Biden Administration Blames Russia for Age Concerns; Crackdowns on Israel's Critics Escalate in U.S.; Ukraine War Appears Permanent Ahead of NATO Summit
TIMESTAMPS:
Intro (0:00)
Russiagate, the Sequel (4:47)
Campus Crackdown (31:15)
Death Toll in Gaza Rises Dramatically (1:13:40)
Outro (1:26:11)
- - -
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, exclusively here on Rumble, the free speech alternative to YouTube.
Tonight...
I know it is completely unsurprising, even expected, but it is also nonetheless newsworthy to note that the Biden administration is genuinely preparing to blame a foreign government, you'll never guess which one, for spreading concerns over Biden's age and his cognitive fitness.
Yes, that's right.
The reason Americans are so concerned about Biden's cognitive decline is not because they have been spending years watching his brain freezing and melting.
Instead, it's because the Kremlin is again interfering in our political discourse to quote exploit these divisions.
I know it sounds like satire and that I must be making it up or just kind of exaggerating wildly some very trivial claim but the reality is is that both the US intelligence community and parts of the corporate press always in alignment really are laying the groundwork explicitly for this excuse All while Democratic Party officials and pundits and activists continue to absolutely implode in unprecedented ways as part of their civil war over whether they can drive Biden out of the race.
We will look at all of that.
And then, even though there is almost no attention being paid these days to the two U.S.
funded and armed wars, the one in Ukraine and the other in Gaza, those wars actually continue to rage on in highly dangerous and disturbing ways, albeit with little attention.
We've repeatedly reported over the last nine months on the systemic crackdown on the freedoms and liberties of people in the United States who are critics of Israel and its war or defenders of the Palestinian cause and those attacks continue always to escalate including some of the most severe escalations over the past several weeks.
We'll show you the latest as well as Some brand new and highly disturbing data about the extent of the war in Gaza and the actual death toll there from this war.
And then finally, as the NATO Summit is set to begin in Washington, it is becoming clearer and clearer that the U.S.
and its European allies have no real goal in that conflict other than to continue to prolong it for its own sake.
In other words, to ensure that it never ends and have no other real goals with regard to this war.
Contrary to all the propaganda about the war from the start, this is now set to be yet another endless war that serves as a bottomless pit of spending and profit for the U.S.
armed industry, as well as an indefinite destruction of both Ukraine and the lives of hundreds of thousands of young Ukrainian and Russian soldiers.
None of the war aims set by the United States at the start is even remotely possible, as virtually everyone now admits.
That NATO's primary goal is to ensure simply that this war rages on, now without any other purpose than prolonging the war for its own end.
We will cover that all as well.
Before we get to that, a few programming notes.
First of all, we are encouraging our viewers to download the Rumble app, which works both on your smart TV and telephone.
If you do so, you can follow the shows you most like to watch here on Rumble.
And once you do that, you can activate the notifications feature, which we hope you will.
And that means the minute any of those shows that you follow begin broadcasting live on this platform, you'll be notified by text or email, however you wish.
You can just click on the link.
No waiting around when those other shows are late.
If those shows, including ours, go on the air unexpectedly, you'll be notified of that as well.
It really helps the live viewing numbers for each Rumble program and therefore for the platform itself.
As another reminder, System Update is also available in podcast form.
You can listen to every episode.
12 hours after the first broadcast live here on Rumble on Spotify, Apple, and all the major podcasting platforms.
If you rate, review, and follow our show there, it really helps spread the visibility of the program.
Finally, every Tuesday and Thursday night once we're done with our live show here on Rumble, we move to Locals for our live interactive After Show, tonight being Tuesday.
We will do that as soon as we conclude our show live here this evening, where we take your questions, respond to your feedback, hear your suggestions for future shows and guests.
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 multiple other interactive features.
It's the place where we first publish our original written journalism.
We publish every day their professionalized written transcripts of the shows we broadcast here.
And most of all, it's the community on which we rely to support the independent journalism that we're doing here every night.
Simply click the Join button right below the video player on the Rumble page, and it will take you directly to that community.
For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update starting right now.
I could really spend all night, every night, doing nothing other than just highlighting to you some of the most hilarious and entertaining parts of the Democratic Party internal breakdown and implosion over the attempt by half of the party to drive Joe Biden from the race against his doing nothing other than just highlighting to you some of the most hilarious and entertaining parts of the Democratic Party internal breakdown and implosion over the attempt by this.
The way in which Donald Trump has basically disappeared and gotten out of the way of the Democratic Party's civil war and self-destruction is remarkably unexpected.
And honestly, whoever got Trump to do that, whoever convinced him that it was wise to basically stay out of the spotlight for all of these days now deserves some sort of prize of some kind because it's really an astounding feat that they've been able to get him to do that.
And obviously there's this old saying in law that when your opponent is imploding, the best thing to do is stay quiet.
And that is exactly what, miraculously, Donald Trump has been persuaded by somebody to do.
And as a result, what is happening is that the Democratic Party and their pundits and their operatives and their media allies and their elected officials are doing insane things every day that, if you're engaged in politics, is actually quite hilarious, but it's also very revealing about their actual mindset.
They are basically telling on themselves every single day with the way in which they're weighing in on this question of whether they should drive Joe Biden from the race involuntarily using power centers like Democratic donors and their media outlets and the like.
I think.
The other day we showed you how Paul Krugman, the New York Times columnist and the previous economist who has long been one of the Democratic Party's most stalwart and vocal partisan loyalists, had been saying for months, in fact years, that anyone who raised questions about Joe Biden's cognitive decline or his age was an extremely deceitful person, part of the right-wing disinformation machine, all of that.
And like so many of the same people like him, who have the same ideological disposition and the same kind of place in the media landscape, all of them instantly switched on a dime.
I've never seen anything that abrupt, such a thing so abruptly before, where they had spent months and years saying that it is immoral and deceitful to say X And then the next day, they all held hands and began chanting X in unison.
X being that Joe Biden is obviously suffering from cognitive decline and is too impaired to run for president.
And one of the really interesting parts about this, I will just note before I get to this new Paul Krugman pronouncement, is that Democrats aren't even pretending to care.
They're not even pretending to care about the possibility that if Biden is reelected, it will mean that our country is governed By a cripple, by somebody who is mentally unwell, who often doesn't know where he is or what he's saying, who's completely controlled by people around him who are unelected and secretive.
Those people and Biden control the nuclear code and whether to start wars and all kinds of unrestrained executive powers.
And none of these Democrats are even pretending.
That their concern about Biden's cognitive decline, which they're only now admitting because they're forced to, might actually be a reason why he shouldn't be re-elected.
They don't even pretend about that.
And that's because despite all the things we hear about this being the most important election in all of history, who the president is doesn't actually matter all that much, which is why they're all fine with having a cognitive cripple there.
And I can guarantee you without the slightest doubt, That if Joe Biden were leading in the polls, as opposed to behind in every poll, all of these same Democrats and liberals who are now finally admitting what everyone has long been seeing with their own eyes, Now that might go without saying, it might even surprise you, but I really think it's worth noting given how explicit they're being about it.
The only reason they've changed their minds is because they're fearful that Biden is running behind Trump and that as a result of that debate, where even they can no longer deny the truth, he won't be able to defeat Trump.
That's the only thing they care about.
Now, that might go without saying.
It might even surprise you.
But I really think it's worth noting, given how explicit they're being about it.
And here's Paul Krugman today, just the latest of all those people to make clear how true that is.
Paul Krugman is one of those people who spent years attacking viciously anyone who suggested Biden was incapable, and then suddenly when all of his liberal colleagues began doing it, he began to write these pain columns proclaiming his deep personal love and admiration and worship of Joe Biden, but saying that for the good of the country, the thing that he cares about as a patriot, he should step aside.
That kind of tone?
Here's Paul Krugman today.
Now starting to face the reality that Joe Biden, far from being this good, decent man and this patriot who cares about anything other than himself, is actually going to stay in the race, despite what they've all been saying is the inevitable outcome that that means he'll lose to Trump.
And now faced with that reality, that Joe Biden is not going to do this self-sacrificing act of letting go of power for the good of the country.
