Zelensky, Live on Fox, Re-Affirms His Own Tyranny. ADL’s Game-Playing w/ Hate Crime Stats. Media’s Gullible Embrace of Anon CIA Leaks. Shocking Censorship Escalation in Brazil
Watch full episodes on Rumble, streamed LIVE 7pm ET: https://rumble.com/c/GGreenwald
Become part of our Locals community: https://greenwald.locals.com/
- - -
Follow Glenn:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glenn.11.greenwald/
Follow System Update:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SystemUpdate_
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/systemupdate__/
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@systemupdate__
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/systemupdate.tv/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/systemupdate/
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Welcome to a new episode of System Update, our live nightly show that airs every Monday through Friday at 7 p.m.
Eastern exclusively here on Rumble, the free speech alternative to YouTube.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is in Washington, and as we discussed on last night's show, he went to the White House and Congress to plead for more billions for his failed war effort against Russia, and then he met with the true beneficiaries of this war, the CEOs of the American arms industry, Raytheon, Boeing, General Dynamics, and the rest.
Today on Fox News, President Zelensky was asked by Fox host Brett Baier about recent accusations from his closest Ukrainian allies that he has become an authoritarian and a tyrant.
Zelensky, rather than even attempting to deny the accusation, essentially affirmed his own autocracy.
He justified it.
All while he insists that Americans must give him billions more to quote, defend democracy.
Democracy that doesn't even exist in his own country thanks to his own actions.
Then, the Anti-Defamation League has long been in the business of accusing people of being racist and anti-Semite in order to silence their opposition and force businesses to pay them substantial amounts of money to be released from those accusations.
Ever since October 7th, though, the ADL has found new allies as they seek to capitalize on the emotions surrounding the Hamas attack on Israel and the newfound efforts to silence Israel critics in the United States, the longstanding goal of the ADL.
Central to their campaign and those of like-minded allies of the ADL is the cynical manipulation of hate crime statistics to try and invent a crisis in the United States.
That holds that American Jews are a singularly endangered group, a victim group, that can be used to justify their oppression of political speech, because after all, if you can demonstrate that a minority group in the United States is endangered, you then argue that censorship is necessary to protect them.
But we'll show you how this deceitful game with hate crime statistics by the ADL is being played.
After that, despite how many times, how many times we have seen that the FBI and the CIA and the rest of the US security state routinely spreads lies by using anonymous leaks to mainstream media outlets, the perfect way to spread lies since it's anonymous and there's never any accountability,
Every time a new leak happens in this way, it's meant with an instinctive belief on the part of many in media that these anonymous leaks by virtue of appearing in mainstream media outlets must not only be true, but must be unquestioningly true.
The CIA just engineered a leak about Russia's military that is so obviously designed to promote their primary foreign policy aim of securing billions of dollars more to keep the war against Russia going.
And yet so many people who should know better gullibly treated this leak as proven fact without an iota of questioning or skepticism.
The idea of embracing CIA and FBI anonymous leaks as truth is one of the most corroding and corrupting components of American journalism and yet, for many good reasons, it never ceases.
Finally, we have been reporting on the growing censorship programs, not only in the United States, but more broadly in the democratic world, in the EU, in the UK, in Canada, in Ireland, and in Brazil.
We do so in part because these attacks on free speech in major countries like those are important in and of themselves.
But we also report on them to you because each advancement of censorship power in the democratic world is seen by other countries, by other democracies, as a test case for how far they can go.
That's why it's so worth reporting.
Every time one country advances in the censorship game, the other countries look and say, oh, we can do that too.
So there are signs of what's coming to the United States.
Some of the most extreme systemic repression of political speech has taken place in Brazil, which is being used as a laboratory specifically by the EU to see how far they can go.
And while we have reported many times on censorship in Brazil, earlier today we received news of one of the most extreme and truly shocking, the most extreme cases of political censorship we have ever seen.
We'll tell you all about it.
As a reminder, a few programming notes before we get to our show.
First of all, yesterday marked the one-year anniversary of the launch of System Update.
We launched our premiere show on December 12, 2022, so last night marked exactly one year But we decided instead to commemorate this by celebrating our 200th show which will be on Friday night and for that 200th show we'll be devoting the entire program to a discussion with the former Fox News host Tucker Carlson who just announced the creation of the Tucker Carlson Network.
We'll speak to him about that but also about A lot of other issues involving U.S.
foreign policy, the international right-wing populist movement, U.S.
economic policy, and many other things.
It'll be a truly enlightening discussion.
I can barely think of a better person to talk to to commemorate our 200th episode.
That'll be Friday night, so look for that.
As a reminder, System Update is also available in podcast form, where you can listen to each episode in podcast version on Spotify, Apple, and all of the major podcasting platforms.
Each episode posts there 12 hours after their first broadcast live here on Rumble, and if you rate, review, and follow the show on those platforms, it really helps spread the visibility of the program.
As a final reminder, every Tuesday and Thursday night, once we're done with our live show here on Rumble, we move to our interactive aftershow on Locals, which is part of the Rumble platform, where we take your questions, respond to your feedback and critiques, hear your suggestions for future shows.
Those aftershows are available exclusively for members of our Locals community, for subscribers, and if you want to become a subscriber, Which not only gives you access to those twice a week after shows where we have this interaction with our audience, but also to the daily transcripts of every program that we produce here.
We publish a fully professionalized transcript each day on the Locals platform.
It's also a place where we have a weekly thread where we have comments and questions from our readers that I do my best to spend as much time as I can answering.
It's really designed to be an interactive dialogue with our audience.
It's the place where we will publish all original journalism.
And most of all, it's really the community, the platform that is crucial to supporting the independent journalism that we do here.
As you know, relying on advertisers, as Twitter or X just learned, can be extremely limiting because if you rely only on advertisers, you are constrained by the outer boundaries of speech they permit.
And so relying on our audience through subscriptions is really the most critical way that we're able to do the independent journalism that we do here.
If you want to become a member of our Locust community, simply click the Join button.
President Zelensky is doing a little tour and I have to say I don't really blame him.
you to our locals community for now welcome to a new episode of system update starting right now president zelensky is doing a little tour and i have to say i don't really blame him there's all bad news in ukraine the russians are on the offense the
The Ukrainians have been completely incapable of breaking through the front line of the Russians' defensive positions.
That front line has barely moved.
The Russians, or the Ukrainians rather, have been able to gain almost no new territory throughout all of 2023, despite losing tens of thousands of young Ukrainian men, all of whom are conscripts, many of whom were forced to go to the front line and serve as cannon fodder.
Populations in the United States and the West are increasingly turning against funding this war, in part because they have fatigue, in part because they have so many problems at home that they'd rather use their resources to take care of, but also in part because they're seeing that so many of the promises that were made to them about what this war would be have turned out, once again, to be deceitful.
