Biden Humiliated as Ukraine Nears Defeat and U.S. Aid Pier in Gaza Fails; Covid Email Scandal Revealed
TIMESTAMPS:
Intro (0:00)
Foreign Policy Failures (7:43)
American Humiliation in Israel (49:46)
Cover-Up Revealed (1:01:33)
Outro (1:16:40)
- - -
Watch full episodes on Rumble, streamed LIVE 7pm ET.
Become part of our Locals community
- - -
Follow Glenn:
Twitter
Instagram
Follow System Update:
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Facebook
LinkedIn
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, on the dot, exclusively here on Rumble, the free speech alternative to YouTube.
Before we begin, I just wanted to let you know I got a cold within the last four hours, and I've been sneezing, so I might sneeze during the show.
And it led me to wonder, why doesn't nobody on live television ever sneeze.
In fact, I don't even think I've ever sneezed on live television, yet here in the studio where it's cold, I sometimes feel I have to sneeze and have sneezed in front of the camera, and I don't understand why nobody else does.
I'm going to try not to.
I'll suppress it, but I might sneeze in front of you.
Anyway, tonight, whatever else one might say about the intentions or motives of Joe Biden's foreign policies, there is no question that those policies are failing, not just failing, but resulting in serious humiliations of the kind that affect not only Joe Biden standing in the country and the world, but also the standing of the country but resulting in serious humiliations of the kind that affect not only Joe In early 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine, Biden vowed that the U.S.
would fund and arm Ukraine's war efforts against Russia until what he called full victory was achieved, something which Biden and his fellow NATO leaders defined as full expulsion of all Russian troops from every inch of Ukrainian soil, not just including provinces in eastern Ukraine, but even Crimea.
It was something impossible from the start.
Two and a half years later, other than perhaps President Zelensky, though I doubt even he at this point is someone, there is almost nobody who would claim with a straight face that those kinds of goals are possible or even plausible.
Russia has not lost any territory in Ukraine over the last year or more.
In fact, it continues its advancements both westward and southward, threatening Ukraine's now often retreating and very fragile front lines.
The diplomatic deal Russia offered Zelensky at the start of the war, but which Joe Biden and UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson demanded be rejected in favor of all-out war, Would have been infinitely more favorable to Ukraine and to the West than anything it can now hope to get from Russia after two and a half years of heavy fighting.
Now both Biden and the West face only two choices really.
One, either accept defeat at the hands of Russia under the metrics of maximalist victory they affirmed, an obviously humiliating outcome for the US and for NATO.
Or engage in truly unhinged and dangerous escalation out of desperation, such as permitting U.S.
weapons to be used for attacks on Russian soil, or even worse, deploying NATO troops to Ukraine to directly fight the Russians, which would be World War III by definition.
That either of these horrific options is even being considered, and they most definitely are in every Western capital.
Illustrates the dangerous and humiliating corner into which Biden has painted not only himself, but the United States and the West.
Meanwhile, similar humiliations are happening with regard to Israel.
As we documented and reported last night, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israel both mocked and dismissed Biden's order last March not to invade the Rafah refugee camp, describing any attempt to do so as a quote, red line.
With the whole world watching, the Israelis now incinerating the bodies of hundreds of Palestinians in that Rafah refugee camp, dozens of whom are dying from those wounds, including many women and children, Biden officials are now left to explain how it is that Israel did not violate Biden's decree.
Even though they marched right into Rafah and began bombing civilians exactly as Biden insisted they not do.
And watching them today try to explain why Israel did not cross Biden's red line, even though they so obviously did, is even more embarrassing than watching Israel explicitly and publicly laugh at and scorn Biden's, quote, red lines.
Even worse, Biden presided over one of the most explicit humiliations seen to American power in years.
That occurred when Israel, whose arms and whose war we are financing and arming, explicitly and publicly refused to allow the American military or American aid organizations to enter Gaza by land through the border crossing in Egypt to deliver humanitarian aid to starving and dying Gazans.
They simply said, no, we're not allowing you to do that.
As a result, the U.S.
was forced to announce that it was going to build a new pier in the water, in the sea, that would allow the United States to deliver small amounts of aid by that pier into Gaza.
In other words, we were forced to build a pier because the Israelis said no to our desire to try and deliver humanitarian aid to the starving population of Gaza.
Only to now watch that pier, almost immediately upon its construction and completion, break into little pieces and be rendered completely unusable as the result of some rainfall that instantly destroyed its structure.
All of that courtesy of the Pentagon, whose budget is close to $1 trillion a year, And more than the military spending of the next 12 countries combined.
So corrupt is the war machine in the United States that we are not even capable with the best engineers of building a pier in the water that can withstand some rain.
That the United States under Biden can't even manage that.
Something that we're forced to do only after being ordered to essentially by Israel is the perfect symbol of the extreme weakness and dysfunction of US foreign policy under the current president.
Then that the American people were completely and repeatedly lied to by top health officials during the COVID pandemic is now, except for people trapped in a liberal bubble, something that is beyond dispute.
We know of the multiple lies we were told, often intentionally, often through recklessness.
But a recently emerged set of emails and testimony demonstrates just how far those health officials under Tony Fauci and Fauci himself were willing to go and the correct measures they were willing to embrace to hide the truth from the public about their actions.
We will show you these latest incriminating documents and testimony so that you can make up your own mind.
Before we get to all of that, a few programming notes.
First of all, we're encouraging our readers and viewers to download the Rumble app, because if you do so, it works on both your smart TV and your telephone.
And if you do it, you can follow the shows you most love to watch here on Rumble.
And if you activate notifications, as we hope you will, It means that the minute any of those shows you follow begin broadcasting live on the platform, all you have to do is click over and begin watching them live.
It means you don't have to wait around when shows start late.
You don't have to try and remember when they start.
You just immediately start watching as soon as the shows are live.
It helps you.
It helps the live viewing numbers of every program and therefore Rumble itself.
As another reminder, System Update is also available in podcast form.
Every episode is you can listen to on Spotify, Apple, and all other major podcasting platforms 12 hours after their first broadcast live here on Rumble.
And if you rate, review, and follow our program on those platforms, it really helps spread the visibility of the show.
Finally, every Tuesday and Thursday night, Once we're done with our live show here on Rumble, we move to our After Show on Locals, which is part of the Rumble platform, where we take your questions, comment on your critiques and feedback, hear your suggestions for future shows.
That After Show is available only for members of our Locals community, and if you want to join, which gives you access not only to those After Shows, but also to the multiple interactive features we have there.
It's the place where we exclusively publish written, professionalized transcripts of every show we broadcast here.
It's where we always first publish our original written reporting and it's the community on which we rely to do the independent journalism we do here every night.
Simply click the join button right below the video player on the Rumble page and we'll take you to the locals community.
For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update, starting right now.
Almost nobody talks about the war in Ukraine anymore because so much attention is being paid to the other U.S.
finance war, the one that Israel is waging in Gaza.
And also because after two and a half years, wars start to get boring.
They get normalized.
Americans and our media just stop paying attention to them, even though they're often raging.
more dangerously than they were at the start.
And that's definitely the case for the war in Ukraine, which is not only continuing, but getting more and more dangerous and more and more unstable.
And that's largely because Ukraine is now almost at the breaking point.
They simply don't have any more men to send to the front lines to fight an advancing Russian army.
That has always been clear.
We interviewed Professor Mearsheimer, who will be on our show later this week.
And we interviewed Professor Sachs.
We interviewed other experts, actual experts, in that region and in US foreign policy very early on in the war.