I mean, imagine how dumb you have to be, how gullible and naive you have to believe to believe that Joe Biden Whose entire adult life has been about nothing other than pursuing power and title is some benevolent, magnanimous person who would just voluntarily give up a thing he's been chasing his whole life for the good of some greater cause?
These people live in an insane bubble.
Ordinary Americans who don't pay attention to politics understand this.
They're very jaded and skeptical and cynical about a politician's motives.
It's only these people, the ones who get paid a lot of money to write about politics, who entertain these West Wing fairy tales about the kind of thing that motivates Joe Biden.
Look at all the things Joe Biden has done in his life.
From vocally advocating the invasion of Iraq and the war in Iraq to being primarily responsible for extremely long prison sentences, for people doing nothing other than possessing small amounts of drugs, only for him to then turn around and posture as some sort of empathetic figure to drug addicts when it came time for his own son.
Do you know how many people Joe Biden is responsible for sticking in a cage for many years for nothing other than possessing small amounts of drugs?
On top of which, he has been basically an ardent supporter of almost every American war over the last 25 years and has, of course, spent the last nine months blindly and limitlessly arming and funding Israel as it destroys Gaza and kills huge numbers of people.
So where is this decency that we're all supposed to believe he has?
So they're now all confronting the fact that actually Biden is like every other politician, something that you have to be incredibly dumb not to have seen before.
And now this is the kind of thing they're saying.
Quote, here's Krugman today.
Quote, so I said what I thought needed saying about Biden, hating every minute as I did.
Meaning I wrote two columns saying he should leave the race.
One thing I won't do, however, is snipe at him if he chooses to stay in.
Anyone who does that is in effect campaigning for Trump and doing so out of sheer pettiness.
Sheer pettiness.
He's the one who wrote two articles saying that Biden is too impaired to beat Trump, to run and withstand the rigors of that campaign.
And now he's saying that if Biden decides to stay in, everybody has to shut up about the fact that the current president of the United States, the one seeking four more years in office, is cognitively impaired and will get increasingly impaired, and anyone who raises that is doing so out of sheer pettiness.
This is what I mean when they don't pretend to care at all if the current president or the future president has a melting or functionless brain.
All of this about how Biden should leave for the good of the country is only about beating Trump.
But these kinds of things are happening every day.
I could show you so many more things where Democrats just contradict what they said the day before, where for the last five years, these people have insisted that it's immoral to launch character attacks on Joe Biden.
Now they're routinely doing exactly that, comparing him to Donald Trump and to all of the worst character traits that they believe Biden is exhibiting.
They just change the rules at any moment.
We'll get to all of that.
We covered that last night.
We'll certainly cover more in the future, the just unhinged nature of democratic and liberal discourse over this problem that they've created themselves.
They spent weeks now telling the public that Biden is unwell and incapable to serve.
And now they're stuck with the reality that Biden probably isn't going to leave and they have no power to force him out.
So now they have to back a candidate who they've spent weeks screaming as loudly as they can, is addled, and unfit to serve as president.
And there's no way to put that back in the box.
I think they really believe, these media people and these DC operatives, that they continue to wield total power.
No matter how often they see that their pronouncements don't mean anything, that nobody trusts them, that nobody pays attention to them.
They've been screaming for eight years that Donald Trump is the ultimate threat to democracy, and yet if you ask Americans in polls who the bigger threat to democracy is, Biden or Trump, they'll say Biden.
These people in this bubble have no idea what ordinary Americans believe and no effect on them, but they haven't accepted that fact that they're so enraged that Biden didn't do what they demanded.
to the point where they basically created this problem for themselves.
And so one of the things that they are now trying to do that you are actually seeing is to rejuvenate the framework that is intended to convince Americans that the only reason they might be thinking negatively about Joe Biden or positively about Donald Trump is not because they actually have a mind of
their own and are judging the two candidates based on how they remember his presidency, but instead it's because Russia, Russia, the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin is once again interfering in our sacred democracy and manipulating, brainwashing the public to believe what they want the public brainwashing the public to believe what they want the public to believe, namely that Joe Biden is a weak candidate and Donald Trump is the better one.
Hear from the Wall Street Journal today.
This is their headline story.
I just want you to take note, not only of what they're trying to claim, but of the language that they use to do it.
The headline is, Russia seeks to boost Trump in 2024 election.
And then you have here the famous and all prevalent formulation in US media, US intelligence officials say.
So the Wall Street Journal isn't purporting to verify that Russia is seeking to boost Trump in the 2024 election.
All they're doing is mimicking mindlessly what, quote, U.S.
intelligence officials say.
And as I've said many times before, if you look at how most media reports are constructed, you will be surprised if you actually go to look for it, how often major media outlets do not tell you what has actually happened.
All they're doing is repeating what government officials have said to them.
That was supposedly the lesson they learned with the Iraq War, where every story from the New York Times was, Saddam Hussein is on the market for nuclear-only aluminum tubes, officials say.
Every article was framed that way, and after they got everything wrong and provoked a war that killed over a million people and destroyed Iraq and thousands of American troops and trillions of dollars, they did a mea culpa where they said our problem was that we were too gullible and too willing to print what anonymous intelligence officials say without actually confirming what they were saying is true.
And yet, barely 20 years later, that's what the New York Times and virtually every other media outlet does.
This U.S.
intelligence official say, it's not actually reporting, it's just a press release from anonymous people in the CIA.
The Wall Street Journal goes on, other foreign influence operations in the U.S.
include attempts by Iran to covertly encourage protests against the war in Gaza, officials say.
Quote, the Russian government has launched a, quote, whole of government effort.
That's scary.
It's not just parts of the government, it's the whole of government effort To influence the outcome of the U.S.
presidential election and favors Republican candidate Donald Trump in the race?
Senior U.S.
intelligence officials said on Tuesday.
And then it goes on.
The officials, these are the only, I mean, do you see how everything, none of this is reporting?
It's just repeating what they were told by the officials.
The officials, the officials didn't mention Trump by name, but said that Russia's current activity described as covert social media use and other online propaganda efforts mirrored the 2020 and 2016 election cycles when Moscow also favored Trump and sought to undermine Democratic candidates, according to U.S.
intelligence agencies.
How can you be someone who calls yourself a journalist?
I believe the reporter here, Dustin Volz, calls himself an investigative journalist or whatever, and day after day publish articles that do nothing other than summarize What CIA and FBI officials have just whispered to you in your ear that they want you to go and report and then you just go dutifully quote them and publish it in the paper under your byline without having the slightest idea if it's true without even pretending to know if it's true?
You're just summarizing what they've told you to go say.
Quote, we haven't observed a shift in Russia's preferences for the presidential race from past elections, a senior official in the office of the Director of National Intelligence said during a media briefing summarizing intelligence on foreign threats to the election.
So DHS called some of their favorite servants.
Who called themselves journalists, called them to a secret briefing at a really impressive part of the National Intelligence Apparatus with all these blinking lights and cool machines and secretive access.
These journalists are so grateful to be there.
And they had a little briefing.
They said, here's what we found.
Now go tell the American public this.
And then they dutifully walk out and go do exactly that.
Quote, the warnings underscore how U.S. adversaries are continuing to exploit social media platforms and other avenues to manipulate public opinion despite efforts by the intelligence and law enforcement agencies to expose and crack down on the influence operations.
Now, you know exactly why this is being published.
It's because Joe Biden is behind Donald Trump in all the polls.
The U.S.
intelligence agency despises Donald Trump.
And just like they did in 2016 and 2020, they will continuously leak to gullible reporters all kinds of assertions unaccompanied by evidence that are designed to make Americans believe that the only reason they have negative perceptions of Biden and positive perceptions of Trump is because they're too stupid to think for themselves and instead the Kremlin is manipulating them.
And I don't even have to go into the history and the severity of how much the US quote interferes in the internal affairs of other countries.
I've shown you that many times.
Now, lest you think I'm exaggerating this one story here at the White House press briefing just today.
The New York Times' David Sanger, who is one of their intelligence reporters, who has long been, and I've talked about many times before, written about many times before, one of the chief spokesmen for the CIA and the intelligence community in Washington.
I mean, he spent his whole career doing exactly this sort of thing, just mindlessly rushing forward and publishing whatever the U.S.
intelligence community tells him to write.
That is his job.
That's what he does.
And today he took it to a whole new level.