And at the same time, President Zelensky's closest political allies in Kiev are now turning against him.
Warning the Western media that this war is failing, that only President Zelensky, who's delusional, doesn't realize this, and now increasingly complaining that he is becoming increasingly messianic and totalitarian and autocratic in his mentality and his intolerance for dissent.
We've covered all of these developments in the Ukraine war over the course of really the last two years, over the course of the last several months.
As the counteroffensive failed last night, we delved in deeply into the refusal of the Congress to provide more funds thus far.
It seems as though the Biden administration is willing to make some hardcore concessions to give the Republicans what Democrats have been calling fascist measures to secure the border in order to extract another $60 billion from House Republicans to send to Ukraine, but the news is all bad for Zelensky.
Earlier today he appeared on Fox News Live where he was questioned by a very sympathetic Bret Baier.
Fox News has, especially with Tucker Carlson gone, been almost entirely fully supportive of Joe Biden's war policy in Ukraine.
It's amazing to watch the largest conservative media outlet cheer President Biden's war policy in Ukraine just like they're cheering his war policy in Israel.
It really shows you that when it comes to foreign policy in this country, there's really no difference between the establishment wings of both parties.
Even on China, President Biden has been very aggressive.
The first president in decades to explicitly threaten China with war if they invade Taiwan.
We've always had a policy of strategic ambiguity where presidents don't say.
And Biden, whether through conviction or senility, has multiple times threatened China with war.
He has expanded the strategy of militarily encircling China with military bases in the Philippines, in South Korea, in Japan, in the South China Sea, in the Philippines, doing deals in Australia to augment significantly the US military presence there.
If you look at the map, China is surrounded by US planes and bases encircled.
And so it's very hard if you're a conservative or an establishment Republican to find grounds for criticizing Joe Biden's foreign policy.
And Fox News, especially the kind of mainstream pro-establishment component of Fox News, which is most of them now that Tucker's gone, certainly include Brett Baier, clearly is in favor of Zelensky and the war in Ukraine.
And yet, Brett Baier did his job, which he usually does, of asking some hard questions, even in the gentlest way.
And he specifically confronted President Zelensky on these accusations from his own allies in Ukraine that he's becoming an autocrat.
And listen for yourself to what President Zelensky said in his own defense.
We need to play this video.
There are critics who say that you've tried to consolidate power.
Headlines that the Orthodox leader in Kiev under house arrest, that you consolidated Ukraine's TV outlets, that you ruled out holding elections next spring, calling for unity, but then the mayor of Kiev says that you're turning it into a authoritarian state.
How do you deal with that criticism?
What do you say to critics who are saying that?
Now, if you listen to that tone, I mean, if this were some sort of U.S.
adversary, Bret Baier would be raising his voice, he'd be very aggressive.
You can see his posture, he's very comforting, very loving.
He says, look, you know, you have these people, they're criticizing you, they're saying you're autocratic.
Well, what do you have to say, Mr. President?
Let's listen to his answer.
I say, such person from government or mayors, think about the war, think about how to defend our people.
Don't travel through the world each day.
Travel to the front line.
Ask people, ask soldiers what they need.
Do this.
Not build roads for today.
Don't do it.
Spend all your money to the weapon, to the drones, to the society, to the pensions and etc.
And don't cry.
Because you are leaders.
And that's it.
That's why we are.
And that's why we stay.
Because mostly people are not crying.
People stay and fight against Putin.
And we don't have any enemies in our country.
We can't have time for this.
And we don't have it.
We have only one enemy.
This is Putin.
And that's it.
But you'll stand for democracy going forward?
Yes, of course.
And of course, because we are really defending democracy and we are really defending freedom.
Mr. President, we appreciate your time and we'll continue to follow the war.
Thank you so much.
I mean, that's such an amazing exchange on so many levels.
Bret Baier didn't just say there are people accusing you of being a tyrant.
He listed specific actions President Zelensky has taken that we almost always consider autocratic.
First of all, even before the Russian invasion, in 2021, Zelensky closed opposition media outlets claiming that they were pro-Russian.
Since the invasion, he has banned all opposition political parties.
He has shut down the rest of the opposition media outlets that criticize him.
He has ordered churches closed and arrested heads of churches, including some of the oldest churches in Ukraine of the Orthodox Church.
There's an American citizen who's a pundit and YouTuber who's criticized Zelensky, who's in a dungeon, disappeared for the crime of criticizing Zelensky.
These brave soldiers, he claims, are going to the front line to fight Putin, are in fact being forced, dragged off buses and out of their workplaces, even though they're middle-aged and they don't want to fight, to go and fight.
He's put deserters in prison for many, many years.
He's canceled elections.
So you had Brett Baier identify, itemize all of the basis for the obviously valid accusation that President Zelensky is becoming, or has become, a full-scale dictator, a tyrant, anything but democratic.
And you saw, you heard, President Zelensky did not try and deny any of that.
He instead invoked the mentality of a dictator.
He said, look, we don't have time for dissent.
We can't have internal debates.
We can't have internal criticisms.
No one should be criticizing me.
We have one enemy and that's Vladimir Putin and we're all unified and marching behind me to attack Putin.
In other words, he didn't deny the case against him that he's a tyrant.
He affirmed it.
He justified it by saying there can be no dissent.
And then because Fox News is so pro-Ukraine war, And I am absolutely convinced, based on everything that I know, and I've talked about this before, that one of the reasons Tucker Carlson had his show cancelled, despite having record ratings, despite being the anchor of that audience that he brought into Fox that nobody has or can replace,
Despite having no real scandals in his background, liberals will say he was the one who was responsible for the large defamation judgment against Fox that Fox actually agreed to pay against Dominion when it's just not true.
We've gone over this before.
Tucker was not only one of the people not pushing the election fraud claims, he was debunking it in real time.
By calling Sidney Powell a liar, by saying she had no evidence for her claims, by highlighting the fact that they had called her onto his show where he wanted to ask her where's the evidence for these extraordinary claims and she refused to go on.
So he didn't have the kind of scandal of sexual harassment that brought down Bill O'Reilly or Roger Ailes.
He didn't have a problem with ratings, quite the contrary.
When Tucker Carlson was cancelled, His show is cancelled.
Republicans in Congress and in the Senate, the establishment Republicans, like the cowards that they are, ran to Politico and other outlets like that in D.C.
and celebrated Tucker's cancellation.
They said this cancellation, the fact that Tucker Carlson is off the air, has made our lives so much easier.
Because of how much success he has had in convincing our voters to turn against the Ukraine war.
We want to fund the Ukraine war, but Tucker has played a major role in convincing right-wing and conservative and Republican voters that that war is not in their interest.
That was a major source of anger.