And they all said, all the other disadvantages of Ukraine aside, the reason it's impossible for Ukraine to win is simply because of the disparate population disadvantage, that Russia is so much bigger And it's such a much larger population and therefore so much more men to send to the front line.
And these kinds of wars are often determined by simply who has more soldiers to fight with.
And the Russians are much, much bigger than Ukraine.
And for that reason alone, it was always clear the Russians were going to win no matter what their problems were for the first several months.
Now that's exactly what's happening.
And the problem is, is that the West made all kinds of very clear and explicit and definitive pronouncements about the necessity of never allowing Russia to win the war, forcing them to lose the war and defining that in the most unachievable way that from the beginning, the United States and the West painted themselves into an impossible corner where they were either going to have to accept defeat and the humiliation that goes with it, defeat to Russia against all of NATO in the US,
Or they were gonna have to do deranged things that all of them said at the beginning they would never even consider, such as providing highly sophisticated missiles and bombs and fighter jets to Ukraine and allowing them to use them to strike inside Russia, which becomes a direct Western proxy war, not just against the Russian army in Ukraine, but inside Russia itself.
Imagine how we would treat other countries that were financing and arming countries to bomb us and attack us on American soil.
That's how the Russians would treat that as well.
Or even more insanely, they're now talking openly about deploying NATO troops to Ukraine to directly fight the Russians.
Not because they suddenly don't see the insanity and danger of those proposals.
Of course they do.
Everybody does.
The problem is the only alternative to doing something that deranged is being humiliated in front of the world by losing a war that the West should never have been involved in and should have allowed to be diplomatically resolved, which it could have and would have been if not for Biden and Boris Johnson's interference.
And instead, the US really has no way out.
It can either admit defeat by allowing the Russians to occupy part of Ukraine, which they obviously are going to, they will never leave Crimea, and are very unlikely to give up all or even most of what they have gained in at least the eastern part of Ukraine.
Who knows how much they'll end up with, how much territory will end up with, but that would be a humiliation dealt to the West.
That the United States simply can't accept, nor can other NATO countries.
So what's the alternative?
Escalating the war even further, doing desperate things to try and help ward off the Russian victory.
Hear from Reuters last week, the Western media is now just extremely open about the difficulties Ukraine is facing.
If you had said any of this in 2022 or 2023, even though it was true back then, you'd be instantly declared a Russian apologist, a Kremlin agent, And yet, disseminating disinformation, you'd be banned from YouTube, your messages would be either deleted or suppressed.
But now the truth is so visible, everyone sees it, that even Western media U.S.
media outlets in particular are admitting that our proxy in Ukraine is losing the war.
From Reuters last week, Ukraine struggles to hold the Eastern Front as Russians advance on cities.
Quote, the drive has marked an inflection point in the conflict spawned by Russia's full-scale invasion more than two years ago.
Russia has gained more territory in 2024 than it lost control of during Ukraine's much-hyped counteroffensive in the summer of 2023, according to Pasi Paronian, an analyst with Blackbird Group, a Finnish-based volunteer group that analyzes satellite imagery and social media content from the war.
Moscow's forces have claimed 654 square kilometers since the beginning of the year, outstripping the 414 square kilometers lost to Ukraine between June 1st and October 1st last year.
Russia has gained 222 square kilometers of territory since only May 2nd.
He added, so just in the last two weeks, 222 square kilometers.
That's how far and rapidly they're now advancing.
Experts and commanders say it could take several months before fresh recruits reach the front and reinforce exhausted troops there.
Even if Ukrainian forces can hold out until all the American ammunition and weapons get to the front, the challenge ahead remains daunting, according to many of those fighting.
And there's stories now every day that we've gone through many times, but the reports are getting more frequent and more drastic and grimmer about the refusal of huge numbers of Ukrainian men, even in the most anti-Russian provinces in Western Ukraine, to go and fight.
They're resisting the draft, they're avoiding the draft.
The people who they're now sending to the front line are people they're abducting from public places and forcing physically into vans, and they're fighting for their lives not to go.
They're trying to flee the country, hide in their own country, because they see what's happening in this war.
They know that Ukraine can't win, and they're going to be used as cannon fodder.
And even the most patriotic people aren't going to go fight in wars they don't believe can be won.
Now, I can show you articles like that all night about how severe the Ukrainian position is in Ukraine.
And yet, NATO knows that it can't possibly afford to lose the war.
And yet there's no real way to win it absent doing utterly insane things, which is increasingly what NATO officials and officials in Washington are demanding be done.
Here's the NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg, who has been the NATO Secretary General for almost 10 years, which is the term of that position.
He's on his way out, but still he's still in that position.
And speaking to The Economist this week, he did something very unusual, which is he bashed NATO for being too restrained, for not doing what's necessary to win this war.
Let's listen to him.
I think the time has come for Allies to consider whether they should lift some of the restrictions they have put on the use of weapons they have donated to Ukraine, because especially now when a lot of the fighting is going on in Kharkiv, close to the border, to deny Ukraine the possibility of using these weapons against legitimate military targets on Russian territory makes it very hard for them to defend themselves.
So to be clear, you're asking the US to lift the restrictions on the use of American weapons over Russian territory?
I believe the time has come for allies to consider whether they should lift some of the restrictions they have imposed on weapons donated to Ukraine.
Because we need to remember what this is.
This is a war of aggression by Russia against Ukraine.
Ukraine has the right to defend them.
Regardless of everything else, the audacity of Western Europeans to do things like this over decades, They barely pay anything for their own military.
They have a lot of economic growth, a great social net for their own citizens.
Almost all of their citizens are afforded free health care and free college.
And they don't really have a military worth talking about.
They rely almost entirely on the willingness of the United States to continue to spend more than the next 12 or 15 countries combined, almost a trillion dollars a year on a military that then protects Western Europe.
And then they turn around and they demand constantly.
That the U.S.
get involved in wars that really don't affect American citizens' lives, like they did when they demanded that Obama join France and the U.K.
in removing Colonel Gaddafi and installing regime change in Libya because they wanted access to that oil.
And now demanding that the United States risk a direct confrontation with Russia, the country with the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons.
Because they're tired of watching the Ukrainians lose.
They're tired of having their proclamations about victory be unfulfilled.
They can't do anything.
They're saying, yes, we want the Americans to lift the restrictions on having our weapons used to bomb inside Russian territory because of how obviously provocative that would be.
And this is NATO.
That has really no stake in the question, given that they really don't spend much on the military.
They've given some aid to Ukraine.
But what they're really demanding is not that their own weapons be allowed to be used inside Russia, because they don't really have many, but that the Americans lift restrictions on the use by the Ukrainians of bombing, say, Moscow or, say, Petersburg, and really risking a direct confrontation between NATO, more specifically the United States and Russia.
Over the question of who rules Crimea or the Donbass?
I mean, is anyone at this point willing to risk a nuclear confrontation in World War III?
Over those questions, but he certainly is demanding it.
Listen to the rest of what he says.
themselves, and that includes also striking targets on Russian territory.
Some allies have already lifted those restrictions, allowing to use their weapons against military targets in Ukraine, and I believe the time has come for other allies to consider this.
The UK has effectively lifted the restrictions, and it is the US that's really the single most important one.
I think what we see now demonstrates the need to reconsider those restrictions, not least because we have fighting going on along the border between Russia and Ukraine, especially in the Kharkiv region, where the front line and the borderline is more or less the same.
And then, of course, if you deny Ukraine the right to hit military targets on Russian territory, So I believe Jens Stoltenberg is Norwegian or Swedish.
to uphold the right for self-defense.
