Could it be the word Lebensraum? Could
it be a country that did exactly that?
And it makes me wonder
>> Mhm. well it makes me it reminds me
of why we don't give the victims of
crime power over
sentencing of of of the the
perpetrators. Because if you know if the
Jewish people suffered
to whatever extent you you you know
people have their own ideas about that
under under the Nazis under the Third
Reich and have
held on to that as a core part of their
identity their victimization at the
hands of the Nazis which to some degree
of course happened.
And define themselves according to that
victimhood.
They're the last people you want to give
a gun to.
>> Well or the Bolsheviks who magically
disappeared and may have reappeared
laundering themselves through
as like there are actual actually were
Jewish victims during World War II and
then there were people like Elie Wiesel
and Robert Maxwell who may have actually
been you know working for other people
doing demonic things and then they just
said oh no we were victims too. That's
my perception. We know for a fact that
some of the Bolsheviks were protecting
Israel and these people were mass
murdering Christians you know. So you
start to ask the question that can't
leave you right? When you have the
spirit of just
murder and lying and deception and gas
lighting
>> you're encouraged by the
mythology that despite the terrible
things that you do you are history's
greatest victims.
And therefore anything you do is somehow
justified. It you know this is why we
don't give rape victims the power to
decide if their rapist you know goes
away for life or or or or it gets the
death penalty. Why we don't give
orphans guns.
Because we need
grown-ups in the room to decide what's
reasonable and to hand
or to allow the acquisition of nuclear
weapons
in the hands of a rogue state that
murders its own people by omission or
commission
that has the ability to take out cities.
And it believes that its people are
history's great victims.
This cannot be allowed.
>> Mhm. No, it's it's completely crazy. And
this is definitively what Trump his
entire legacy is is over. I think it
really is over. I think MAGA is over.
There's no question. I mean, MAGA with
Trump, I guess,
leading the movement is completely over.
What MAGA will become in the future is
kind of what the question is going to be
because we're going to have to pivot and
recognize whether or not we can emerge
as something else.
Comments
Be the first to comment on this video.