On the part of cowardly Republicans who would never put their name on that accusation publicly, but ran like little mice to Politico and said, please give me anonymity so that I can talk freely about how happy I am that Tucker Carlson is gone.
Fox News is owned by the Murdochs, who have always been more neoconservative, who have always supported all of the wars of the Bush-Cheney administration.
They're trying to take back control of the Republican Party, wrench it out of the hands of the populists, the Trump-led anti-interventionists, and put it back into the hands of people like Nikki Haley.
And getting Hucker off the air was crucial because he was one of the few people that lots of people trusted.
Republicans listen to Sean Hannity and other hosts on Fox, but these are already hardcore Republicans.
Tucker was attracting a much more diverse crowd, a younger crowd, and he was having a big effect in a negative way from their perspective.
So now that Tucker's gone, Fox is all in again on the war in Ukraine.
And so Bret Baier, who is very capable of conducting aggressive interviews, he usually doesn't let people evade his very direct question, sat there and listened to Zelensky ignore every item that Bret Baier cited as evidence for why Zelensky has become authoritarian.
And instead of following up, he used this like baby voice, this comforting voice to say, but you are going to continue to keep Ukraine democratic, right?
And Zelensky, again, didn't even take that chance and say, oh, yeah, I'm going to keep Ukraine democratic.
He said, we're fighting for democracy.
We're fighting for the democratic world.
That's why you have to give us our money.
Now, maybe you want to fight the war in Ukraine, even though you think and agree that Zelensky has become a dictator.
And again, he closed opposition media outlets before the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, not only after.
But you saw this interview, which is very reflective of how Zelensky has been treated in Washington, like some sort of hero who cannot be questioned, even as he keeps sticking his hand further and further and further into the bowels of the American treasury and taking and taking and taking.
Now, it was amazing to watch that Zelensky be so explicit about what he has become and Fox News fairly challenging him.
One of the primary grievances of American conservatives and the American right over many years has been the attempt by all kinds of groups in the United States to separate themselves based on their demographic characteristics, to declare themselves vulnerable minority groups who are endangered, to say that they feel unsafe, and therefore censorship is required to protect them.
They mock almost every group that has made those claims.
Black people and Latinos and Muslims and immigrants and trans people and LGBTs.
And although I don't believe in that kind of mockery, I've been largely on their side in this, in battling this idea that you have major minority groups inside the United States who are endangered in their lives.
You have all these kind of drama queen gestures.
Remember the NAACP issued a travel advisory warning for black people to avoid Florida?
You had LGBT groups doing this sort of the same thing.
And all of this left-liberal censorship for years has been based in the view that black people, trans people, et cetera, feel unsafe because right-wing speech on policing and race and affirmative action and immigration and the right of people to access gender-affirming care, that that right-wing speech is a call for violence and makes these people feel unsafe.
And that's why it should be abandoned.
The right has mocked that viciously.
And yet, since October 7th, there has been a narrative that has set in, led largely by the Anti-Defamation League, that holds that the real victim group in the United States are American Jews.
Even though American Jews are very well represented, in fact, disproportionately represented in almost every major institution of power and authority and elite culture in the United States, even though they are among the highest income earning groups, The ADL will say, well, they also were well positioned to Nazi Germany.
Everything is Nazi Germany.
And another Holocaust is around the corner.
American Jews can't go outside.
Now, I've had Israel supporters on my show who have heaped scorn on this, but the ADL lives off this kind of narrative.
This is not new.
They've not only been doing it since October 7th.
They demanded Tucker Carlson be fired by claiming he's a white nationalist who's anti-semitic.
They accused the Trump administration of being anti-semitic.
They accused the basketball player Kylie Irving of being anti-semitic and only stopped once he gave them $500,000 because he recommended or liked a book on Amazon that the ADL said had anti-semitic ideas.
This is the business they're in.
And for a while, the American right hated the ADL.
In fact, before October 7th, there was a hashtag campaign that they circulated, hashtag ban the ADL, that trended on Twitter because the ADL was accusing Elon Musk of being anti-semitic.
But now, after October 7th, a lot of people who were former critics of the ADL are very much supportive of what the ADL is doing in creating this victim and narrative.
No, black people aren't Vulnerable minorities in the United States.
Trans people aren't vulnerable minorities.
Latinos and Muslims aren't.
Immigrants aren't.
Only American Jews are.
That's the real minority group that's endangered and therefore we need all these measures to protect them.
And one of the ways the ADL has been doing this to create this narrative a major way is by playing games with what anti-semitism is and what hate speech or rather hate crime statistics show.
Now, all kinds of groups that defend or purport to represent minority groups have been using hate crime statistics to support those other narratives and use all kinds of name-playing because most of it is self-reported.
So if a member of a minority group feels a quote microaggression and they report that as them being the victim of racist abuse, that gets counted as a hate crime or a hate attack and the statistics go up.
And most people are willing to say that and are capable of seeing that until it comes to this post-October 7th narrative about American Jews.
And yet you can watch as the ADL manipulates these statistics to create this narrative.
We're going to show you what they've done and you can decide for yourself.
So here's the ADL just recently, in fact, Monday, December 11th, with a new report.
ADL reports unprecedented rise in anti-Semitic incidents post-October 7th.
Now here's what they say, they mean by this.
Between October 7th and December 7th, ADL recorded a total of 2,000, I don't know if I'm going to be able to, yeah I can't do this.
So recorded a total of 2,031 anti-Semitic incidents.
Up from 465 incidents during the same period in 2022, representing a 337% increase year over year, this includes 40 incidents of physical assault.
increase year over year.
This includes 40 incidents of physical assault.
So of the purported number, which is 2031, 40 incidents of physical assault, Which is... I...
Something like 20%.
And actually, I'm sorry, it's 2%.
It's 2% of the overall incidents.
337 incidents of vandalism, 749 incidents of verbal or written harassment, and 905 rallies, including anti-Semitic rhetoric, expressions of support for terrorism against the State of Israel, and or anti-Zionism.
No, what they really mean by this, this 905 rallies are just rallies against the state of Israel, criticizing Israel for its bombing campaign in Gaza.
And of course, there's a lot more people in the last two months expressing criticism of Israel because the Israel-Palestine issue was on the back burner.
Many people weren't discussing it.
It was basically being ignored.
Until Israel started a bombing campaign in Gaza that, according to Haaretz today, the Israeli newspaper, is of historic proportions in terms of how many civilians it's killing and the rate of civilian death and suffering.
And 995 of these 2,000 or so hate crime incidents that the ADL says have been recorded in the last two months, so that's basically 50%, Are just rallies, political rallies, against the state of Israel.
You're allowed to criticize Israel.
You're allowed, if you're an American citizen, to have a rally against the actions of the Israeli government, especially since it's the United States funding that war.
And it doesn't make you guilty of anti-Semitism, let alone an anti-Semitic hate crime.
