All Episodes
Dec. 10, 2025 - System Update - Glenn Greenwald
01:12:06
Jasmine Crockett: The Avatar of Democratic Emptiness; Bari Weiss Chooses Fanatical Israel Supporter as New CBS Anchor

Glenn reacts to Rep. Jasmine Crockett's announcement that she is running for Senate. Plus: Bari Weiss chooses fanatical Israel supporter Tony Dokoupil as the CBS Evening News anchor.  ------------------------------------- Watch full episodes on Rumble, streamed LIVE 7pm ET. Become part of our Locals community Follow System Update:  Twitter Instagram TikTok Facebook  

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good evening.
It's Tuesday, December 9th.
Welcome to a new episode of System Update, our live nightly show that airs every Monday through Friday, every single Monday through Friday, punctually at 7 p.m. Eastern, exclusively here on Rumble, the free speech alternative to YouTube.
I think I mentioned this last week.
In fact, I know I did.
One of the reasons why I was able to know the date so readily is because in December, the first of the month fell on a Monday.
So all last week, I didn't even have to think.
I didn't have to have anyone remind me.
It was so obvious when each day in December was.
Obviously, Wednesday's the third.
Thursday's the fourth.
And now even into the next week.
I know the Monday was the first.
That means Monday's the 8th.
Today's the 9th.
It's incredibly easy.
I asked for us to organize, to join together in a campaign for a law that says that the first of the month has to every single month fall on a Monday to make life easier for all of us.
There was very little response from all of you.
I'm very disappointed by that.
I'm hoping to see a little bit more activism, not just passive ingestion, but let's make the world a better place by getting a hashtag started.
Like I said, I don't know, Monday is the first or something like that.
I'm not the one who's politically talented in messaging, but I'm sure some of you are out there.
So let's get that done.
All right.
I'm not going to, I hope I don't have to badger you again about that.
Now, for tonight, Jasmine Crockett, Jasmine Crockett.
She is a congresswoman from Texas of the Democratic Party, relatively newly elected to Congress.
She's in her second term, but she's become quite a media spectacle for reasons that I don't think speak very well of her, although she does have a certain knack for drawing attention to herself, let's say.
And in the attention economy, that is not necessarily a bad thing for a politician, no matter how you do.
I think nobody has proved that more than Donald Trump.
And she announced today that she's running to be the Democratic nominee for the United States Senate in the state of Texas, where the Texas incumbent, Republican incumbent, John Cornyn, who's been in office for, who knows, what doesn't matter, 12 terms, five terms, three, you know, he's just been around forever, is seeking reelection.
She does have a primary opponent, a young Presbyterian minister who's a Democrat, who is trying to present himself as a sort of new unity, rising above it all, but still economic populist kind of candidate.
Not the worst pitch ever.
And I don't really want to spend much time on Jasmine Crockett because I find her extremely uninteresting.
Really, just utterly unnotable.
There's not a single, beyond her kind of demeanor that has made her a starring cable news and among Democratic Party faithful, just like the way she presents herself.
There's nothing substantively interesting at all about her at all.
But that's really the point that I do want to examine.
She has created a lot of excitement among the Democratic Party base who have perceptions of her that are completely the opposite of reality because their perceptions are based only in stylistic issues, not in substantive ones, which I believe has been the primary problem of the Democratic Party for 10 years, which is they don't have anything that they stand for.
They don't have any policies that they actually advocate.
They have nothing to offer people.
It's just like identity politics and theatrics.
And above all else, a very defiant posture toward Donald Trump.
And that's pretty much all she has.
And yet you would think that the next coming of Barack Obama or Bill Clinton emerged today when this extremely vapid, empty, pointless, trite, coched, platitudinous person announced that she was running for the Senate.
So I want to talk about the story with as little attention paid to that person as possible, Jasmine Crockett, but more attention paid to what it continues to say about the utter unhinged emptiness and vapidity. of Democratic Party politics.
And then earlier today, a very important announcement was made by CBS News, a network that is utterly collapsing and falling apart in terms of how many people watch them, especially their news division, which the Israel fanatic Barry Weiss is now the editor-in-chief of ever since the Ellison family, which is run by the largest single private donor to the IDF in all of history, Larry Ellison.
Again, I'm not sure why it's legal to be an American citizen, donate millions and millions of dollars to a foreign military instead of veterans in your own country.
But apparently it is and he does.
And he bought, he led a consortium to buy TikTok.
TikTok is trying to buy CNN, just tried to buy Werner Brothers, but was beaten out by Netflix.
But he does own Paramount and CBS News.
And they announced that because there's very poor ratings in CBS News, they're going to try and rejuvenate it by elevating a host of the CBS morning show to this position, even though there's nothing interesting about him.
Nobody ever talks about him.
Nobody ever thought he was a ratings attractor before.
He's married to Katie Tor, some MSNBC.
It's not even MSNBC anymore.
It's now called MS Now.
CNN.
Now she's MNS Now.
MS Now, completely a notable cable personality.
Both of them are.
But Barry Weiss and David Ellison are elevating him to the once prestigious position of CBS News anchor for no reason other than the fact that he's a fanatical supporter of Israel.
He was married to an Israeli woman and he made waves and Barry Weiss defended him before she went to CBS because he very aggressively interrogated Tanahizy Coates after Tanahizi Coates released a book very critical of Israel.
And he basically implied Tanahezy Coates was a terrorist.
And that's what kind of made his name for himself that he was calling Tanahizi Coates a terrorist because he wrote a book critical of Israel.
And so of course this is who Barry Weiss and David Ellison decide to elevate to the once prestigious position of CBS News.
They're not even running it as a pretend for-profit business.