This is self-defense.
Self-defense is enshrined, the UN charter.
It's legal, it's legitimate, and we are helping Ukraine with upholding that right, and that should include the ability to also strike targets on Russia.
So I believe Jen Stoltenberg is Norwegian or Swedish.
So why doesn't he go to Norway and Sweden and tell Norway and Sweden, let's give our most sophisticated weapons, let's turn out weapons and give Ukraine fighter jets and bombs and other weapons, and tell them, go ahead and use this inside Russia.
Have Norwegian and Swedish and Scandinavian bombs dropping it on Moscow.
He's Norwegian, but he's the head of NATO.
And so it's very easy for him to say, let Americans pay for this and risk an all-out war with Russia.
This is what the Western Europeans do.
But it is important to note, in fairness and for accuracy, that he's far from alone.
In fact, there are a lot of warmongers in both parties in Washington who are now also demanding a lifting of these restrictions.
Here is the very establishment Republican, the war hawk, Michael McCaul, who has almost nothing to do with the new populist wing of the Republican Party, who has been an outspoken supporter of Joe Biden's policy in Ukraine for a long time, berating Secretary of State Blinken.
Ukraine.
We have a really bad situation going on as you know.
But in fact, Secretary Blinken, by all reports, also wants to, is agitating inside the administration to lift these restrictions and allow American weapons to be used to attack Russians on their own territory.
Listen to this exchange from last week.
Ukraine.
We have a really bad situation going on, as you know.
This is a sanctuary zone that the Russians have created.
And what they're doing is they're lining up all their artillery and rockets and missiles just across the Ukraine border that they then use to attack the Ukrainians.
However, your administration and Jake Sullivan have restricted the arms use so that Ukraine cannot defend itself and fire back.
First of all, it's very important to note that while he's claiming that the fighting is going on right at the Russian border and.
And that all of their artillery is inside Russia.
The reality is the pink regions on this map that you can see where he's pointing to, the blue is the part that Zelensky and the Kiev government still control, but the pink is the part that the Russians are in full control of that's inside Ukraine.
Something like 22 or 23 percent of all of Ukraine is controlled and occupied by Russia.
They have armed forces all in eastern Ukraine and they're constantly expanding.
So the idea that they're only fighting from Russian territory is preposterous.
They have eastern Ukrainian separatists with whom they've been working since the U.S.
and the West supported the coup in Kiev in 2014, who have been fighting to free themselves from a government they don't recognize the legitimacy of.
That Russians have been occupying Crimea since 2014, almost 10 years, also as a response to that coup in 2014 that removed the elected Ukrainian government, while people like Victoria Nuland and John McCain and Chris Murphy and the U.S.
government cheered the coup mongers who forced that president out to install a more pro-American president right over the Russian border.
But you can see how much of Ukraine Russia already occupies.
But Michael McFaul is trying to create a picture about why it's crucial to now allow American bombs to fall inside Russia.
And obviously, if you lift restrictions on American weapons being used by Ukraine to attack Russian targets, they can attack any Russian targets they want, not just across the border, but they can attack the Kremlin.
They tried attacking the Kremlin last year with the drone.
Remember, they crashed one into the Kremlin itself.
Now they can use far more long-range missiles to attack St.
Petersburg, to attack Moscow to attack Russia's major cities in a way that, by the way, the Russians really haven't been doing in Ukraine.
I mean, the Russians have not been carpet bombing Ukraine or attempting to destroy, or Kiev rather, or attempting to destroy civilian life in its largest cities like Kiev, even though they could have been doing that.
In fact, there was a report today that a grand total of 524 children in Ukraine have died since the war began two and a half years ago.
That is a tiny fraction of the number of children that Israel has killed in Gaza only in the last seven months.
So Russia is obviously not, in any way, Attempting to kill civilians or destroy civilian targets and in Ukraine's most important cities the way Ukraine would be able with American weapons to now do if the Michael McFaul's and NATO officials get their way, but Secretary Blinken who he's berating as you'll see agrees with his position He just can't say so because it's not yet the administration position.
Well, I've mandated the ATACMS and the supplemental the long-range short-range and the HIMARS That your administration is tying their hands behind their back?
Not unlike what you're trying to do in Israel.
Will you change this policy so Ukraine can fight without one hand tied behind its back?
Well, as you know, we've rallied 50 countries over the last two years to come to Ukraine's defense to provide it with the weapons it needs to defend itself, to push back against Russian aggression.
When it comes to enabling, endorsing attacks outside of Ukraine, that's not something we've done.
But Ukraine will have to make, and will make, its own decisions, and I want to make sure it gets the equipment that it needs.
Well, you know, Congress got them the equipment, and thank you for implementing that, but Congress did not put restrictions on the use of these weapons.
It's Jake Sullivan and your administration that has put the restrictions on these weapons, and I talked to them.
And this is not, they cannot achieve victory with these restrictions that you, not the Congress, have placed on them.
And I hope you'll take that back to the National Security Advisor and the National Security Council and change this policy decision that is very dangerous and damaging to the Ukraine, Ukrainian people.
So let me make a couple observations there that I think are important that this exchange illustrates.
Number one, every time these people advocate a war and the war fails, they never admit responsibility.
They always blame the people who were opposed to the war for having constrained the war effort too much and that that was the reason it lost.
The U.S.
fought in Vietnam for, however, depending on how you count, 13, 14 years, ended up losing, fleeing Saigon in helicopters in order to avoid getting killed by the Viet Cong.
That's how the U.S.
left, with that humiliation, instead of admitting Pentagon officials and the U.S.
government that they were completely wrong about what they were promising in Vietnam.
They decided to blame the war protesters somehow who never had any power for restraining the U.S.
too much.
They did the same thing in Iraq.
They did the same thing in Afghanistan, and now they're doing the same thing here.
They can never admit any errors.
They can never admit mistakes.
They can never say, we lost this war because we were wrong, because we foolishly committed to a war we couldn't win.
So they have to try and claim that somehow the Biden administration, which has been fanatically supportive of Ukraine from the start, is somehow to blame because they're constraining the Ukrainians too much, even though it was McCaul's own party, to its credit, that held up that last $60 billion in aid.
He can't blame his own party, even though they did far more to impede the war than the Biden administration.
But this is always what warmongers do when they lose wars, is they blame everybody else who opposed them, even though the people who opposed them were actually right that the war shouldn't have been fought.
I've seen this over and over in history.
The other issue is that this illustrates so much how little disagreement there actually is between the parties, especially when it comes to foreign policy.
The Biden administration has been providing Israel with all the billions of dollars that it asked for, every weapon, every bomb that it needs, promising over and over that it will give Israel everything it wants at any moment, with no conditions.
Only one time did the Biden administration make a theatrical showing of suspending a transfer for a very short period of time of weapons the Israelis already had.
Every weapon that the Israelis used, or most weapons that the Israelis used, the soldiers and military that the Israelis fight with, the protection of the Israelis diplomatically at the UN, it all comes from the Biden administration.
The Biden administration are vehement supporters of the word Israel.
And yet, the Republicans have to pretend that they have disagreements with the Democrats.
The whole theater depends on that.
And so their grievance is not that the Biden administration got us involved in other words, that somehow the Biden administration isn't doing enough to finance and arm Israel.
That they're somehow standing in the way of Israeli victory.
And then when it comes to Ukraine, you do have populists on the right, who have said from the beginning, we don't want to be involved in this war.
But the establishment wing, the dominant strain of Republicans like Michael McCaul are doing the same thing in Ukraine.
Their grievance with Biden isn't that he got the US involved in a futile, hopeless war.