You have to hear this question that he posed to Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary at the White House briefing today about why it is that Americans might believe inaccurately, of course, that Joe Biden is too old to be president.
You can denigrate politicians in the United States and elsewhere.
Do you have any concerns right now that this is the leading edge of any part of a Russian effort to interfere in the election?
Has the president been briefed on this?
And have you seen any evidence that the Russians, How much she was nodding?
I'm surprised she didn't strain her neck.
on the debate performance to repeat some of the president's most embarrassing moments.
Did you see there how happy she was to get this question, how much she was nodding?
I'm surprised she didn't strain her neck.
I mean, there really is a reporter from the New York Times, David Sanger, Sanger, who went to the White House briefing to encourage her to say that the reason that people are concerned about Joe Biden's debate performance is because the Russians are manipulating the footage in order to make Biden appear worse than who went to the White House briefing to encourage her to say that the reason that Of course, there's nothing wrong with Joe Biden.
It's just, unfortunately, people have been brainwashed to believe that there is because of the Kremlin and all the naughty and dirty things that they do to deceive our American public.
And basically, he's not saying he has evidence of it.
He's saying, have you had any evidence?
Have you found things to suggest that this is true?
And then listen to what she said.
And for those of you who are listening to this and not seeing the video, while he asked the question, she couldn't wait to answer.
She was smiling at him.
She was nodding her head so aggressively.
She couldn't wait to interrupt him to answer.
And here's what she said when she finally got to.
So that's a very good question.
That's a very good question.
I mean, imagine being at the White House press briefing And all of your colleagues are asking aggressive questions now about Biden's cognitive decline and whether they've been hiding facts.
And then you finally stand up and feed them a line of propaganda that they even haven't claimed themselves.
And then you get the little head pat.
From the White House Press Secretary, thank you for that.
Thank you for that suggestion.
That's a very good question.
Listen to what she goes on to say.
That's a very good question.
Very good question.
I would have to talk to our team about those particular questions that you just asked.
There were multiple questions in your statement there.
I would leave it to the Department of Justice as what they announced.
Obviously, that's for them to speak to.
Look, AI has always been a concern.
That's why the president made some announcements recently to take executive action on how we can deal with AI.
Someone please tell me what AI has to do with the widespread perception that has existed for many years about Biden's cognitive impairment and how all Americans basically who watch that debate saw Biden's brain freezing and melting.
She's basically implying that these videos are fake.
Remember, what they were doing with all the other videos prior to the debate that show Biden disoriented and confused and not knowing where he was, was they were implying with the help of the media that all of this was just right-wing disinformation.
These videos were being doctored and manipulated and taken out of context.
There was nothing wrong with Biden.
They were what they called cheap fakes, meaning admitting that they were somehow genuine, but at the same time manipulated.
So for a long time, this is what they were doing to hide Biden's cognitive decline and what the media was doing to run cover for the White House.
And also, I want to just remind you of one other thing, which is the special counsel who was appointed to investigate whether Joe Biden committed crimes by having classified documents strewn all over the place, at his house, at various offices, without the slightest authorization to have retained and lost and hidden those classified documents inside his garage, the thing for which Donald Trump is being prosecuted.
The special counsel who was appointed to Determine whether Biden should be prosecuted ended up concluding, after questioning Biden for many hours, that it would be impossible for a jury to convict Joe Biden because no jury would believe that Biden is capable of forming criminal intent.
In other words, it's not enough to convict somebody of a crime to show that they did something the law prohibits, such as take classified documents home.
You have to show that they did that with malicious intent, with criminal intent.
The same thing if you are driving a car and you hit somebody without wanting to because they ran into the front of your car.
That's a completely different act than if you take your car and with criminal intent deliberately kill somebody by running them over in a car because you dislike them or for whatever other reason.
Even though they seem like on the surface to be identical acts, the major difference is whether they have criminal intent.
And what the special prosecutor said is we could never prove to a jury that Biden is incapable of forming criminal intent because he just seems like an old man with memory problems.
And he recounted all the different things that Biden was incapable of remembering that are shocking for somebody to have forgotten.
And of course, there's video of this questioning by the special counsel.
And yet the Democrats are fighting tooth and nail, the Justice Department is, to prevent disclosure to the public of this questioning.
And before this debate, when everyone wanted to, when Biden wanted to win, the media was fully supportive of this concealment of this video.
We'll see whether or not it now surfaces, now that a lot of people have turned on Biden, but the argument that the Biden Justice Department and the Biden White House made as to why that Video had to be concealed was exactly the one she's alluding to here, which is that AI allows deepfakes and that they're concerned that there will be manipulation of these videos and deepfakes circulating.
And that's why the public has no right to access this questioning and judge for themselves whether the special prosecutor was accurate in assessing Joe Biden's cognitive decline.
This is their now go-to excuse for why they have to hide even things like videos.
Here's the rest of this.
... from Congress.
That is something.
It is a cutting-edge technology that we need to get our hands on and get a better understanding of what it could potentially do.
And so that is something that the president certainly is looking to make sure that we deal with this in a full, whole-of-government way.
On those particular questions, I would have to check in with our team here and obviously whoever's related to the Department of Justice in that statement, I would refer.
So that was a minute and 30 seconds of just uninterrupted propaganda, where she even threw in at the end, like, "I have to check to see if we actually have evidence that any of these things are happening." But the whole point of that was to create this narrative, like the Wall Street Journal article, that Russia is responsible for negative perceptions of Biden.
She was so happy to get the question that the New York Times fed to her.
And by the way, just in case you're concerned, don't worry, Joe Biden is deeply investigating the dangers of artificial intelligence, the way in which they can be used to manipulate videos, and the safeguards that we need to ensure that can't happen.
So if you are somebody who's worried about the dangers of AI and their capacity to manipulate the public, Joe Biden is on top of this.
He's looking into it.
He's presiding over commissions.
He's fully understanding all of the different components of this problem and he is finding solutions field of greens has been a sponsor of ours for quite some time
we are happy to say and the foundation of this company is that it is extremely important that you have a healthy diet that you think carefully about the kinds of nutrients and vitamins that are entering your body and obviously with modern society where everything is shipped and frozen and there's additives and nutrients on top of which people are extremely busy just trying to keep their head above water it's often very very difficult to
to make sure that your diet and the diet of your family members are giving you all of the things you need.
And that is why I personally, once Field of Greens started to talk to us and I got the product, have been taking Field of Greens.
It's really unlike any other fruit or vegetable supplement or green product.
It is never watered down with any extracts.
It is a completely organic superfood filled with all fruits and vegetables that you need every day.
And these fruits and vegetables were specifically selected by doctors to support various bodily functions that are vital, like your coronary system, your liver, your kidneys, your metabolism, your immune system.
And the most interesting thing is that Field of Greens and only this product in this space is backed by a better health promise, meaning that at your next checkup, if you go to your doctor and he doesn't notice or she doesn't notice improved health, concrete improvement in your health, you're entitled to get your money back.
So you don't have to look back and say, oh, I should have paid attention to nutrition when I was younger.
Field of Greens is a key way to do that better than Any other product on the health market I would say of this kind and when it matters most it's easy to take.
You don't have to spend a lot of time and attention worrying about it.
And we can get you started with 15% off and free shipping if you visit FieldOfGreens.com and use the promo code Glenn.
That's promo code Glenn at fieldofgreens.com.
Thank you.
One is the war itself, which we will get to in a minute, since it barely has any attention anymore, even though Israel continues to destroy major parts of Gazan civilian infrastructure, using U.S.
bombs and weapons to kill enormous amounts of innocent people.
Even though people aren't looking quite as much, they're concerned about whether Democrats are going to win.
You have all these Democrats who have been accusing Joe Biden of genocide for the last nine months, and suddenly their only concern is no longer the genocide in Gaza.
They've been accusing him of perpetrating, but how to help him or his party stay in power.
But the other component behind the war itself is the effects that the war is having inside the United States, specifically the severe crackdown cheered on and demanded and imposed by pro-Israel cheerleaders in the United States on people who criticize Israel inside the United States, who exercises a right to oppose and protest against the Israeli war in Gaza or our government's funding and arming of it.
Or people who support the Palestinian cause.
We have constantly reported on the numerous ways that laws have been passed.
To severely constrain the free speech rights of American citizens when it comes to Israel and Israel alone.