And yet the ADL is counting political rallies that criticize Israel as an example of anti-semitic hate crimes to claim an unprecedented increase in anti-semitism.
Do you see this conflation?
This is what American conservatives have claimed to hate forever.
The attempt to characterize dissent to the left liberal agenda as bigotry.
Oh, if you're against affirmative action, it means you're racist and you should be banned from campus because you make black people feel unsafe.
If you're against immigration, it means you're a white nationalist that makes Latinos unsafe and therefore have to be banned from campus.
And if you criticize the state of Israel and its war in Gaza, it means you're anti-Semitic, guilty of an anti-Semitic hate crime and have to be banned from campus.
It's the same exact tactic, being weaponized and deployed for a different cause.
Here's the ADL in 2021.
They had a backgrounder on anti-Zionism.
And here's what they say.
Quote, anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic in intent or effect as it invokes anti-Jewish tropes, is used to disenfranchise, demonize, disparage, or punish all Jews and or those who feel a connection to Israel.
equates Zionism with Nazism and other genocidal regimes and renders Jews less worthy of sovereignty and nationhood than other peoples and states.
And that is just an explicit admission that they count an anti-Semitic hate crime as being an expression of an ideological view.
Zionism is an ideology that did not exist until the early part of the 20th century.
The founder is generally regarded to be Theodor Herzl, who was a political scientist and philosopher and Jewish writer in the early 20th century.
Zionism is a fairly new ideology.
There are a lot of Jews who oppose Zionism, including religious Jews.
And the idea that someone can be against a state, the state of Israel, which is an ethno-state based on the supremacy of the Jewish people, is something a person could have as a generalized view, that I'm against ethno-states or countries organized based on demographic identity.
And yet, that is the ACLU acknowledging that An anti-Semitic hate crime can be counted if somebody expresses an ideology, namely anti-Zionism.
Now, are there some people who are anti-Zionist and also anti-Semitic, or maybe even who are anti-Zionist because they're anti-Semitic?
Absolutely.
There are some anti-Zionists who definitely are anti-Semitic.
There are some people who are opposed to immigration because they're white nationalists, that is for sure.
The person who went and shot up an African American grocery store in Buffalo wrote a manifesto saying he's against immigration because he believes that only white people should be in the United States.
So you do have some opposition to immigration by people who are white nationalists.
That does not mean that all opposition to immigration is due to white nationalism or racism.
Identically, just because some people who are anti-Zionist are anti-Semitic does not mean that all anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic or comes from anti-Semitism.
And yet the ADL has exploited this very stinging accusation of anti-Semitism to try and claim that unless you support the State of Israel, you are anti-Semitic.
And so when you hear about this increase in hate crimes, what the ADL means, what the ADL is counting is that every time there's a mark that is critical of the state of Israel or opposes the state of Israel, and obviously there are more of those in the last two months since Israel started bombing Gaza in a way that we haven't quite seen a country bomb a civilian population in many years, of course there's an increase in marches against Israel and the ADL counts that as an increase in anti-Semitic hate crimes.
That's where this narrative is coming from, a conflation of a political view with bigotry, which is exactly what the American right has spent years claiming they hate when the left does.
Now, one of the major expressions of a political view that has increasingly been counted, not only as anti-Semitic, but as genocidal, is the longstanding Palestinian chant that Palestinians shall be free from the river to the sea.
Now, is it true that some people who say, I want Palestinians to be free from the river to the sea, mean by that, I want to eliminate the state of Israel, and I want to eliminate the state of Israel, not peacefully, not through legal means, not by going to the international community and rewriting the map, as has been done many times in the past.
For example, when Israel was created, the map was rewritten.
After World War I, with the fall of the Ottoman Empire, maps were rewritten, peacefully, often.
There are people who chant from the river to the sea who are anti-semitic and want to do violence against Israel, which is a state, not against all Jews, but against that country.
But some people who chant from the river to the sea mean they want Palestinians in Israel and the West Bank and Gaza to be free.
This phrase, from the river to the sea, is also Part of the Likud, which is Netanyahu's party, the Likud Charter, which says that Greater Israel is composed of all territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, from the river to the sea, which includes Gaza and the West Bank and Israel.
That's how that phrase has been used for decades.
So again, can that phrase be anti-Semitic?
Can it be from someone who wants to do violence against Jews in Israel?
Yes.
Does it have to be that?
No.
And to show you how clear that is, only recently did the ADL proclaim this phrase from the river to the sea to be anti-Semitic.
Here is what the ADL site in May of 2022, just over a year ago, looked like.
This is before they changed it.
Here's a backgrounder.
On this phrase, from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.
This is from the ADL.
And they did not claim at the time that it was anti-Semitic.
If you look at the original version, which we can put up on the screen, they say, from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free, is a slogan commonly featured in pro-Palestinian campaigns and chanted at demonstrations.
It didn't say it was anti-semitic.
It just said that.
Then one on.
Then one on.
It was only in 2023, after October 7th, October 26th, 2023, when that got updated.
Here you see allegations from the River to the Sea Palestine will be free.
Now the EDL site reads, From the River to the Sea Palestine will be free is an anti-Semitic slogan commonly featured in anti-Israel campaigns and chanted at demonstrations.
So only since October 7th have they revised Their view of this phrase to now define it as anti-semitism, which means that anytime there's a rally and somebody chants, from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free, this now counts as an expression of anti-semitism or an anti-semitic hate crime.
That's why there has been this alleged explosion in anti-semitism because of how anti-semitism is being defined, increasingly to include not attacks on Jewish people, Certainly not physical attacks or even personal assaults, violent assaults or verbal assaults on Jewish people.
But many of the incidents by the ADL's own reckoning that they're counting as anti-Semitic hate speech or anti-Semitic hate crimes means political rallies at which Israel is criticized or Zionism is opposed.
Which again, the ADL decided to characterize as anti-Semitic only in the last few weeks when they saw this opportunity.
to start censoring at college campuses on the grounds that college campuses can't allow anti-Semitism, meaning can't allow the kinds of criticisms of Israel that the First Amendment unquestionably protects, and yet there's now a large movement behind the ADL to ban in the name of censoring to protect Israel.
There have been, by the way, fabricated allegations of hate crimes as well against American Jews that have been classified as anti-Semitism that either proved to have no evidence or proved even to be false.
Here, for example, from the Times of Israel, November 30th.
A pair of swastikas that were spotted at pro-Palestinian rally at New York City Christmas tree lighting.
One demonstrator who signed depicted Nazi symbol and the words Israeli military were kicked out by other individuals.
Another sign compared Jews to Nazis.
Now this is so often what's done.
If you have a pro-Palestinian protest and somebody holds up a Nazi sign, a swastika, It will immediately be alleged that this proves that there are advocates of Nazi ideology at pro-Palestinian rallies, and they immediately get characterized as anti-Semitic or Nazis.