That brings far more danger to the American people than benefits.
His complaint is that somehow they're not doing enough.
Because they took the very minimalistic restraint Of prohibiting the use of American weapons by Ukraine to attack cities in Russia.
So that's now the big fight between the Republicans and Democrats is somehow Biden isn't doing enough in Ukraine and should do even more.
Now, here is Congressman Scott Perry, who is making very similar claims about the war.
Just to give you a sense of the growing ethos in Washington, knowing that they're about to lose a war that will bring humiliation to the war machine in the United States.
Can you tell me what the difference is?
What's the difference between Ukraine and Israel?
In a sense, there isn't.
And as we've made clear from the start, these are both close partners of the United States.
Well, Mr. Secretary, with all due respect, if there's no difference, why do we have these conditions?
They have to come up with a plan of governance and the people that attack them.
They've got to have a plan for the hostages.
I mean, Russians have thousands of Ukrainian hostages, right?
And have we, has the United States government, has President Biden restricted Ukraine's use of weapons in urban areas to reduce civilian casualties?
Has that happened?
So, first of all, Congressman, no one has done more, will do more.
I know you say that, but it seems like it.
No, but I don't really say that.
Look, I'm just reporting what I'm reading.
I'm just going with the facts.
You can say that all day.
So he's making exactly the opposite argument as the one that we just heard from his colleague, Congressman McCall, though it's in the same for the same purpose.
He's saying you're imposing restrictions on Israel, but not on Ukraine.
Why aren't you imposing restrictions on Ukraine the way you are with Israel?
First of all, the U.S.
isn't imposing any meaningful restrictions on the Israelis.
They tried to set a red line that Israel ignored, and we just kept sending them more money and more weapons.
There are a couple of minimal restrictions on Ukraine.
So he has that backwards.
If anything, we are imposing some restrictions on Ukraine, namely using American weapons to bomb inside Russia, but almost none on Israel.
But again, his complaint is that somehow the Biden administration, which is vehement supporters of both wars, is almost entirely funding both wars.
No one in Ukraine, no one in Israel that's arming and protecting them diplomatically.
The only tiny little space this Republican congressman has to complain about the Biden administration, even though he supports their policy entirely, is to pretend that he's upset that they're somehow holding back Israel and Iran.
Israel and Ukraine, rather.
So this is his grievance?
But the fact is that others have done more.
And we're doing more right now for Ukraine than we are for Israel.
President Biden's doing more for Ukraine than Israel.
We took roughly half of the money or more from the aid package passed for Israel and gave it to Hamas, who's taking it from the citizens in their country and using it to fight Israel.
The United States has given more billions and billions and billions of dollars to Israel over the last several decades than any other country by far.
The United States finances their military, arms them in their wars, pays for their wars.
Isolates itself diplomatically against the entire world to shield Israel in international fora.
And the complaint of these Republicans in Congress is that we're not doing enough for Israel.
Somehow, even though Biden's policy for decades has been give Israel everything it wants, that's how he's always voted.
He's beloved by AIPAC.
He's one of the most pro-Israel politicians in Washington for decades.
We've shown him that many times.
The only complaint, the only tiny little space these Republicans can find to criticize Biden is that he should be doing even more for Israel somehow.
It's like handing somebody access to all of your bank accounts and giving them access to your credit cards and taking all the cash out of your bank and handing it over to them and have someone complain, why aren't you doing more for them?
You're not doing enough for them.
That's what it sounds like to me.
That's how my ears interpret it when I hear these Republican members of Congress complaining that the Biden administration is not doing enough to fuel Israel, to give Israel everything it deserves, or to do more for Ukraine.
Listen to the rest of this.
So please skip the narrative and just tell me what the difference is between Ukraine and Israel.
How come conditions on one and no conditions on the other?
These are not conditions.
We give to our close friends, our best friends, our best partners, one of our obligations is to give them the best possible advice we can.
And so when it comes to dealing with Hamas, we're committed to seeing that Hamas cannot govern Gaza again, cannot pose the threat that it did that led to the October 7th attack.
Uh, we've been doing everything we can to support Israel's efforts to defend itself and make sure that can't happen.
And when it comes to, uh, when it comes to Rafa, the concern that we've had and that we've expressed, as friends do, uh, and have an obligation to do, is that, um, the effort to go in, full force, into Rafa, uh, to remove... Where the enemy is, where the enemy... It was just reported, as you know, Mr. Secretary, 600 tunnels into Egypt, into Israel, traversing weapons and military...
I also just want you to notice how much time both parties, but honestly, especially Republicans at this point, spend on Israel.
Nikki Haley was in Israel this week signing little fun phrases on the bombs that Israelis are going to drop on Gaza, saying, finish them, which was the phrase she was screeching after October 7th when she went on television to tell Israel, my advice is finish them!
Finish them!
Then and that's what she went in with a little fun humor in Israel.
Just this week, Elise Stefanik, who's a leading candidate to be Trump's vice presidential nominee, who's supposedly elected to serve in the American Congress, was also in Israel complaining about the US government to the Israeli Knesset.
Here's you see how passionate they are about Israel?
So much more passionate than they ever are about helping citizens of their own country improve their lives and their standard of living.
And it's obviously in part because of religious reasons and cultural reasons.
Both Jewish members of Congress and evangelical members of Congress have extreme levels of passion and intensity and devotion to Israel.
And it's so obvious and visible they get more emotionally aroused by Israel than any other issue, not just than any other foreign country, but any issue, even one that affects the United States.
They hold hearings constantly involving Israel to censor American citizens, not to criticize Israel, to give more to Israel, to give more bombs to Israel, to parade Biden for somehow not doing enough to give Israel more.
Same with Ukraine.
For Democrats, Ukraine is a religion.
Every time I visit the United States over the last year to liberal communities, it's impossible to describe how many Ukrainian flags you see flying over houses, on the doors of charming little stores of the kind that left liberals run.
Far more Ukrainian flags than you see American flags.
And the establishment wing of the Republican Party, but really almost all of the Republican Party, with a few noble exceptions like Congressman Massey, Maybe Rand Paul, a couple others, but overwhelmingly...
They spend so much of not just their time but their energy and passion on serving Israel, on figuring out how they could better Israeli interests and do more for Israel in a way that you never ever see them doing for Americans who don't have health care, for Americans who can't afford college, for Americans who live in towns ravaged by addiction, even
The open border, which they'll go on cable news and rant and rave about, but really don't do anything as much or with as much passion or dedication as they do for Israel.
And I really think it's worth asking why.
But it's again, just yet another thing that unites the two parties.
Now, talking about the insane proposals that NATO officials have been openly floating, here from France 24 in the beginning of this month, French President Emmanuel Macron reaffirms the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine.
French President Emmanuel Macron reaffirmed he did not rule out sending troops to Ukraine, saying the issue would legitimately arise if Russia broke through Ukrainian front lines and Kiev made such a request.
In an interview published with The Economist on Thursday, Macron said, quote, if Russia decided to go further, we will in any case all have to ask ourselves this question of sending troops.
Describing his refusal to rule out such a move as a quote strategic wake-up call for my counterparts He described Russia as a quote power of regional destabilization and a quote threat to European security So he's there you have it.
He's saying the reason I think we should start thinking about sending NATO troops to Ukraine is because if that's the only choice we have other than losing the war and being humiliated and I so don't want to be humiliated in the eyes of the world that I'm willing to risk a world war, a nuclear exchange, even if it means sending NATO troops to Ukraine to fight the Russian army directly, something that we went through the entire Cold War and managed not to do.