All of the different measures that Congress has taken to demand that colleges change their curriculum and take all sorts of administrative steps to eliminate the kinds of speech that members of Congress dislike because they say it makes Jewish students unsafe to have to be exposed to it.
We reported on the mass firings in media and politics and journalism.
and all sorts of other sectors of people who have criticized Israel in a way deemed excessive.
The boycott campaign by billionaires to prevent people from entering the industry of hedge funds or other high finance if they are found guilty of denouncing Israel, this foreign country, or its crimes or its war effort in Gaza.
Just a continuous stream of repression and attacks on the free speech rights, on the employment rights, on the civil liberties of American citizens as punishment for criticizing this foreign country and just that foreign country and that country alone.
them.
I'm not going to repeat all the things we reported, but I just want to instead report on some of the latest and most disturbing new escalations of these crackdowns because they continue to escalate even while people aren't paying attention.
First of all, here from the New York Times reporting yesterday, Columbia, the university in New York, removes three deans saying that their tax touched on, quote, anti-Semitic tropes.
That's three deans at Columbia punished, reassigned, moved out of their office for supposedly engaging in speech that was, quote, unacceptable and deeply upsetting to Jewish students.
That's what the president of the university said.
The Maat Shafik, the university president, called the sentiments in the text message, quote, unacceptable and deeply upsetting.
Now, I'm sure you remember, as I do, How essentially everybody on the American right who identified as conservative or just sort of anti-woke has made this cause their primary issue for the last decade.
Mocking college students who demand to be protected from ideas they find disturbing.
viciously condemning the notion that academics and scholars and administrators should lose their jobs for expressing views simply because they're unpopular on college campus.
Remember that was called cancel culture.
That was called censorship.
Everyone in the American right hated that.
Barry Weiss and Dave Rubin and Ben Shapiro all built very lucrative careers pretending to champion the cause of free discourse.
And yet now you have the most significant and extreme crackdown and attack on free speech over the last nine months that I've seen in many decades that involve private sector jobs, academia, scholarship, the ability of professors to teach things and say things, and even implemented laws themselves, like we reported on many times.
that are designed to punish people for their speech if they're found to be anti-Semitic.
Not if they're found to be racist, not if they're found to be misogynistic, not if they're found to be Islamophobic, not if they're found to be homophobic or transphobic.
The right thinks it's absurd to try and police speech on those grounds.
But on this ground, all the principles get abandoned and everything inverts.
So let's look at exactly what these professors were Punished for doing.
Three Columbia University administrators have been removed from their posts after sending text messages that, quote, disturbingly touched on ancient anti-Semitic tropes during a forum about Jewish issues in May, according to a letter sent by Columbia officials to the university community on Monday.
Now this has been what, quote, woke ideology has been about.
Getting people fired for being adjacent to or implying tropes that are racist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, etc.
And everyone who proclaimed they were anti-woke was indignant about this.
This is the same exact framework.
It's just applied to a group that those people who have been making up their cause have more empathy for, or more affection for.
And in this case, it's not speech that they like that's being targeted, when it's very easy to denounce it, it's speech they dislike that's being targeted, and now suddenly they cheer it.
Quote, the three Columbia administrators involved in the text message exchanges are Kristen Crome, formerly the Dean of Undergraduate Student Life, Matthew Patachnik, formerly the Associate Dean for Student and Family Support, and Susan Chang Kim, formerly the Vice Dean and Chief Administrative Officer, I believe.
At least one, if not two, of those punished deans are themselves Jewish.
We'll check on that, but I know that at least one is.
The administrators are still employed by the university but have been placed on indefinite leave and will not return to their previous jobs.
The university also announced on Monday that beginning this fall, Columbia students, faculty, and staff will undergo required anti-discrimination training that will include a focus on anti-Semitism.
I don't think anything has provoked the rage and disgust of the American right more over the last decade than re-education programs designed to cleanse people of prohibited ideas or discriminatory ideas.
But training people, re-training them, re-educating them about anti-Semitism?
That, of course, is incredibly noble.
Quote, on March 31st, in the aftermath of student protests and congressional hearings called to address anti-Semitism on college campuses, Columbia hosted during its reunion weekend a panel discussion called Jewish Life on Campus, Past, Present, and Future.
The panel speakers included Brian Cohen, the Executive Director of Columbia Barnard Hillel, the Jewish Students Organization, and we of course had Lee Fang on to report on the financial connection between Hillel and the Israeli government.
It also included David Scheitzer, the former dean of the law school and a chair of the university's anti-semitism task force.
The three administrators and Dr. Soret were in the audience.
And a person sitting behind Ms.
Chang Kim photographed the text message she was exchanging with her colleagues.
These were private text messages, not even public statements.
And somebody creeped behind them and took photographs of their text messages and then quote, the images of those conversations were shared with the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website which published an article about them.
Now the Washington Free Beacon is one of the, you could go back a decade and find hundreds of articles.
Mocking and denouncing university students for demanding that people be fired for racist views.
Mocking students who say they're uncomfortable by those sorts of views.
Mocking the idea that academics need to be shielded from racists or homophobic.
They've all said no.
The thing to do is debate them.
Allow these discourses to flourish.
And here's the Washington Free Beacon now leading the lynch mob.
against these deans who are guilty of nothing other than having private text messages one another that they deem to be insufficiently sensitive to the grievances of Jewish professors and Jewish students.
Dr. Pashnik texted in a private message that one panelist was, quote, taking full advantage of this moment.
Quote, huge fundraising potential, he wrote.
No, that's just a fact.
Remember, facts don't care about your feelings.
You're supposed to be able to state facts, even if it offends other people.
That's what made Ben Shapiro a right-wing prophet, that immensely profound decree.
And of course, it is a fact that many of the largest donors at all these universities have been demanding and pressuring that the school crack down on Israel critics in the name of anti-Semitism.
So of course, it is true that the more that Columbia does that, it is used as a fundraising That's just a fact.
It may make other people's feelings hurt to point out that facts, but facts don't care about your feelings.
Quote, later an alumna in the audience began to cry as she described her daughter's uneasiness as a Jewish student at Columbia.
The woman said she had shared her daughter's feelings with a representative of the university development office.
Which, by the way, is the office in charge of the billions and billions and billions of dollars of endowment that Columbia has and builds on.
And one of the Columbia administrators texted, quote, amazing what money can do.
That's it.
That's what they were texting that caused them to be fired.
Now here is the free beacon, and the author is Aaron Siberian, who I actually have had on my show before.
In large part to talk about the dangers of cancel culture on college campuses.
He's been one of the loudest people in media who has been denouncing this for many years.
But he's a very vocal supporter of Israel and has now taken the lead in disclosing the bad acts that these administrators are doing that he considers anti-Semitic.
So he's the one who got the The photos of the private tax that someone took on the phone of these administrators, and he's the one who published it, quote, Columbia administrators fire off hostile and dismissive text messages, vomit emojis, during alumni reunion panel on Jewish life.
Oh my God!
Can you imagine the monsters who would fire off hostile and dismissive text messages and even use vomit emojis?
During a reunion panel on Jewish life, I mean, the law requires that if you're a school administrator, you sit respectively and deferentially when any Jewish student is talking.
And you don't disagree with what they say, you certainly don't mock it, even in private.
That is not allowed.
And yet these administrators were actually expressing hostile and dismissive text messages with one another, and even using vomit emojis.
Yes, I know sometimes this might hurt to hear, but sometimes people who are Jewish actually do say things that deserve mockery and criticism and even a vomit emoji, just like students of every other group might.
Here's what the article goes on to report.
Quote, "The administrators," this is the article that got them reassigned and pundished.
Quote, "The administrators included Joseph Sorat, the dean of Columbia College." Okay, we went over them, Susan King Chim and Kristen Crum, and Matthew Patachnik, the associate dean for student and family support.
Throughout the panel, which unfolded over nearly two hours, Chang Kim was on her phone texting her colleagues about the proceedings, and they were replying to her in turn.
As the panelists offered frank appraisals of the climate Jewish students have faced, Columbia's top officials responded with mockery and vitriol, dismissing claims of anti-Semitism and suggesting, in Patchenak's words, that Jewish figures on campus were exploiting the moment for, quote, fundraising potential.