When in reality, the reason people are carrying Nazi symbols is not to support Nazi ideology, but to compare what Israel is doing in Gaza to what the Nazis did to countries in World War II, including Jews.
Now you may not agree with that comparison, you may find that comparison offensive, but you see how this is being deliberately distorted?
Someone sees a pro-Palestinian march, they see a Nazi symbol, and they say, oh look, there's actual Nazis at this march.
People advocating for Nazi ideology, people cheering Nazism.
When in reality, they hate Nazism, and the reason they're carrying that sign is to accuse the Israeli military of Replicating what the Nazis did to the Jews.
In fact, that's what the article says.
Quote, one demonstrator held a sign with the Nazi symbol and the words, Israeli military.
Obviously what they're saying is the Israeli military is engaged in Nazi-like genocide against the Palestinian people.
Not that Nazism is good.
The protester was forcibly objected from the event by other individuals who shouted at him and trampled his sign, prompting police to intervene.
Another protester carried a sign that compared Jews to Nazis via a blood-splattered swastika intertwined with the Star of David and the words, quote, the irony of becoming what you once hated.
Now, again, feel free to say that that is political rhetoric gone too far.
Everyone's constantly being compared to Nazis in American political discourse.
Donald Trump is.
Tucker Carlson has been.
American conservatives are.
Vladimir Putin is.
Iran is.
Hamas is.
So this is just another example of comparing a political enemy to Nazis by saying the IDF is carrying out the kinds of violence against civilians that define what Nazism is.
And they're saying, you've become what you hate.
They're not advocating Nazism.
And yet so often that's how these things get interpreted by people who are trying to manufacture this narrative that there's this anti-Semitism crisis that justifies or necessitates censorship in the United States.
That's the EDL's game.
Here's another example of how this is done from the Jerusalem Post, November 10th.
There was graffiti found at the University of Maryland that was allegedly put there by Palestinian activists, student activists, that read Holocaust 2.0.
And there you see the image on the screen, Holocaust 2.0.
And there was an immediate effort to claim that what this graffiti meant is that we're advocating a second Holocaust against American Jews.
I suppose it could mean that.
It's just graffiti completely out of context.
But far more likely what this means, given that it's a march and a protest against what the Israeli military is doing in Gaza, is an allegation that the Holocaust 2.0, this time is one being carried out by the State of Israel against Palestinians in Gaza.
It's not a call for Jews to be murdered en masse in a Holocaust.
And if this were any other minority group on whose behalf stuff like this is being done to claim that there was a crisis of racism or transphobia or black people or Latinos or trans people were endangered and that censorship and other forms of campus protection were needed to shield them from these feelings of unsafety, the American right, many of the people who have become part of the intellectual dark web, people who have built their careers on being anti-woke, would be mocking this mercilessly.
But because the group that is now being depicted as a unique victim is not some other group with which they have no empathy or identity, but the group to which they belong, suddenly it's, oh no, we have to take this very seriously.
This is the real victim group, American Jews.
We have to rewrite speech codes on college campuses to protect them and they're being led by the ADL and their deceitful methods.
Here, the last paragraph of this article, if we can go back, footage also shows the students chanting, quote, there is only one solution, intifada revolution.
No, we've been over that a million times.
Intifada, can that mean violence?
Yes, it can mean violence.
Does it have to mean violence?
No, it's the Arabic word for uprising.
And when Palestinians talk about Intifada, what they mean is an uprising or resistance against Israeli occupation.
Again, it's like opposition to immigration.
It can be racist, it sometimes is racist, but it's not inherently racist.
Newsweek this week claimed that Yale University removed the word Israeli from the salad in the Yale dining room, the couscous salad.
And this viralized.
On X, formerly Twitter, user Sahar Tartak shared a post that said, quote, at Yale, the years old popular Israeli couscous salad with spinach and tomatoes has been renamed in our dining halls as the same exact dish, but without the word Israeli to try and show that anti-Semitism is rampant on American college campuses.
Because everyone knows that Jews are incredibly underrepresented in the Ivy League schools and in the administration of Harvard and Yale.
No Jews to be found anywhere.
There's a crisis of anti-Semitism.
They won't even allow that salad to remain named after Israel, said this person whose claim went viral by people who are neurotically insistent that there's an anti-Semitism crisis and we're eager to believe that with no evidence.
A Yale student, Victor Kagan, Went that day and tweeted, good afternoon from a Yale dining hall.
And here you see the menu that says Israeli couscous salad with spinach and tomatoes.
Exactly how it's always been.
It hasn't been changed at all.
It was a manufactured claim like so many of these to try and create a censorship, anti-Semitism crisis in order to usher in a rewriting of speech codes.
Now, one of the things that happened after that congressional hearing where the three presidents of Penn, MIT, and Harvard appeared, and Elise Stefanik, the Republican congresswoman from New York, questioned them about whether advocacy of genocide of Jews would be in violation of the speech codes or the code of conduct.
And because the context for this discussion was the attempt to conflate Israel criticism More calls for intifada or free Palestine chants or from the river to the sea chants with genocide.
They were unwilling to try and just say with no caveats that is banned because they know people like Elise Stefanik and the ADL are trying to define, redefine genocide against Jews to involve almost any criticism of Israel.
And that's why they were saying it depends on the context.
We won't ban pure political speech, but we will ban conduct.
If you go up to a Jewish student repeatedly, if you target their dorm room and post things on their door to cry and create an environment where they feel intimidated or personally targeted, that's conduct.
But if you write an op-ed or have a political protest criticizing Israel, chanting Palestinians will be free, that's pure political speech and they won't censor it.
That was the whole context for that discussion.
And yet, And yet, when I started defending the idea that there should be no censorship on college campuses and that conservatives and pro-Israel Republicans are being hypocrites for pretending to believe in free speech and now suddenly turning around and using this kind of narrative and these kind of tactics when I started defending the idea that there should be no censorship on college campuses and that conservatives and pro-Israel Republicans are being hypocrites for pretending to believe in
That of course is free speech.
But you can't go around chanting, gas the Jews, and kill all Jews, because that's genocide.
That's advocacy of genocide.
That's beyond the free speech line.
Now, under the First Amendment doctrine as interpreted by the Supreme Court, it is definitely not beyond the free speech line.
You could say, I think black people are such a menace that it's time to kill them all.
I think Jews have become so violent that you should kill them all.
I think trans people should be put in camps.
Now, the reason people don't say those things is because there's a huge social sanction.
If you go around saying, I think Jews should be killed, I think black people, it's justified to kill black people or put trans people in death camps.
But you couldn't be prosecuted by the state for it.
And these universities have said that their free speech policy is consistent with the First Amendment doctrines.