Now, This is something that Macron has been saying for a while in different ways.
He just today, and here you see in Politico, Macron quote, Macron, here is the political article, Macron opens the door for Ukraine to, quote, neutralize Russian bases.
Quote, Ukraine wants to use donated weapons to attack targets inside Russia, but its allies are split on the issue.
Quote, we have to allow Ukrainians to neutralize the military sites from which the missiles are fired, but not other civilian or military targets.
We're not being escalatory by doing this, Macron said on Tuesday, speaking alongside German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
It's not just a problem for the European Union.
U.S.
President Joe Biden is also under pressure from Congress to respond to Kiev's pleas and explicitly permit Ukraine to hit targets in Russia with donated weapons.
By the way, I have to say it is so bizarre How if you read Western media reports about Ukraine prior to the Russian invasion in February 2022, and then read Russian media accounts about Ukraine, the same country, after February 2022, the entire narrative shifted overnight to serve U.S.
war interests.
The way they talked about Ukraine, the things they reported about Ukraine, even the way they spelled cities in Ukraine, changed overnight for 10 years.
Every one of these media outlets was warning that Ukraine is dominated by far-right, neo-Nazi, white nationalist battalions.
There were all kinds of laws in Washington to ensure that our weapons didn't fall into the hands of these dominant white nationalist battalions.
And then after the Russian invasion, anyone who pointed out that Ukraine was flooded with neo-Nazi soldiers was called a Russian propagandist.
It was always talked about how Ukraine is the most corrupt country in Europe, how if we send aid there it disappears because all these officials are corrupt.
After February 22, 2022 it became prohibited to say that.
And they even started changing on Ukraine's orders how they spell Kiev and multiple other Ukrainian cities simply because Zelensky claimed that Western spelling of these cities that we've been using for decades in our media was somehow Russian.
Pro-Russian spelling.
And the media just jumped overnight to completely radically change everything it was saying for the last decade about Ukraine.
This article goes on, quote, In addition to ammunition and air defense, two things can help Ukraine reach the tipping point to win the war.
Increasing training for Ukrainian fighters allow Ukraine to strike military targets in Russia, tweeted Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pefkoor.
Finnish President Alexander Stubb said on Monday, quote, It's not our jobs to tie Ukrainians' hands.
Russian President Vladimir Putin warned Tuesday of serious consequences if Western countries allowed Ukraine to use their weapons to strike in Russia.
Again, think of what the United States would say and do.
If China, Iran, or Russia were providing a foreign military with dangerous, sophisticated weapons and allowing them to strike American cities and American targets on American soil.
Quote, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said on Tuesday that no NATO member should exclude the option of sending troops to Ukraine.
Quote, let Putin be guessing as to what we will do, he told the Polish paper.
Now, while the West continues to be so excited about winning this war to the point that they're willing to send troops to get Ukraine, use Western weapons to bomb inside American cities, to do anything to avoid the humiliation that they set up for themselves, Ukrainians themselves are increasingly seeing that this war is futile and refusing to fight.
There's not enough Ukrainians anymore who are willing to answer the call, even when they're conscripted.
And remember, Zelensky is fighting with a conscript army, not a volunteer army.
But these conscripts are getting increasingly desperate.
Hear from NBC News today, quote, Ukraine urgently needs soldiers, but some men are desperate not to fight.
Quote, while volunteers line up to fight Russia at the beginning of the war, manpower shortages are now an issue that could seal Ukraine's fate, even if it can retain Western support.
Quote, when you see people in uniform, you panic.
You start thinking someone will mobilize you now against your will.
A lawyer based in Kiev told NBC News.
There's that spelling of, uh, of Kiev that no Western media outlet ever used to use, that overnight they began using on command because they were told that the decades-long spelling of Kiev, K-I-E-V, was some sort of pro-Russian rendition, and they instantly switched how they spelled it on command.
Quote, he did not want his identity known, fearful like a growing number of men across the country of being drafted into the army if his name is made public, just as Russia launches a wave of attacks to try to decisively seize the battlefield initiative.
The 25-year-old has no military experience and just became eligible to be conscripted after Ukraine lowered the age men can be drafted from 27 to 25 last month.
Quote, I love my country, he said in a phone interview earlier this month.
I donate to the Ukrainian Army but unfortunately I am not very prepared to fight on the front lines because I don't have the experience and I am probably not morally prepared to kill somebody even if it's someone Russian.
While volunteers lined up to fight at the beginning of the war, that fervor has waned and manpower shortages are now an issue that could seal Ukraine's fate.
So it has taken a series of steps that include passing a new mobilization law, increasing fines for draft dodging, and withholding consular services for Ukrainian men abroad who lack up-to-date military documents.
So many Ukrainian men have fled.
Now, one of the friends of our show, who's an excellent journalist named Liam Cosgrove, goes frequently into Congress and interviews members of Congress and other officials.
And last week, he accosted South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, who, needless to say, every time there's a war, he's one of the most ardent defenders of that war, of sending other people to fight and die in wars, when he never fights and dies in any wars.
And he's basically demanding that Ukraine lower its draft age to send even more unwilling Ukrainians to go fight and die for this war that they no longer any believe in.
Imagine sitting in the United States and demanding that a foreign country forces 18 and 19 year olds to go fight.
The reason Ukraine hasn't lowered the draft age in part is because they're not very skillful fighters, but also because they're very cognizant of losing all their men, an entire generation of men who are just going to disappear.
And so they're at least trying to preserve their youngest men.
Who are in college, who want to try and build families, who want to start families, who want to start work.
Not to have to go die on the front line, but that's not good enough for Lindsey Graham.
Here's what he told William Cosgrove when asked about his view on Ukrainian draft age.
...went on Ukraine.
You visited last March, correct?
Yeah.
Met with Zelensky.
And while you were there, you advocated that they reduce the minimum age of the conscription for Ukrainian immigrants.
And they did right after.
Do you think that played a role?
Your visit?
I don't know about that.
I just said, listen, I mean, most Americans are used to 18-year-olds serving.
And... They had it at 27?
Yeah, I was shocked.
Now they're at 25.
Would you like to see them go to 18?
Now, let me just say, This is a United States Senator heavily involved in foreign policy and foreign affairs and war making in Washington who apparently was shocked to find out only last week that there are debates about the Ukrainian draft age inside Ukraine and that it was extremely difficult politically for Zelensky to lower the draft age from 27 to 25 because the people in that country are unwilling to be conscripted any longer.
And Lindsey Graham is saying, I just went to Ukraine and I was shocked to find out something that you can read in countless media reports about how the draft age is at 27, the difficulties Zelensky had in lowering it to 25.
This is someone who knows nothing.
He doesn't even know what you would know if you just read the newspaper.
about the wars that he is insisting be funded.
He knows nothing.
That shocked me that Lindsey Graham admitted that he had no idea the draft age in Ukraine was 27 when we talked about that on the show dozens of times from news reports about the difficulty that Zelensky has in lowering the draft age because of resistance to his own people.
So here's Lindsey Graham going to Kiev and saying you better lower the draft age when he has no idea what the political situation in Ukraine is.
He doesn't even know this controversy exists.
These are the people Who constantly send our military to go fight, who constantly send other people to go die in wars if they feel aroused by supporting and feel purpose and strength.
Lindsey Graham served as a lawyer in the military, got nowhere near combat zones, and he spent his whole career trying to send other people to go fight and die in wars so that he can feel better.
Here's the rest of those comments.
I'll leave that up to them, but yeah, I mean if you have a manpower shortage, the argument is we need these people in the economy.