Quote, this is difficult to listen to and I'm trying to keep an open mind to learn about the point of view, Chang Kim texted Sorat, the dean of the college.
Yep, he replied.
The administrators expressed skepticism that Jewish students had experienced targeting or discrimination.
As Massel, who published a news report in the Columbia Spectator about Jewish students who felt, quote, ostracized, was asked to dilate on, quote, the experience of Jewish and Israeli students on campus, Chang Kim fired off a text to Kram and Pachinic, quote, did we really have students being kicked out of clubs for being Jewish?
The messages are not timestamped, so it is not always clear to what comments on the panel the participants are referring.
In other cases, though, the references are easy to understand.
At one point, Krom used a pair of vomit emojis to refer to an op-ed penned by a Columbia's campus rabbi, Johann Hein, in October 23.
Ooh, no criticizing or mocking an op-ed by a rabbi.
That is absolutely... Only an evil, racist person would do that.
You can mock a...
op-ed by anybody else, an imam or a Christian leader or an atheist or a liberal or a concertist, not a rabbi, that will get you fired and exposed by the Washington Free Beacon, the Free Beacon, the beacon of freedom. that will get you fired and exposed by the Washington The Beacon of Freedom.
The Washington Beacon of Freedom.
Titled, quote, Sounding the Alarm, the op-ed published in The Spectator expressed concern about, quote, the normalization of Hamas that Haines saw on campus.
Patachnik, the associate dean for student and family support, also chimed in to say that one of the panelists, it is not clear to whom he was referring, is capitalizing on the crisis at hand to raise money.
Quote, he knows exactly what he's doing and how to take full advantage of this moment, Patachnik wrote to Chang Kim and Cromm.
Now, do I need to actually point out that it is a debate whether, not Jewish students, but Israel supporters on college campuses.
It's much different.
There are a ton of Jewish supporters participating in and helping organize the protest against the Israeli war.
They weren't mocking Jewish students, they were mocking Israel supporters.
And on this show, I've constantly questioned and challenged the idea, as have guests, that there's some sort of anti-Semitism epidemic in the United States, that Jewish students on college campuses are uniquely endangered.
There have been virtually no attacks on Jewish students of any kind.
There have been a lot of attacks actually on pro-Palestinian protesters.
But neither an epidemic of any kind.
What these Jewish students are complaining about is that they feel like they're subject to hostility and being made uncomfortable because of criticisms of Israel, because of pro-Palestinian chants that they find offensive.
And all we've heard for a decade From the American right, every part of the American right is stop whining.
You have no right to be protected from political expression that makes you uncomfortable.
Everything is debatable, including race and gender and sex and sexual orientation and gender identity and immigration.
It doesn't matter how uncomfortable it makes you.
The point of colleges is to become an adult and and toughen up.
And stop whining because you hear things that make you feel uncomfortable or even attacked.
That's the whole argument of the left when it comes to people being censored for questioning gender ideology.
It makes trans people feel endangered.
It incites violence against them.
Same with the Black Lives Matter movement demanding that people be fired for advocating certain views because it makes black people or black students uncomfortable.
It's the same exact framework.
You're allowed to question a rabbi's op-ed in the United States without being fired.
You're allowed to mock or question whether anti-Semitism is being exploited to protect Israel or to argue that the concern about anti-Semitism on college campuses is being exploited to limit free speech and to crush dissent and criticism of Israel, something that many people have argued many, many times.
And now the Free Beacon, the Free Beacon, the Beacon of Freedom is leading the way, demanding that these college students, administrators, these administrators be punished.
They're publishing their private tax and suggesting they're anti-Semitic and insensitive.
Now, the Free Beacon and Aaron Severium Have had a much, much, much, much different position on very similar controversies, but that ones that did not involve Jewish students, but instead black students or trans students.
Here, for example, is the Beacon of Freedom, the Free Beacon, here in Samarium, April 21st, 2023, so five months before October 7th.
Quote, Stanford Law School's Black Students Group will no longer help law school recruit minority students in the wake of Duncan Apology Group, in the way of Duncan Apology, the group that cries, quote, scapegoating of diversity dean and white supremacist practices.
Quote, the letter also aired a number of grievances that it said predated the Duncan incident.
Stanford, the Black Law Students Association argued, has hobbled the group's ability to, quote, create a safe space for its members.
So Stanford is making black students feel unsafe on Stanford's campus, as they said.
And despite black students, quote, free labor, the school's admission policy, quote, reproduce and reify white supremacy, classism, and colorism.
Quote, based on the administration's handling of DEI, we unequivocally share a vote of no confidence in the current state of the administration's ability and willingness to adequately consider and respect the needs of black students and administrators.
The group said, quote, we hope this letter will urge the administration to restructure its processes, lend credence to marginalized communities, and truly acknowledge and combat its practices of exploitation and domination moving forward.
The exact same rhetoric we're hearing now, the exact same mentality, the exact same mindset that the right has mocked forever, for as long as I've been paying attention.
now deployed, and not for the first time, but it's been long deployed to protect pro-Israel students and to punish Israel critics long before October 7th, but it's intensified greatly.
Remember, the U.S. Constitution, Congress summoned university administrators, administrators of private universities, to Congress to demand that they crack down on speech that people like Elise Stefanik and pro-Israel supporters in the Democratic Party believe crosses into the line of anti-Semitism.
Imagine Congress summoning college administrators to demand that they limit speech about gender ideology or race, and then invite a bunch of black students or trans students to testify about how unsafe they feel, as they invited a string of privileged Jewish students at Harvard and Columbia and Yale to talk about how unsafe they were.
Again, I mean, the hypocrisy, the stench of it is so sickening.
I can barely stand it.
And it's not just on college campuses.
Here from the New York Times yesterday, a Wall Street law firm wants to define the consequences of participating in Israel protests.
Sullivan and Cromwell, which was one of the biggest and most influential law firms on the planet, Here's what Sullivan and Cromwell is doing.
is now requiring job applicants to explain their participation in Israel protests.
Critics see the policy as a way to silence speech about the war, do you think?
Here's what Sullivan and Cromwell is doing.
Listen to this.
Quote, Sullivan and Cromwell, a 145-year-old firm that has counted Goldman Sachs and Amazon among its clients, says that for job applicants, participation in a protest on campus or off could be a disqualifying factor.
that they're not going to be The firm is scrutinizing students' behavior with the help of a background check company, looking at their involvement with pro-Palestinian student groups, scouring social media and reviewing news reports and footage from protests.
Notice that they're not trying to find instances of potential applicants participating in pro-Israel protests or anti-immigration protests or any other kind of protests.
That's all totally fine.
The one thing you cannot do if you want a job at Tel Aviv and Cromwell is participate in pro-Palestinian protests or against the Israeli war in Gaza.
That's the one thing that will get you disqualified from employment.
And they're not just Doing that to people who come and say I participated in an anti... they're scouring social media and looking for news reports to find and keep a list of the people who participated in a report in protest against the Israeli war in Gaza or US support for it.
And either refusing to hire them or forcing them into all sorts of extra additional required interviews for them to explain why they did that.
Quote, the firm is looking for explicit instances of anti-Semitism as well as statements and slogans it is deemed to be, quote, triggering to Jews, said Joseph C. Schenker, a leader of Sullivan and Cuomo.
They're not looking for any people who have said things that are triggering to any other minority group.
Black people, Latinos, immigrants, LGBTs, Muslims, atheists, no.
That's all fine.
You can offend those groups as much as you want and still get a job at Sullivan and Cromwell.
There's only one minority group that you cannot offend if you want a job there.
How is it that we constantly hear that this one minority group is the most vulnerable and endangered one in the United States when every single power center is not only on their side but acting with unprecedented force to protect them and to punish their critics?
Seems kind of in conflict, these two narratives that American Jews are uniquely endangered or marginalized and discriminated against and yet every power center is acting aggressively to punish people who disagree with them.
Candidates could face scrutiny even if they weren't using problematic language but were involved with a protest where others did.
The protesters should be responsible for the behavior of those around them Mr. Shanker said or else they were embracing a quote mob mentality.
Quote, what's happening here is really just the implementation of basic workforce decency and standards, said Neil Barr, the chairman of Davis Polk, a global law firm employing more than 1,000 lawyers.