But the more important point is that there are no people on American college campuses going around chanting, gas the Jews and kill all Jews.
This is a fabrication.
The United States has had a debate over the last two weeks based in a belief That there's hordes of students on American College's campuses running around chanting, gas the Jews and kill all Jews.
And I have asked hundreds of people now, as I talked about on the show last night, show me examples of this happening.
And nobody could.
Not only is it not an epidemic, I couldn't even find one example.
Usually you can find one example.
There have been hate crimes.
There was a student at Cornell who made threats.
But there's no student groups or protests where gas the Jews or kill all Jews is being chanted.
This is a fabrication.
It is a fake scandal.
It's a hypothetical discussion that has convinced millions of people that this is some epidemic on college campuses, even though it's not.
And so finally, I kept asking and asking and asking.
And the one thing people would say is, oh, well, there was a protest in Australia a few weeks ago.
Where people chanted, gas the Jews.
And obviously that's not an answer to the question about whether that's happening on American college campuses.
And you can find all kinds of extreme and hateful statements being made as part of any cause.
We've shown you the videos before of Israeli, of pro-Israel protesters saying, flatten Gaza, turn Gaza into a parking lot, kill all Arabs.
There are people in the Israeli government, not random street protesters, but in the Israeli government who explicitly advocate the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, removing all Palestinians, all Arabs out of Gaza and the West Bank and having Israel take it over.
So you can find hateful statements in any group.
You can find racist chants.
There are white racists who have gone and massacred black people in Charleston, South Carolina at a church in Buffalo, New York at a supermarket at Jacksonville, Florida.
But we don't accept the claim, most of us don't, that because there's massacres against black people that now we need censorship protection against criticisms or dissent from supposedly pro-black ideology.
You're allowed to do that.
But there were no isolated examples of people chanting this on American campuses.
So the claim was, oh, this happened once in Australia.
As it turns out, It's very dubious, according to a Australian newspaper, whether or not that even happened.
Here is Kriki.com, a pretty mainstream, well-regarded news site in Australia.
Today, there you see the headline, viral footage showed protesters chanting, gas the Jews.
Nobody can verify it.
Edited videos from the Australian Jewish Association prompted global outrage, but further evidence corroborating its claims has not emerged.
They showed a video that I've watched many times of people chanting and they put on the screen as though they were quoting the protesters gas the Jews and it didn't sound like that.
And now there's been an investigation and in fact this claim went so viral that Australian officials banned pro-Palestinian protests based on this claim.
A major free speech violation.
And yet, here's Kriki.
Quote, based on these videos, news outlets around the world published reports of the, quote, gas the Jews chants, including Reuters, which noted that the video was, quote, unverified.
The New York Post and Fox News.
In the aftermath of the protest, NSW police rejected an application for a subsequent pro-Palestine protest.
Premier Chris Minns declared that activists would not be allowed to, quote, commandeer our streets.
Although future protests were approved and have taken place and his government introduced legislation to quote strengthen hate speech laws by making it easier to prosecute people who threaten or incite violence against protected groups.
Do you see what's happening here?
All of these people who have claimed to oppose censorship are now feeding into the censorship regime.
By giving these people another round of pretext for censorship.
Oh, there's an anti-Semitism crisis in the world.
We have to punish more aggressively hate speech.
The newspaper goes on, quote, but despite the enormous amount of attention and considerable response to the report, third parties have been unable to verify the, quote, gas the Jews claim.
And further footage corroborating the chants has failed to emerge.
Crickey has reviewed other footage from the protests captured by other attendees, but has been unable to find any corroboration of the Australian Jewish Association's claims.
So often this is what's happening is some claim viralizes on Twitter and people get convinced that it's true.
There was some out of context footage at Cooper Union and this claim that Jewish students were being terrorized by a roving mob and locked into a library where they had to bar the doors.
And some Israel supporter narrated this whole thing.
And added all sorts of things that weren't evident in the video and this went viral disbelief.
And then the New York Police Department, which obviously is part of a government in New York City that is very pro-Israel.
You can't become New York Mayor unless you're very pro-Israel.
I don't think people think the New York City Police Department is woke or left wing.
Nobody has ever suggested that.
The chief of the New York City Police Department had a press conference that we showed you before, where he said, we investigated and nobody issued violent threats.
Nobody was in danger.
It's constant hyperbole, constant exaggeration, even fabrication.
And you can do this with anything online.
Here at Harvard, yesterday,
A Palestinian woman was walking with a Palestinian headdress and not some random person, but the wife of Jason Furman, who was a full professor at Harvard's Kennedy School and was a former Obama administration advisor, walked out and just started calling her a terrorist and harassing her for walking in their neighborhood with what they called a terrorist scarf.
Let's look at this video.
between you and people who wanted to murder you.
Hi, camera.
Thank you for walking through neighborhoods and making families feel unsafe with your tourist skirt.
Palestinians felt pretty unsafe when Israelis occupied their country.
You know, I'm not.
So that was just a Palestinian woman walking on a street at Harvard and the wife of a very prominent professor, a former Obama administration official came out and started yelling at her about walking through the neighborhood with a terrorist scarf by which she just meant a Palestinian scarf.
Now, Now imagine if instead of being the wife of a Professor who did that to a Palestinian wearing a Palestinian scarf.
A wife of a Harvard professor had come out and screamed at a Jewish student walking with religious garb of Jews or a shirt with the Israeli flag on it and just started screaming at this person.
How dare you walk through our neighborhood with this genocidal flag?
This would be a major national scandal.
This would be held up as more proof that Jews are unsafe.
They can't even walk on the street.
And we've had a lot of incidents like this.
Remember there was a former Obama national security official.
Who was going around to random Arab street vendors and threatening them with deportation saying we're gonna have your father arrested by the Egyptian torture regime that we control and support and his fingernails are gonna be removed.
You can make any faction look hateful by singling out the worst people.
American Jews are not in danger any more than American black people are or American trans people are or American immigrants are or American Muslims are.
You're going to have hate crimes.
You're going to have people saying terrible things about all groups.
But what the ADL is doing is what they always do, which is they are manipulating these definitions of anti-semitism to include criticism of Israel and There is a media attempt to create this perception, trying to scare American Jews into believing they can't walk on streets safely.
And now you have politicians demanding the rewriting of speech codes at campuses.
This has been the greatest week for censorship on college campuses, or this greatest month for censorship on college campuses, for the idea that minority groups in the United States are endangered.
That I think we've seen, at least since the George Floyd protests, and so many of the people who claim to be against this have been cheering it and are marching behind the ADL.
Use skepticism in terms of what you're seeing.
Now, speaking of skepticism, it's actually the perfect segue into our last segment because, as we just showed you, President Zelensky is in Washington, desperately trying to get this latest $60 billion, facing a lot of opposition from Republicans in Congress, from public opinion that is eroding quickly against the war.