Well, in World War II, if you were 18, You're drafted, because we're in a world we couldn't afford to lose.
I'll leave that up to them, but Americans were, including me, were sort of surprised.
I didn't know that.
So... Well, we've seen some reports out of Ukraine and The Economist, particularly, where they were actually sending amputees to the front lines, conscripting them.
So, I mean, is that something you support, though?
Sending, whether it's an amputee or someone with a disability, against their will to the front lines?
I don't know.
I find that, first of all, Liam Cosgrove did a fantastic job and we're working with him on doing more interviews like that in various parts of Washington and the bowels of Washington to which he has access to be able to ask questions like that, but I think that
Lindsey Graham's complete ignorance about this country that he's been demanding war be fought in alongside his just blithe willingness to send 18-year-old Ukrainian boys to go fight in a war that they cannot win, that they're being used as cannon fodder and dying on the front lines almost immediately.
That kind of sociopathic demand that young people go and fight in a war so that the West can avoid feeling humiliated and defeated.
That is sick.
That is absolutely sick.
That is what most people are like in Washington.
That's why the U.S.
fights wars endlessly.
And getting a glimpse of Lindsey Graham in an unscripted moment like that, so casually saying, yeah, I didn't know that was 27.
They should send their 18-year-olds.
What are they doing?
That is the kind of person who doesn't place any value on human lives other than American elites like him.
And that's why he's so comfortable backing every single war, because he doesn't care who dies in these wars as long as he doesn't.
Now, the situation in Israel we covered at length last night, so I'm not going to redo all that reporting. - Yeah.
But the weakness of Joe Biden when it comes to the war in Israel is almost as severe as the weakness of Joe Biden when it comes to Ukraine.
Back in January and February when there were reports all over the place from aid organizations about famine in Gaza, how much the population was on the brink of famine and then dying of malnutrition.
The Americans were insisting on allowing aid trucks or even U.S.
military trucks to enter Gaza through the Egyptian crossing and the Israelis made clear they wouldn't allow that.
Even though we're paying for their war, even though we give them all the weapons they need to fight it, even though they couldn't fight the war without us, the ones who dictate this relationship is Israel and it's always been like that.
So instead of demanding that the U.S.
be permitted to enter Gaza, In order to avoid having the world see the United States responsible for a starving population that's dying of famine, the United States and Biden said, OK, sorry to ask.
We understand you won't let us.
Can we build a pier that will allow us to deliver aid?
Now, a lot of people are very suspicious of that motive and said the motive was not to give humanitarian aid to Gaza.
It was to help the Americans in Israel govern Gaza and control it once this war is over.
Whatever the motive, the U.S.
claimed it was to help Palestinians deliver aid.
The pier was announced, and then it was built, and it was just completed about a week ago.
Unfortunately, it began to rain in that region, and as soon as it began raining, this pier that the United States military just got done building at Joe Biden's order completely disintegrated.
It fell apart.
It broke into small pieces, and now it's floating away at sea.
I can't think of a more symbolically vibrant image of Joe Biden and his leadership in this.
Here from the New York Times today, U.S.
pier for Gaza aid is damaged by rough seas.
Quote, Army engineers are working to put the pier back together and Defense Department officials hope it will be operational again in about a week.
Quote, the temporary pier that the U.S.
military constructed and put in place to provide much needed humanitarian aid for Gaza has broken apart in rough seas, the Pentagon said on Tuesday.
The latest calamity to befall the peer endeavor punctuated a particularly grim several days in Gaza where Israeli forces have ramped up attacks on the city of Rafah just two days after carrying out a deadly strike that killed dozens of people.
Quote, unfortunately we had a perfect storm of high sea states and then as I mentioned this North African weather system also came in at the same time creating a not an optimal environment to operate.
Sabrina Singh, the Pentagon Deputy Press Secretary, said at a news conference in early March, President Biden surprised the Pentagon by announcing that the U.S.
military would build a pier for Gaza.
Defense officials immediately predicted that there would be logistical and security issues, and it turned out that this pier is pathetic.
We can't even build a pier in shallow waters to connect to land that allows boats to come and deliver things onto land.
Some of the most basic military operations, when we fund the Pentagon with a trillion dollars a year that they can't account for.
Here's a picture of the broken pier, the pier that's not even connected any longer to land, parts of which are now floating out at sea.
And Charles Lester, who is a foreign policy analyst, said, quote, new, the US has stopped all humanitarian aid efforts using the DOD constructed maritime pier, which is now heavily damaged and floating adrift after bad weather.
Who would have thought maybe it would have been better to simply deliver aid via Gaza's seven different land crossings.
But of course, Israel didn't allow that.
And that's why we built this pier that is now Disintegrating, it's breaking up into tiny little pieces and the excuse is, oh, well, it rained very hard.
It was a perfect storm, a bad weather, as though you build a pier, what, just for days that it's sunny and you hope it doesn't rain?
Because if it does, your pier is going to just break up into tiny little pieces and float out to sea?
And then you can't use it anymore?
The pier that you so flamboyantly announced you were going to build to help the people of Gaza?
The White House is really at a point where it's pathetic.
You see that with Ukraine, you really see it with Israel.
That red line that Joe Biden pronounced he was imposing several months ago on Israel's invading Rafa was obviously ignored and violated by the Israelis.
The Israelis laughed at that red line.
They said, we're not going to pay attention to that red line.
Of course, we're going to invade Rafa the way we want.
And for the last two weeks, their excuse has been Well, Israel's not involved in a really heavy invasion or attack of Rafah, and so the red line's not violated.
And now the world just watched hundreds of Palestinians being incinerated by a fire that Israel caused with a bombing right in the sector where they had promised was a safe zone.
And now, obviously, journalists at the White House, even pro-Biden journalists, are asking, how can you possibly claim that Joe Biden's red line wasn't violated?
And here's the national security spokesman, John Kirby, trying his best to justify how somehow the Israelis didn't do what Joe Biden publicly said they can't do.
So how does this not violate the red line that the president laid out?
As I said, we don't want to see a major ground operation.
We haven't seen that at this point.
How many more charred corpses No civilian casualties is the right number of civilian casualties.
president considers a change in policy.
We don't want to see a single more innocent life taken.
And I kind of take a little offense at the question.
No civilian casualties is the right number of civilian casualties.
And this is not something that we've turned a blind eye to, nor has it been something we've ignored or neglected to raise with our Israeli counterparts.
I mean, honestly, these spokespeople have to stand up every day, like Matthew Miller in the State Department, John Kirby here and in the Pentagon, and Karine Jean-Pierre, who have to defend American policy in Ukraine and especially its enabling of this war in Israel.
And And they have to say that the red line wasn't crossed because Israel really didn't do much in Rafah.
And then the reporters say, well, they just incinerated hundreds of people, many dozens of whom died, including women and children.
How many do they have to kill before you say, yeah, now they're really attacking Rafah?
And then John Kirby says, how dare you?
I'm offended by that.
We don't take for granted civilian casualties.
What has the United States done to rein in the Israelis in any way?
To stop the Israelis in any way?
To impose any real limits on what they're doing?
In carrying out a war where more bombs are dropped on this tiny, densely populated strip of land in the first two weeks than the United States often dropped in all of Afghanistan during the 20 years that we fought that war for the entire year.
Use bombs in the first several months, 2,000 pound bombs that the United States stopped using all the way back in urban areas in Iraq because of how many civilian casualties occurred.
It's a war that is indiscriminate, that obviously doesn't value Palestinian life, and the United States is very much a part of it.