Davis Polk rescinded job offers over students' involvements with groups that had released statements blaming Israel for the October 7th attack by Hamas.
Sullivan and Cromwell's screening will take place after students apply for a job or arrange for an interview at their top law school, including Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and NYU.
The firm has engaged a background check company called Higher Right to scour social media and recordings of public appearances for statements or actions about the conflict.
Applicants will be asked to list student groups they have joined, participation at a protest, or involvement in a group that Sullivan and Cromwell find objectionable will prompt questioning.
Applicants will have to explain their role, including what they did to stop other protesters from making offensive or harassing statements.
So if you went to a protest against the Israeli war in Gaza, which is your absolute right as an American citizen to do, and you just held an inoffensive sign saying stop killing innocent people or stop funding Israel's wars, and someone in that protest, that same protest, who you don't know, who you didn't see, Said something that these law firms consider over the line when it comes to criticizing Israel.
You'll be forced to demonstrate what you did to stop them from doing that in order to get a job there.
And again, this is on top of all the other things that we've been reporting over the last nine months about crackdowns on people who are Israel critics.
From CNBC in November of 2023, Wall Street titans helped to fuel an Ivy League donor revolt.
Quote, at least 400 Penn alumni and donors joined a recent call hosted by former class presidents and several speakers who said they were frustrated with the university's current leadership.
Rowan was one of the final speakers on the call where he raised his own issues about the school.
Beyond the calls with donors and alumni, Rowan and other financial executives critical of the university have been in contact through their messages about their concerns with the school.
One of the people on these text messages chains with Rowan is Bill Ackman.
the billionaire CEO of the hedge fund Pershing Square.
Rowan and Ackman are not alone.
Investors David Magerman and Leon Cooperman have also said they plan to stop donating to their preferred universities to protest how the schools have responded to the war in Gaza.
So on one hand, it's an anti-Semitic trope that can get you punished or fired if you're an administrator speaking in private to say that obviously these kinds of events where the school demonstrates its protection of Jewish students and their limitations it's an anti-Semitic trope that can get you punished or fired if you're an administrator speaking in private to To say that obviously these kinds of events where the school demonstrates its protection of Jewish students and their limitations on Israel criticism have a fundraising aspect to them.
That's an anti-Semitic trope.
And on the other, all sorts of pro-Israel billionaires have been out in the open blackballing students who participate in criticism of Israel and withdrawing their billions of dollars of support for universities unless they prove they're willing to crack down on students who are critical of Israel.
Again, I mean, I thought the whole point of the right was that you should, not only do you have the right to, but you have the duty to state facts even if it upsets people.
It's clearly true that one of the main reasons that these universities have cracked down on criticism of Israel is because their biggest donors have been demanding that they do so.
Not all of them.
Many of them.
And of course there's a financial and fundraising component to what these universities are doing.
And it is inane to say that there's something anti-Semitic about pointing that out simply because in this case the students involved are Jewish or pro-Israel.
Now, the civil liberties group FIRE.org, which gained a lot of credibility and popularity among conservatives for the years spent defending conservative students, Who are targeted with censorship on universities for right-wing speech is one of the few, maybe the only consistent free speech group in the country.
They will defend anybody regardless of political ideology and they've repeatedly spoken out since October 7th on the dangers of this trend of punishing Israel critics.
And here they is what they said on April 17th.
When the congressional hearings were held on, quote, anti-Semitism, quote, we watched today's congressional hearing on anti-Semitism.
Here are our big takeaways.
Columbia's leaders told lawmakers they're investigating or have already disciplined multiple students and faculty for what appears to be speech protected by the university's policies and commitments.
Fire is looking into these alarming revelations.
As always, Fire will defend any student or protester investigated or punished for simply exercising their right to free expression or academic freedom.
Columbia's leaders said calls for genocide would violate university policy, but there are good reasons why the First Amendment and Columbia's substantially similar free speech promises generally protect even quote calls for genocide.
Remember, if you have a law or rule that prevents advocacy of genocide on a college campus, you can easily see that being applied to either side.
There are a lot of critics of Israel, a lot of people on the left, a lot of anti-Israel activists who believe that the genocide that's being committed is by Israel against Gaza.
In fact, not just activists who believe that there are major countries in the world like South Africa and others who have taken that position legally in court, that Israel is guilty of genocide.
So if you have a rule on college campuses that you can't advocate what's considered quote, genocide, that means that if you stand up and defend Israel and defend the Israeli war in Gaza, you could be punished or censored or expelled for quote, advocacy of genocide.
And then, of course, you could also, if you're a critic of Israel, be accused of advocating genocide by simply advocating that there should be full democracy between the river and the sea, where every person has the full and equal right to vote, because that would basically result in the elimination of a Jewish state once there's an Arab majority.
We don't have a hate speech exception to the free speech clause.
We don't have a genocide exception to the free speech clause.
And if you want to have a hate speech exception or whatever, a genocide exception, then don't come whining to me or anybody else when people are expelled from school for anti-trans speech on the grounds that that incites a genocidal violence against trans people, because you've already said that you believe in that framework.
Now, just to give you an example for how the American Right has talked about students until October 7th, when they completely changed their script, but how they always used to talk about students Who demanded protection from offensive speech or upsetting speech or demanded safe spaces on college campuses.
Just as one example, here is Fox and Friends on January, in January of 2016.
And the headline there is Trouble with Schools, meaning that the trouble is that all kinds of students and minority groups and marginalized groups are demanding speech limitations in the name of protecting them from violence.
Here's how Fox and Friends used to talk about this before October 7th.
Eskendi College students, should you at your university have a rule banning offensive speech?
51% say yes!
Oh my god, those crazy leftists.
Those evil leftists who want speech codes on college campuses.
51%.
Fox News is indignant and frightened.
And yet Fox News has cheered every single time that a student group has been closed or an Israel critic has been expelled or punished since October 7th because now they're the ones that want speech codes.
They just wanted to protect the one group they care about.
But here they were in 2016.
Look at this.
There's these crazy, insane, tyrannical leftists who want speech codes on college campuses.
and the name of being protected next guest says if these students want a safe space they should just stay home he's also the author of a brand new book abraham the world's first but certainly not last jewish lawyer alan dershowitz welcome back to the show long-time professor at harvard university harvard law school and who's the perfect person answered this question what happened to our college campuses professor well they became places where people are afraid of ideas they They think they know the truth and they have ideas.
Oh, they're afraid of ideas.
And here's the graphic on the screen.
They think I'm the perfect person to answer.
Don't go to college.
Just stay home if you want a safe space.
Obviously, they weren't talking about Israel supporters there.
They were talking about black students and LGBT students complaining that there were views that were being allowed on college campuses that made them uncomfortable.
And their idea was, look, toughen up.
If you don't want to hear ideas that make you uncomfortable, stay at home.
Don't go to college.
College is for adults.
You don't have the right to be protected there from ideas that make you feel endangered.
That's what the whole segment was, mocking these college students.
Here from Ben Shapiro, he delivered a speech at the Young Americans for Freedom.
They're for freedom.
Ben Shapiro is for freedom and therefore he spoke at the Young Americans for Freedom conference because Ben Shapiro is for freedom in November of 2015 and the topic of his speech was College students who demand that speech be limited or CBP punished if it makes them uncomfortable.
And the title of his talk was, because Ben Shapiro's like a tough guy, he's like really been through it all and he's like never complained or whined or anything.
It's quote, toughen up spoiled children.
So Ben Shapiro was calling college students spoiled children who wanted speech codes, who were whining about feeling unsafe on college campuses.
But now if you call Israel supporters that, spoiled children, it means that you'll be fired for, quote, anti-Semitic tropes.
So you're allowed to say this.
These children are spoiled.
They're privileged.
They're wealthy.
They should stop whining about any group we want.
Except one, the one that Ben Shapiro happens to identify most with.
Here's the incredibly tough and pro-liberty and pro-freedom speech he gave about college students in 2015.
...in doing his or her bad thing.
And all colleges do now is give people reasons to feel like they are justified in doing the bad things that they want to do.
Because once you've been microaggressed, once you've been microaggressed, once you're part of the self-designated victim group, driven to extremes by the evils of white privilege, you can now ban white students from black safe spaces.
You can ban them.
Which, by the way, is a policy the KKK loves because the space is both separate and equal.