And lo and behold, we have the perfect leak from the security state.
Published by the New York Times and CNN and every other media outlet, that is the perfect claim if you want to convince people to just keep funding the war in Ukraine.
Here, CNN reports, quote, Russia has lost 87% of its troops that it had prior to the start of the Ukraine war, according to U.S.
intelligence assessment.
The assessment sent to Capitol Hill on Monday comes as some Republicans have balked at the U.S.
providing additional funding for Ukraine, and the Biden administration has launched a full-court press to try to get supplemental spending through Congress.
Of the 360,000 troops that made up Russia's pre-invasion ground force, including contract and conscript personnel, Russia has lost 315,000 on the battlefield, according to the assessment.
2,000 of 3,500 tanks have been lost, according to the assessment.
4,400 of 13,600 infantry, fighting vehicles, and armored personnel carriers have also been destroyed, a 32% loss rate.
Quote, as of late November, Russia lost over a quarter of its pre-invasion stockpiles of ground force equipment, the assessment reads.
This has reduced the complexity and scale of Russian offensive operations.
Which have failed to make major gains in Ukraine since early 2002.
Now, first of all, anytime you have an anonymous intelligence report that perfectly aligns with the war aims of the U.S.
security state, the only rational thing to do is to disbelieve it, to subject it to extreme skepticism because of how many times the U.S.
security state has lied using exactly these methods.
The U.S.
security state lied the country into the Vietnam War with a fabricated claim about North Vietnamese aggression in the Gulf of Tonkin.
It lied the United States into war in Iraq.
It lied the country into staying in wars in Syria and Libya.
It's lied continuously about the war in Ukraine.
And seeing how many people just instantly believe things like this.
First of all, if the Russian military is really as destroyed as this report suggests, why haven't the Ukrainians been able to break through their defensive lines?
They're claiming that their military is basically destroyed.
They have no people left.
No military equipment left.
Why then With hundreds of billions of dollars from the West and all the most sophisticated equipment that the West can give, Ukraine has Ukraine lost ground in 2023.
If the Russian military is really disintegrating to this extent, this is obviously propaganda designed to convince people, oh, just hang on, keep funding Ukraine because they're very close to destroying the Russian army.
And yet nothing in the war suggests that's true.
And it's just unbelievable to watch how many people still are conditioned To just uncritically ingest whatever the U.S.
security state disseminates through the media.
If you want to see how blatantly advocates of the Ukraine war are willing to lie, how desperate they're getting, here is Congressman Jim Himes, a Democrat from Connecticut, on the House floor, and you can hear the desperation in his voice.
Listen to what he says is true about the war in Ukraine and the Republicans' refusal to Send money without any safeguards at least on where the money is being spent.
And if we accede to where half of the Republican majority is today, which is that we're not going to support Ukraine in this fight, Putin will not stop.
And soon the United States will have no choice but to step in to stop Vladimir Putin.
We hear these excuses.
There's not enough accounting.
There's not enough oversight.
We didn't hear that when we were supporting the Afghani regime.
Profoundly corrupt.
We didn't hear that about Iraq.
We're only hearing that about Ukraine.
We hear that we would like to know what the plan is for victory in Ukraine.
Did anybody ask Winston Churchill, the hero of World War II, what his plan for victory was?
No, they did not because he wasn't sure.
But we stood by him because he stood for liberty and he stood for the moral clarity that this institution has now lost.
If we think for one moment that Putin is the only one who is enjoying this moment, think about what President Xi of China is learning.
Think about what the Iranian mullahs are seeing.
Think about what the North Korean dictator is coming to understand.
That this Congress, when faced with the demand that we fight for liberty and freedom, we cut and run.
That's what is being learned.
And anybody who reads an iota of history will understand the tragedy that is behind that.
He sounds exactly like Nikki Haley, exactly like Tom Cotton, exactly like Marco Rubio, exactly like Liz Cheney.
Do you see how identical the Democrats and Republicans are, the establishment wings of those parties when it comes to foreign policy?
First of all, everything is Hitler, everything is World War II again.
Oh, we didn't ask Winston Churchill what his plan was.
Why would we ask the United States government what its plan is in this war?
Because we've been caught in so many wars with no exit strategy, with no clear strategy.
And all it's done is eaten up American resources, destroy American standing in the world and ended up causing us to lose so many wars because we had no plan.
But you see, everything is World War II.
Everything is either you support war and you're Winston Churchill or you oppose it and you're giving in to Adolf Hitler just like Neville Chamberlain did.
Beyond that, this is the same worldview as Republicans have.
We're faced with an axis of evil composed of Iran, China, North Korea, Russia.
This is standard Republican foreign policy orthodoxy.
That is coming out of the mouth of these desperate Democrats to fuel this war in Ukraine.
But he also lied when he said there were no calls for safeguards or investigations into where the money went for Afghanistan and Iraq.
There were all kinds of investigations about where the money went in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And what we found was when we have no safeguards, billions of dollars disappear.
Here from CNN in October 2021, summarizing the Investigation.
Hundreds of billions of dollars were spent by the U.S.
and Afghanistan.
Here are 10 of the starkest examples of waste, fraud, and abuse.
Half a billion dollars of aircraft that flew for about a year.
A huge $85 million hotel that never opened and sits in disrepair.
Camouflage uniforms for the Afghan army whose fancy pattern would cost an extra $28 million.
A health care facility listed as located in the Mediterranean Sea.
These are part of a catalog of waste, fraud, and abuse complaints made against the United States' reconstruction effort in Afghanistan, an effort totaling $145 billion over 20 years, made by the United States' own Inspector General into the war.
But the in-depth audits detailing these findings have, for the most part, been taken offline at the request of the State Department, citing security concerns.
The total cost of the war, according to the Pentagon, was $825 billion, a low-end estimate.
Even President Joe Biden has cited an estimate that put the amount at over double that, more than $2 trillion.
For the war in Afghanistan, where the Taliban marched right back in the minute we left, the interest on the debt runs into hundreds of billions of dollars already.
This is what the Military industrial complex in Washington does all the time.
They use anonymous leaks to lie.
They use the same exact rhetoric to continue wars all the time.
And the Democrats and the Republicans, the war-making parts of both parties, are completely indistinguishable.
I don't understand how Nikki Haley will debate Joe Biden on foreign policy.
Given that they're in full agreement on Ukraine, they're in full agreement on Israel, they're in full agreement on China, as is most of the Republican Party with Joe Biden and with these Democrats.
The only ones not in agreement are a handful, a few dozen members of the right wing of the Republican Party, the populist wing, who have been voting no on Ukraine from the beginning.
Some more Republicans who are pressured into it by their voters and then about six or seven members of the Democratic Party who dissent on Israel.
That's it.