And these people have to get up every day and not only justify it, but try and reconcile Joe Biden's red line with the Israelis' contempt for it and their violation for it, because he knows that Joe Biden can't and won't do anything to stand up to the Israelis.
He can't do it politically, and he doesn't want to do it because he's a lifelong supporter of Israel.
And so this is the kind of self-humiliation in which they have to engage every day.
Whatever you think about the war in Ukraine at the beginning and wanting to fight Russia, whatever you thought about the war in Israel at the beginning and wanting to fight Hamas, you cannot deny that Joe Biden's policies and presiding over these two wars have been nothing short of disasters in a way that has really not only humiliated him, but
made a major blow to the idea of American power in the world and American credibility in the world because he just looks so weak he can't complete a sentence and then he obviously can't enforce anything that he's saying and he leaves it to these underlings to do so and they just feed all kinds of obviously false and contrived rationale to justify all of this is happening and of course the press is completely confused Why the American people don't want to reelect Joe Biden.
They're just, they're genuinely confused by that.
that they don't see any of this.
As you probably know, two weeks ago we went to the city of Toronto in Canada where we participated in an event sponsored by Rumble that was designed to promote the cause of free speech and specifically to oppose a truly draconian censorship law that was and is being advocated by and pushed by the Trudeau administration.
And the reason we went there and participated in the Rumble event is in part because laws like that jeopardize the cause of free speech everywhere.
But also because Rumble is not just a for-profit company being an alternative to YouTube.
It really is a cause of free speech and it goes around the world taking a stand often to its own detriment.
And it's being attacked for its free speech stance, as every company is, and one of the things Rumble has now begun doing is offering its own products for people who want to actually support a platform that is not just talking the talk about free speech, but really walking the walk.
In order to access my own show in Brazil, where I am, I have to use a VPN, because Rumble is blocked in Brazil because it refuses to abide their censorship orders.
The other day, I accidentally clicked on the VPN to pretend that I was in France, Usually I just do one from the U.S.
or Australia and access Rumble that way, but I accidentally chose France.
And when I went to access Rumble, I got a similar announcement saying Rumble is blocked in France for the same reason, because Rumble refused to obey the French government's orders to censor.
And so having their products, which are of the highest quality, and purchasing those instead of others is one way to support this cause.
One of their best products is Rumble's very own 1775 coffee.
I've drank this coffee.
I've tasted it.
It is derived from some of the best beans, coffee beans, in Bolivia.
It is seriously a great way to begin your day with coffee, but it's also ethically sourced from a family farm in the high-altitude mountains of places like Bolivia, where it's just very organic and very fresh.
And so, instead of waking up tomorrow morning and drinking kind of corporate-owned, banal coffee that has nothing to do with any cause other than profit for corporations, You can try Rumble 1775 Coffee, which gives you great coffee and at the same time supports the cause of freedom of speech, building a parallel economy that actually values you and fights for your rights.
You can go to 1775coffee.com right now and pick up your first bag.
If you use the promo code Glenn, you save 10% off of your first order.
My personal favorite roast is dark, But there are all kinds of other flavors there.
You can taste the ones you like and pick out the ones you like best.
If you level up your morning routine with a bag of 1775 Coffee, you'll sleep well at night knowing that your hard-earned dollars are going toward supporting actual important causes and creators like me on Rumble, who have a platform where we can say whatever we want.
It's 1775Coffee.com.
Use the promo code LEN to save 10% off of your first order.
Throughout 2021 and 2022, we spent a great deal of time reporting on and analyzing and deconstructing all kinds of emails and other documents that emerged from inside the health policy industry, the worldwide health policy industry,
to demonstrate how often and how deliberately healthcare to demonstrate how often and how deliberately healthcare workers, or healthcare officials rather, lied to the public about many aspects of COVID.
They knew they were lying about the efficacy of masks.
They knew they were lying about the efficacy of vaccines.
They knew they were lying about the risks that those vaccines entailed.
And they especially set out to lie about the origins of COVID.
Right at the beginning of the pandemic, Dr. Fauci himself was receiving emails from the leading epidemiologists saying they analyzed the DNA, they analyzed other components of the virus, and they were highly convinced that it came from a lab in Wuhan, which just coincidentally was the place where COVID started, and it just coincidentally has a city where the COVID coronavirus lab is located.
And yet Fauci was petrified by the idea that scientists would be identified as the cause, in part because Fauci himself had invested in that Wuhan lab and had all kinds of contracts that he controlled that were related to it.
But also just in general, he didn't want scientists to be blamed.
So he got those doctors who sent him those emails
Within a week to sign on to a letter in Lancet that not only affirmed the exact opposite view than the one they insisted they believed, that Lancet letter notoriously not only proclaimed that all signs pointed to a naturally occurring virus, even though the scientists a week before had insisted it had all the indicia of a lab leak, but it also proclaimed that the knowledge that it was originally, that it naturally occurred, was so high and so definitive
That anyone who questioned the origins of COVID, as described in that Lancet letter, was guilty of spreading disinformation, propagating prejudice, bigotry, and hatred against scientists in general and Chinese scientists in particular.
And from that point forward, were rendered taboo, were censored from the internet.
That was a debate that was not permitted.
And within Fauci's own email box was all kinds of evidence from the world's leading epidemiologist and other scientists that the evidence suggested highly that it came from a lab leak, was manufactured and built in a lab and not from a naturally occurring source.
And we've gone over that so many times.
There's so much evidence that we were deliberately eyed to.
We haven't been covering it very much because we think those questions are essentially settled.
It is the view of the leading agencies inside the United States government that it is far more likely than not that this COVID pandemic came from a lab leak in Wuhan and not from a food market in China.
And somehow, they tried to claim that the View that the virus came from a lab was the racist view.
That's what the Lancet letter said that Fauci organized, that it was racist against the Chinese, to suggest that it came from a lab leak in Wuhan, when obviously the far more racist theory, to the extent that that even matters, I mean, all that really matters is what is the true theory, but to the extent that one theory was all that really matters is what is the true theory, but to the extent that one theory was racist, the far more racist theory was that Chinese food markets are so filthy and disgusting and disease-ridden, and they eat bats, and as a result of the Chinese filth, this is the liberal view, this virus escaped from
thoughts and as a result of the Chinese filth, this is the liberal view, this virus escaped from their food markets because of their crappy, unsanitary, primitive eating habits.
That was always the farmer race's view and yet somehow it was the lab leak theory that the Chinese conduct highly sophisticated research in partnership with the U.S.
government and were not careful sufficiently and caused this virus to leak.
That got branded the racist theory, even though the exact opposite was true.
This week there is even more evidence of just how malicious and deliberate this campaign of deceit was.
Emily Coff from The Right to Know wrote on May 22nd the following, quote, Anthony Fauci aid triggers deeper concerns about hidden emails on COVID origins.
And this is what she wrote, quote, testimony from NIAID Senior...so that's the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases...Senior Scientific Advisor Daniel Morins, a longtime aide to former NIAID Director Anthony Fauci, only deepened congressional concerns about the possibility of concealed or destroyed emails concerning connections between the institute and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
A memo and over 150 emails released by the House Select Subcommittee on the Corona Pandemic Wednesday show that Morin spent considerable time and energy avoiding the Freedom of Information Act.
Morin sought to conceal emails in which he championed his close friend, Echo Health Alliance President Peter Daszak, a scientist who subcontracted Fauci's funding to the lab in Wuhan for experiments that made coronaviruses more deadly.
Moren said that he and Daszak met 20 years ago and were part of the same close-knit, quote, fraternity among emerging infectious disease experts.