Right.
You can call the cops.
You can call the cops.
You can have the police investigate hateful remarks, as the notice went out from MU.
So if you're a member of a self-identified victim group, you can even get the FBI or the police to investigate hateful speech.
This is all that people have been calling for after October 7th.
Call the police on pro-Palestinian protesters, have the FBI investigate them, put them in prison.
Because they're offending, in the words of Ben Shapiro, a self-identified victim group.
Of course, everything changes once the victim group is Ben Shapiro's own.
It's heavily covered.
I tweeted out that everybody should immediately call the cops and inform them that Professor Melissa Click was engaged in microaggressions against people and actual aggressions against people.
You can ban reporters from public spaces by calling for muscle.
By the way, why Melissa Click is still employed at this university is absolutely beyond me.
There is no way in hell anybody should be paying this out.
Once you're microaggressed, you can deliberately assault reporters, as we saw happen to at least a couple of reporters.
And again, I have to tell you, the strategy that these protesters are using is constant, you-hit-yourself strategy.
If you watch the tape of the reporter who is trying to get into the safe space, the magical safe space, the coveted utopian safe space, he's standing there with the camera, and all of the kids are saying to each other, and one of the professors is saying to them, Remember the one time that there was supposedly a documented case of violence against a Jewish student?
They finally found the case.
Barry Weiss was so excited.
They bump into the reporter with him standing there completely immobile, and then they start yelling at him about how he hit them.
Remember the one time that there was supposedly a documented case of violence against a Jewish student?
They finally found the case.
Barry Weiss was so excited.
Her website promoted it so aggressively because a Jewish student got stabbed in the eye, they said, with a Palestinian flag.
Invoking this image that, like, she was just standing there and somebody came up to her with, like, the sharp end of the flag and just stabbed her in the eye a bunch of times.
And then Mike Johnson went the next day to the Holocaust Memorial Museum and he claimed that Jewish students, plural, were walking around being stabbed in the eye by Palestinian flags, like it was some kind of, like, trend or epidemic.
And then the whole thing proved to be a Jesse Smollett level hoax when this Jewish student who was stabbed in the eye did this massive media tour the next day and there was absolutely nothing wrong with her eye.
Didn't even have like a little redness, like a little pink eye, let alone having been stabbed in the eye.
And they asked her like, well, what are your symptoms?
She's like, yeah, I just basically have a headache, a light headache.
I had a light headache.
Because it was a hoax.
It was a lie.
They had video of it finally emerge, and there were Palestinian protesters walking by her.
She was provoking them, very close to them, and they were all waving their flags, and one of them brushed up against her with the flag, and she claimed she was stabbed in the eye, and Barry Weiss and all the Israeli fanatics promoted it.
We finally got an example of a student who was victimized by violence.
They were all screaming anti-Semitism.
It all turned out to be a hoax, exactly like what Ben Shapiro is claiming that other minority groups do.
It's just childish behavior.
It's just spoiled brat behavior.
You can excuse pastors being punched inside the free speech zone, right?
You can do anything.
Once you've been microaggressed, microaggression gives you superpowers.
And the beauty of it is that you give yourself the superpowers because you're the one who determines whether you've been microaggressed.
You don't even have to show proof that you were microaggressed.
You were because you feel it deep in the cockles of your heart.
Oh wow, so apparently people who claim they're being micro-aggressed, who are members of minority groups, get superpowers as a result.
For example, like getting three, two different university professors fired for allowing too much anti-Israel speech on college campuses.
Forgetting major law firms to ban the hiring of anyone that participates in a protest against the Israeli war.
These are superpowers that you get if you are claiming to be microaggressed or somehow offended by speech on college campus.
Ben Shapiro hates that.
His message for them is toughen up, spoiled children.
Has anyone in that realm of the American right, the pro-Israel right, said anything like this in response to Jews?
No.
In fact, those college administrators are basically saying about these Jewish students exactly what Ben Shapiro has been saying about black students and Muslim students and LGBTQ students for a decade.
You become a hero on the American right if you mock So finally, all of this, the white privilege, the microaggressions, this provides the impetus for the safe space.
The vaunted safe space, which I know I have violated multiple times tonight.
toughen up, spoiled children, when it comes to Jewish or pro-Israel students.
So finally, all of this, the white privilege, the microaggressions, this provides the impetus for the safe space, the vaunted safe space, which I know I have violated multiple times tonight.
And I got to tell you, I don't give two hoots in hell.
The system is so corrupt, it's so inescapable, and you've made it so corrupt and so inescapable to yourself that when you need a safe space.
Everybody needs to be put outside the safe space, and reality must not intrude.
The South Park song about safe spaces is exactly what these people think.
All these pro-freedom advocates who believe so much in freedom, cheering this idea that if you want a safe space on college campus, if you're complaining that you feel unsafe, It's time for you to, it means you're in a bubble, it's time for you to go outside and all these pro-freedom people are cheering Ben Shapiro.
And let me tell you something about safe spaces.
There's only one group of people, one group of people, who want safe spaces that are race specific.
There's only one group of people that want safe spaces so that they never have to hear from anybody of a different ideology or political persuasion.
Those people are called fascists.
Okay, and you've got a bunch of fascists, damn fascists on this campus, who are trying to shut down political debate and trying to cloister themselves in this little cocoon of stupidity so they don't have to debate anyone or think about issues outside their kin so that they can feel comfortable.
Guess what?
Life isn't about feeling comfortable.
Life is about bettering yourself.
Get off your ass, you stupid pansies.
Get off your ass, you stupid pansies!
Ben Shapiro has been through it all.
He's battle-hardened.
He's sickened by the idea that students would whine about feeling unsafe on college campuses because of having to hear uncomfortable ideas.
These are fascists, he said.
There's only one group of people who do that.
They're called fascists.
They're pansies.
Ben Shapiro is sick of them.
They need to toughen up.
They're spoiled little children.
For saying far, far, far, far, far less than that about pro-Israel students literally crying or having their parents come and cry about how traumatized they are for hearing criticism of Israel that makes them uncomfortable.
Columbia student administrators were reassigned or punished while the beacon of freedom, the free beacon, led the way in tattling on them and cheering their punishment.
Now, just to add one last point to this that's about the war itself, in case you're still in doubt about whether people should have the right in the United States to protest this war, there has long been debate about how many children and women and innocent people Israel has killed in Gaza. there has long been debate about how many children and And typically the count comes from what's called the Gazan Health Ministry, which is run by Hamas as the governing body.
And that's supposed to imply that they're fabricating numbers, that what they're saying is unreliable, even though these numbers have been repeatedly verified by the World Health Organization and the UN.
Also then they just get called anti-Semitic.
Even the U.S.
government has said that those numbers from the Gazan Health Ministry are almost certainly undercounting the number of people killed in Gaza because they only count the number of people who go through the morgues.
But because there are so many people buried under buildings that they can't remove because they don't have the equipment or the electricity or the fuel to remove the rubble, And because there's basically no more health system in Gaza because the hospitals have all been destroyed, huge numbers of people who are being killed by the Israelis in Gaza don't go through the morgue and therefore aren't part of the official count.
And people, including the United States government that's funding and arming Israel, have been saying for months that the count, if anything, is radically undercounted.
Here is an article in The Lancet published just at the end of last week on July 5th.
And I realize that The Lancet, unfortunately, has actually sacrificed a lot of its credibility because they're the ones who published the so-called proximal origins of the COVID-19 pandemic in early February 2020 that purported to know for certain that the pandemic was caused through natural evolution and species jumping and not through a lab leak.
And there are all kinds of journalistic scandals and conflicts of interest surrounding that false proclamation in The Lancet.
And I do think The Lancet should be suspect in terms of their editorial process because of that.
That's part of the accountability of publishing something so irresponsible and reckless.
But that doesn't mean that every study published in The Lancet is to be disregarded.
And here, The Lancet has long had a reputation for editorial rigor when it comes to science, statistics, and things of that nature.
And so you can take this for what it's worth based on what the evidence cited for it is, quote, counting the dead in Gaza, a difficult but essential.
It's published by Rashid Khatib of the Institute of Community and Public Health, Martin McKee, the Department of Public Health and Policy at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in London, Salim Yousaf, the Population Health Research Institute of McMaster University, and Hamilton Health Sciences in Canada.