In every other context, the two parties in Washington are completely united and they use lies and security state leaks and the same tactics over and over to keep these wars funded and their donors enriched for as long as possible at the expense of everybody else.
All right, for our last story, we want to take you to Brazil, in part because, as I said, major censorship anywhere in the democratic world is a big story, but what happens in other countries in the democratic world is always a harbinger of what is to come in the United States.
From the beginning, we have been reporting on the case of A podcaster named Menarche, who was the most popular podcaster in Brazil up until about two years ago.
He was the Joe Rogan of Brazil.
He had modeled his show after Joe Rogan.
He would have three to four hour shows.
Every major figure in Brazil wanted to go on, were desperate to go on because of how large his audience is, just like Joe Rogan.
I went on once myself.
I went on with my husband a second time.
It was a gigantic podcast.
And then one night, Monarchy was debating free speech and a member of the Brazilian Congress asked him when he was saying he opposes the right of the state to ban political parties or to criminalize particular views.
She asked him, even the Nazi party?
You don't think the state should have the right to ban the Nazi party?
And he said, no, I don't.
It's like in the United States.
I don't think the state should have the right to ban any party, including Nazis.
Overnight, the Brazilian media lied about him and said he had admitted that he supports Nazism.
They turned him into a Nazi.
Not someone who supports free speech for Nazis, but a Nazi.
Within two days, YouTube banned his show.
He got fired from his podcast, demonetized, and he ended up getting hired by Rumble or Rumble paid to bring his show to Rumble because Rumble is a free speech platform that supports people who are censored.
And yet, that wasn't enough.
The Brazilian Supreme Court, using immense censorship powers, began ordering Rumble and every other social media platform, including Twitter and Facebook and Instagram, to ban him from using social media.
They completely depersoned him and silenced him.
And then, because he criticized the Supreme Court, they launched a criminal investigation against him.
For criticizing the Supreme Court for questioning the results of the 2022 election.
They criminally prosecuted him for his views.
Here's a report that we did on this when we got a hold of a secret order by a judge of the Supreme Court who has become notorious for censoring political speech.
And if you want to hear the story, we actually interviewed Monarchy there.
We went over the court order that was issued to Twitter, Facebook, Rumble, and many other platforms banning Monarch before he was even convicted of a crime or charged with a crime.
And then they launched a criminal investigation against him.
He has since fled Brazil.
He's a fugitive.
From his own country, he took refuge in the United States.
His only crime is, he expressed views that the Brazilian government, the Brazilian court has decided is criminal to be expressed.
Imagine living in a country that repressive, that is so hostile to free speech.
Now, as amazing as all of that has been, and I've been reporting on it because it's shocking, I know Monarch, Because I've been on his show, I also have become friends with him because of how much support I have for what he's gone through.
His life has been ruined.
All for saying that he doesn't think the state should be able to ban political parties.
What happened today is a bridge even further than I thought they would go.
The Justice Minister of the current government, President Lula da Silva, is named Flavio Dino.
He's technically a member of the Communist Party, but he's not really a communist.
The Communist Party in Brazil is just a very kind of pragmatic... He had been in the Communist Party.
He's since moved to a different party, but he's a longtime member of the Communist Party, but it's not really the Communist Party.
You have to take my word for that.
But he's definitely a left-wing figure.
And he's the Justice Minister.
And Monarch has been heavily criticizing him because it's the Justice Ministry that has been prosecuting him.
And Flavio Dino went to the criminal courts to initiate this criminal case against Monarch.
The Supreme Court approved it.
And now there's a criminal proceeding against Monarch.
Lula has now nominated, there's an opening on the Supreme Court, Lula has nominated this Justice Minister Flavio Dino for an opening on the Supreme Court.
Just like in the United States, there's now a hearing in the Senate to see if he'll be confirmed.
Obviously people are debating.
Flavio Dino and his Whether it's appropriate to put him on the Supreme Court and Monarch, who is now in the United States where he does his show because he can't be in Brazil because he knows they're trying to imprison him for expressing his views.
As part of this criminal case, Flavio Dino, the Justice Minister nominated for the Supreme Court, went to the criminal court and asked for an order barring Monarch from being able to talk about Flavio Dino at all, even being able to mention his name, even though he's the Justice Minister of the country, even though he's nominated for the Supreme Court.
And the court today granted that request.
Here from O Globo, one of the largest newspapers in Brazil.
We translated the headline, it's of course in Portuguese.
Defendant in a criminal action, Monarch receives pretrial restraints upon the request of Flavio Dino, that's the Justice Minister.
The YouTuber is prohibited from commenting on the Justice Minister after he launched new attacks on him in a live stream.
He made fun of his weight, he's obese, the Justice Minister, he made fun of him for that.
Imagine in a democratic state, a court preventing you, ordering a citizen, banning you from commenting on even mentioning the name of a high official.
That is how quickly censorship unravels, how quickly it expands.
I know I spend a lot of time on censorship efforts in the United States and other Western countries.
This is why.
This is where it leads to.
And it's one of the reasons why I've been so indignant That all these people who pretended to be allies of those of us who believe in free speech until October 7th have turned on a dime now that there's an issue they really care about, now that they're abused, they're really offended by, that they want suppressed, namely criticism of Israel.
That's why it's so dangerous.
And Brazil shows you where this can go, where this will go, where this is going in other European countries as well.
It's to this kind of extreme that you inch and inch and inch and then finally get there.
And what would seem unthinkable a very short time ago becomes totally normalized.
That's why it's so important that we remain vigilant against it, even when it comes to efforts to shield Israel from being criticized.
Last thing, Mr. President.
All right, so that concludes our show for this evening.
As a reminder, System Update is also available in podcast form, where you can listen to each episode 12 hours after the first broadcast live here on Rumble on Spotify, Apple, and all other major podcasting platforms.
And if you rate, review, and follow the program, it really helps spread the visibility of System Update.
As a final reminder, every Tuesday and Thursday night, once we're done with our live show here on Rumble, we move to Locals, which is part of the Rumble platform, where we have our live interactive aftershow, where we take your questions and respond to your critique and feedback, hear your suggestions.
Those aftershows are available solely for members of our Locals community, if you want to become a member, which gives you access not only to those twice-a-week aftershows, but the daily transcripts we prepare of every program we produce here, As well as an interactive thread each week that I tried my best to spend a lot of time responding to.
It's the place where we're going to put original journalism.
And most of all, it really helps to support the independent journalism that we do here.
It's a very small amount for each month, similar to what the membership was on Substack.
It is crucial if you believe in independent journalism to support it.
It's the way that we can produce the show.
And if you want to join you just click the join button right below the video player on the Rumble page and it will take you to our community.
For those of you watching this show we are as always very appreciative you are helping make this show a success and we hope to see you back tomorrow night and every night at 7 p.m.