One email released by the committee suggests that Fauci himself may have subverted public records requests through use of a personal email account bypassing official channels.
Quote, I can either send stuff to Tony on his private email or hand it to him at his work and at his house.
Morton's emailed on April 21st, 2021.
Quote, he is too smart to let colleagues send him stuff that could cause trouble.
The reason these email policies are in place for public officials, this is something that Hillary Clinton avoided as well, is because the public is supposed to have the right to see them through FOIA requests.
And they're required to be sent and received over official government email channels, purposely using your personal email accounts.
Or getting documents in person so they don't go over government systems so that you can then destroy them and avoid FOIA disclosure is illegal and obviously corrupt.
You would only do that if you're trying to hide from the public what it is that you're actually saying and doing.
And this is Anthony Fauci's top aide who, quote, confirmed Wednesday that he discussed grants from NIA to the Wuhan Institute of Virology with Fauci.
Quote, I certainly told him some things that he asked me to tell him about the situation with Peter Daszak, Morin said.
That statement contradicts a transcribed interview Morin gave the committee earlier this year in which he said he did not recall discussing echo health or the Wuhan lab with Fauci.
Now, just to remind you of what this scandal was about.
One of the organizers and signers of that Lancet letter that early on told the world, don't even consider the possibility that the lab came from a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, it only came from a natural leak, was Peter Daszak.
He was one of the organizers and signers of that letter.
And he had an obvious, gigantic conflict of interest in claiming that because he had His EcoHealth Alliance had contracts approved by Anthony Fauci with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
And so, of course, he had a strong career and personal interest in publishing a definitive statement at the beginning of the pandemic in Lancet to say, oh, no, don't look at that institute over there that I have contracts with.
It was only naturally occurring.
It was a huge journalistic scandal that Lancet published that letter without disclosing that conflict.
Eight months later, they went back and disclosed the conflict somewhat quietly.
It was a huge journalistic and scientific scandal what happened here.
And now it's turning out that exactly as was clear and predicted, Dr. Fauci and his closest advisors were deliberately hiding from the public everything they were doing and saying in private.
And you only do that for one reason, because you're ashamed of what you're doing or you want to deceive the public and have them never know.
Here from the U.S.
House of Representatives on May 22nd, 2024, the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic is a memo entitled, Allegations of Wrongdoing and Illegal Activity by Dr. David Morin, Senior Advisor to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, former Director, Dr. Anthony Fauci.
And there was an email Now we're going to show you, and here's the description, quote, previous witness testimony and documents in the custody of the select committee on the coronavirus pandemic raises serious questions regarding potential wrongdoing and illegal activity by Dr. Daniel Morins.
And then here is the email that they produced, and it was an email from Daniel Morins, and we have it here.
It's a...there you see it better on the screen.
It's dated June 28, 2021.
It's from Dr. Morins at the National Institute of Health, the NIAID, and he wrote the following, quote...he wrote the following to Dr. Fauci, quote, Sorry, he said.
Let me just check that.
Yeah, this is Morin's email, and he said, quote, sorry, on April 18, 2020, Peter Daszak emailed me and Tony congratulating Tony on standing up for science.
That was when Dr. Fauci warned that nobody should even question whether or not scientists in the Wuhan Institute of Virology were responsible for a lab leak.
Peter called him and congratulated him for, quote, standing up for science by telling the public, even though they had no idea if it was true, that it was naturally occurring.
That email somehow fell into the hands of a congressman, probably via a FOIA of someone who didn't delete it, as I did.
Delete all of Peter's emails and others relating to the origin when the shit started hitting the fan.
He's saying the minute this became a controversy, I went and deleted all of Peter Daszak's emails and every other email relating to this so that nobody could get it from FOIA.
Anyway, the congressman got a copy of Peter D's email from someone at NIH and he now wants to get any reply Tony and I or anyone else may have sent back to Peter.
Mine was erased long ago.
I verified that today and I feel pretty sure Tony's was too.
Dr. Fauci's reply was also deleted.
He went on, quote, the best way to avoid FOIA, which is the FOIA law that applies to them, to avoid FOIA hassles is to delete all emails when you learn a subject is getting sensitive.
So you have all these emails back and forth, and the minute you know Congress is interested or the public is interested or people suspect there was wrongdoing, you immediately go and delete them all.
And then he concluded, quote, in any case, there is nothing here except opportunities to harass, hassle, and huff and puff.
But of course, the public has no ability to determine that because they erased and deleted all of the evidence with the explicit intention of preventing it from being discoverable by Congress or from the public through FOIA laws.
Something that is absolutely illegal to do.
To go and either purposely put government emails on a private server to keep it away from the public, or to go and delete it when you know that it's being investigated.
And that's what this email explicitly says they did.
Here's that notorious Lancet letter for those of you who don't remember.
It was dated February 19, 2020.
So right at the beginning, of the pandemic and it carried the name Peter Daszak, which you see in the yellow, along with several scientists who emailed Fauci within the week prior to say that they thought that all the indicia suggested a lab leak, not natural occurrence.
And the letter was, quote, "A statement in support of the scientists, public health professionals and medical professionals of China combating COVID-19." This was the letter that shaped the public's understanding and the media's treatment and big tech's willingness to entertain debates.
They declared right from the start that they knew something they had no idea was true, and that any questioning of it was racist, anti-scientific, and spreading of malicious disinformation.
Quote, the rapid open and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumors and misinformation about its origins.
We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.
Scientists from multiple countries have published and analyzed genomes of a causative agent, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and they overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife, as have so many other emerging pathogens.
This is further supported by a letter from the presidents of the U.S.
National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, and by the scientific communities they represent.
Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumors, and prejudice that jeopardize our global collaboration in the fight against this virus.
This is one of the most corrupt things that has ever happened in the history of public health policy.
That Lancer letter was a fraud down to its core in so many ways.
The fact that Peter Daszak signed it with no disclosure of his conflicts, his obvious financial and reputational and career conflicts, given that he and Fauci both had direct connections and funding of the very research in the Wuhan Institute of Lab Virology that was suspected as having caused the lab leak.
All of this was a complete disgrace.
It destroyed faith and trust in one of our remaining institutions that still commanded it, which were physicians and scientists and health professionals.
And now as the evidence comes out more and more, there's more and more evidence of just how corrupt and criminal and deceitful this was.
They were purposely deleting exactly those emails that they knew would inform the public debate the minute controversies or questions started.
They were using means to keep it out of the public's hands.
You don't do that unless you are a deeply corrupt and deceitful individual.
And that's what so many of the people were who formed the original COVID narrative and then dictated COVID policy over the next three years.
All right, so that concludes our show for this evening.
As a reminder, System Update is also available in podcast form.
You can listen to every episode 12 hours after their first broadcast live here on Rumble on Spotify, Apple, and all other major podcasting platforms.
If you rate, review, and follow our program there, it really helps spread the visibility of the show.
As a final reminder, every Tuesday and Thursday night, once we're done with our live show here on Rumble, we move to Locals for our live interactive aftershow, this being Tuesday night.
We're about to go do that as soon as we conclude our show here in just a few minutes.
That aftershow is available solely for subscribers to our Locals community, and if you want to join, which gives you access not only to those aftershows, but to many other interactive features, to the transcripts, the written, professionalized transcripts we publish for every show here, the place where we first publish our written original journalism, And most of all, that's the community on which we rely to support the independent journalism that we do here.
Simply click the Join button right below the video player on the Rumble page, and it will take you directly to that community.
For those of you watching this show, we are, as always, very appreciative, and we hope to see you back tomorrow night and every night at 7 o'clock p.m.