And they say the following, quote, by June 19th, 2024, 37,396 people have been killed in the Gaza Strip since the attack by Hamas and the Israeli invasion in October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, as reported by the U.N.
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
The ministry's figures have been contested by the Israeli authorities, although they have been accepted as accurate by Israeli intelligence services, the U.N.
and World Health Organization.
These data are supported by independent analyses comparing changes in the number of deaths of UN Relief and Works Agency staff with those reported by the Ministry, which found claims of data fabrication implausible.
The Ministry has had to augment its usual reporting based on people dying in its hospitals or brought in dead, with information from reliable media sources and first responders.
This change has inevitably degraded the detailed data recorded previously.
Consequently, the Gaza Health Ministry now reports separately the number of unidentified bodies among the total death toll as of May 10, 2024.
30% of the 35,000 deaths were unidentified.
Some officials and news agencies have used the development designed to improve data quality to undermine the veracity of the data.
However, the number of reported deaths is likely an underestimate.
The non-governmental organization Airwars undertakes detailed assessment of incidents in the Gaza Strip and often finds that not all names of identifiable victims are included in the ministry's list.
Furthermore, the UN estimates that by February 29, 2024, 35% of buildings in the Gaza Strip had been destroyed.
So the number of bodies still buried in the rubble is likely substantial, with estimates of more than 10,000.
The total death toll is expected to be large given the intensity of this conflict, the destroyed healthcare infrastructure, the severe shortages of food, water, and shelter, the population's inability to flee to safe spaces, and the loss of funding to UNRWA, one of the few humanitarian organizations still active in the Gaza Strip.
In recent conflicts, such indirect deaths range from 3 to 15 times the number of direct deaths.
Applying a conservative estimate of 4 indirect deaths per 1 direct death to the 27,000 deaths reported, it is not implausible to estimate that up to 186,000 or even more deaths could be attributable to the current conflict in Gaza.
Using the 2022 Gaza Strip population estimate of 2.3 million, this would translate to 7-9% of the total population of the Gaza Strip.
7-9% of the total population of the Gaza Strip killed directly or indirectly through the war in Gaza.
Indirectly meaning from infections that are untreated, from injuries that are untreated, from malnourishment.
Not just people who were shot or blown up in bombs that went to the morgue.
There are all kinds of indirect deaths that come from, especially a siege of this kind in the Gaza Strip.
Quote, a report from February 7, 2024, at the time when the direct death toll was 28,000, estimated that without a ceasefire, there would be between 58,000 deaths without an epidemic or escalation and 85,700 deaths by October 6, 2024.
deaths by October 6, 2024.
So according to the study, the number is at least 70, 80,000 when you count uncounted dead people.
And then if you add indirect deaths, you're up to 150, 180,000 and counting, which is 7 to 9% of the total population of Gaza that have been killed directly or indirectly as a result of the war.
Now, just to indicate to you why it has been so cynical for people to call into question these numbers provided by the health ministry in Gaza, The Economist back in November of 2023, and The Economist has been an outspoken supporter of Israel's war in Gaza.
They've long been very pro-Israel.
This is what they said back in November of 2023.
The deaths in Gaza surpassed 14,000, according to its authorities.
More than a third of the dead are children.
And then they tried to analyze whether these numbers should be deemed reliable.
And this is what they said, quote, "The Gazan authorities' figures, death figures, have been called unreliable by some, including Joe Biden.
International agencies, however, say the overall numbers are reliable.
They are compiled by hospital workers, not Hamas apparatchiks.
On November 8th, in testimony to Congress, a member of Mr. Biden's team said that it was, quote, very possible that death counts were, quote, even higher than is being reported.
And I think this is the key.
thing to take note of when it comes to the question of whether these figures are reliable.
In previous conflicts, meaning in previous conflicts where Israel has bombed Gaza, the UN and other independent organizations have come up with tallies that are nearly identical to those provided by the Gaza Health Ministry.
In other words, in the past these Numbers of deaths provided by the Hamas-run Gaza health industry have been extremely reliable, because they simply count people who go through the morgue, and their healthcare workers doing that job.
But in this case, it just stands to reason, and the data is provided in the Lancet article, that when you count the number of people under the rubble who haven't been able to be rescued, who never made it to the morgue, and likely never will, combined with the collapse of the healthcare system, which means people don't go to hospitals and don't die in hospitals, they die everywhere else, It's almost certainly the case that there are thousands and likely tens of thousands of people who are uncounted, but part of the people, the death toll of people who have actually died in Gaza.
Here from the Hill, back in November, they reported the death toll in Gaza is likely, quote, higher than is being reported.
And that's from a U.S.
official.
And obviously, the Biden administration is saying that given that they're the ones funding and arming the war.
That's something to take into account.
A senior Biden administration official said the death toll of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip is likely far higher than the 10,000 number being reported by the health ministry amid Israel's war against Hamas.
Barbara Leaf, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, told a House panel those killed more than one month into the war are likely, quote, higher than is being cited.
And of course, I don't believe assertions by the Biden administration, but in this case, when people make assertions contrary to their interests, in other words, the Biden administration is funding and arming the war in Israel, defending it and justifying it, their interest is in minimizing the death toll.
If even they're saying the number of people killed in Gaza is likely higher than the official death toll, that's a statement against their interests and therefore much reliable, much more reliable.
Now here, just to underscore, The point is a report from the Wall Street Journal in late April of 2024.
Just listen to this.
Wall Street Journal is another outlet that has been vehemently supportive of the Israeli war in Gaza editorially.
And yet, listen to what they report.
Quote, in Gaza, authorities lose count of the dead.
The collapse of hospitals and rescue services mean many now die in obscurity, meaning not counted.
Quote, Gaza's Palestinian health authorities say they can no longer count all their dead.
Hospital, emergency services, and communications are barely functioning.
Extracting bodies from the vast number of collapsed buildings is a gargantuan task and not a priority while the war continues.
The scale of the Palestinian numbers, treated with varying degrees of skepticism early on in the war, is now broadly accepted by UN experts, US officials, and some Israeli military officials.
But Palestinian authorities say the figures in recent months have become less accurate given the difficulty in gathering data.
Quote, at the beginning we had systems, we had hospitals, said Meda Dabas, a spokesman for the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza.
Quote, the civil defense teams were able to get people who are stuck under the rubble, then the whole system collapsed.
The Wall Street Journal goes on, quote, the true picture of the worst human toll will take a long time to emerge as thousands are estimated to remain buried under the rubble and in unmasked graves, according to local health authorities, witnesses and the United Nations.
So here's what I know.
I've made my position very clear on the immorality and criminality of the Israeli war in Gaza.
People can have different opinions.
But when you have a war of this magnitude, of unprecedented civilian destruction, funded and armed by the United States government, what I know for certain is this, that as American citizens, we absolutely must preserve and demand the preservation of our complete and unfettered right to openly debate U.S.
policy in Israel and the Israeli war in Gaza, to have the same exact free speech principles apply to criticism of Israel and their war and the U.S.
support for it, and yet since October 7th, both legislatively, on the federal and state level, culturally, politically, and in business, more and more there is a constriction around the necks of those questioning or criticizing this war in a way that is deeply unhealthy and directly contrary to everybody who has spent the last decade pretending that they believe in free speech or principles of basic liberty.
All right, so that concludes our show for this evening.
We had a little segment on Ukraine and particularly Joe Biden's recent statements and policies regarding Ukraine to show how this war is likely permanent that we just didn't have time to get to.
We will likely get to it tomorrow.
But for now, that concludes our show.
As a couple of reminders, System Update is also available in podcast form.
You can You can listen to every episode 12 hours after their first broadcast live here on Rumble on Spotify, Apple, and all the major podcasting platforms.
If you rate, review, and follow the show 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 Locals, which is part of the Rumble platform.
We have our live interactive after show.
Tonight being Tuesday, we are about to go do exactly that in just a few minutes.
That after show is designed to take your questions, respond to your critiques, hear your suggestions for future guests and shows.
The after show is available only for members of our locals community, so if you want to join, which gives you access not only to those twice a week after shows, but to the multiple interactive features we have on the platform.
It's where we publish written, professionalized transcripts of every show we broadcast here.
It's where we first publish our original written journalism, and most of all, it is the community