I mean, the idea that this person, and we'll go into him, is somehow he converted to Judaism 10 years ago, wrote an article, very brave, very brave personal account of how he endured circumcision as an adult so that he could convert to Judaism to align to the religion of his Israeli wife.
Very inspiring story, very, very inspiring story.
Very brave, very, very just an absolute, just raw, honest writing.
And so that's the new anchor of CBS News.
And we want to tell you about that again, not to delve too much into him because there's not much there.
Like she's sort of the Jasmine Crockett of CBS News, but instead to show you what they're really up to, the Ellison family at CBS buying all these entertainment properties, leading the consortium of TikTok as well, that that is really important.
These are important developments that have gotten nowhere near enough attention.
All right, before we get to all that, a couple of quick programming notes.
First of all, system update.
A lot of you think it's just a show on Rumble.
And yes, it is a live show on Rumble.
Absolutely it is.
But it's also more than that.
System Update is something that you can listen to in podcast form.
You don't have to just watch it.
You can watch it and listen to it.
You can just listen to it.
It appears on Apple, Spotify, and all their major podcasting platforms.
And if you go there and you rate, review, and follow the show, and I know that's so much work, but maybe that's something you could help us with.
Just go to Apple, go to Spotify, find the show, just search it, and then just rate it, leave a comment, follow it.
That really helps spread the visibility of the show.
As a final reminder, System Update is a program of independent journalists.
We are independent media.
And as a result, we do rely on our viewers and our members for support to enable us to do the independent journalism that we do here every night.
All you have to do is join our locals community, which you can do by just clicking the red join button that's right below the video player on this very Rumble page.
It will take you to that community.
You get a wide array of exclusive benefits and content, but most of all, it's the community on which we really do rely to support the independent journalism that we do here every night.
Simply click the join button right below the video player and it will take you directly to that community.
now welcome to a new episode of system update starting right now all right So two years ago in Texas, when Ted Cruz was up for reelection, the Democrats really thought that they had the right candidate.
They've been dreaming of turning Texas blue for so long, just keep running into a wall.
They actually thought that Kamala Harris could win Texas and Donald Trump won it by this very significant margin, primarily because all the Latinos on whom they rely, where they had been relying, voted for Trump.
Not all, obviously, but a huge number.
And you may remember Beto O'Rourke, who ran for Congress, was a member of Congress.
They really thought he was like the answer.
He was like the super charismatic.
Poor Democrats, honestly, like they've really been looking for so long, ever since Obama left.
And even though Obama was a charismatic figure, there's no denying that, even though he was a very effective speaker and a good, shrewd politician, the Democratic Party really collapsed underneath him.
He masked the collapse of the Democratic Party already in a way that gave rise to and previewed the victory of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016.
And they thought Beto O'Rourke was the answer.
And then Beto O'Rourke ran against Ted Cruz and got beaten fairly easily.
And then they found someone named Colin Allred, who was a congressman.
He was a former NFL linebacker.
They love that.
Like, oh, that's going to really show people that we're the masculine party.
We have this black linebacker from the NFL.
Who can question his masculinity?
He was also a very kind of pro-national security Democrat, which they always think like people are just craving militarism and war.
I spent a lot of time focused on a video where Matt Taibbi went to Congress and spoke before, testified before a committee when he was reporting the Twitter files.
And Colin Allred was like last on the committee to talk to Matt Taibbi because he was junior in his seniority.
He'd only been there one term or two terms.
And he said to Matt Taibbi, you know, Matt Taibbi, seems like you have a tinfoil hat on your head that you think the good folks of the CIA and the NSA and the FBI are trying to censor the internet for sinister reasons.
You might want to think about the fact that they're actually doing it for our own good to keep us safe.
And I just, as low of an opinion I have of the Democratic Party, it was still amazing to watch one of their rising stars speak up in defense of censorship, but also in the hands of the CIA, NSA, FBI in particular, and say only a conspiracy theorist would be concerned that the NSA and the U.S. Security State and the FBI and the CIA are censoring the internet and punishing dissidents and suppressing dissidents for bad reasons.
Maybe it's for our own good.
I just think this is the Democratic Party now.
Anyway, he was expect.
He ran against Ted Cruz, made a decent showing, lost not exactly in a very close nail-biting election.
But I can understand why they think he's an okay candidate, especially for a red state in Texas.
They still have this idea the Democratic Party does that in red states, you run kind of corporatist and militarist, like former CIA agents, people who love war, who are kind of conservative when it comes to economics, meaning serving corporate interest and big banks.
And I don't think that's what the moment calls for.
I don't think that's what people want.
I think that's what they hate about the Democratic Party, not like about it.
There's a perception that the Democratic Party is too far to the left, but usually that means on social issues, like abortion or guns or trans issues, gay rights, whatever.
Not on militarism and corporatism, but this is the thing that they always think is like their golden goose in Red State.
So Colin Alrad fit that profile perfectly.
Problem was for them is that in October, just last month, rather two months ago, as you can see in this political article, he announced that he was not going to run for the Texas Senate race and instead will run for a different congressional seat than the one that he previously occupied.
He's basically just moved to the district.
He's desperate to get back to Congress.
He gave up his congressional seat to run unsuccessfully for the Senate.
Looks like he doesn't want to go through a whole other Senate race again and lose to Ted Cruz or to John Cornyn, rather.
And so he's just going to run for Congress.
And so that opens up the field to other types of Democrats that the Democratic Party is hoping to find someone who can win in a red state like Texas.
And they found somebody who they really thought was this kind of new style politician.
He's young.
He's like 36.
He's a Presbyterian minister.
Imagine that.
A Democratic Party candidate who's a pastor and a man of God.
And you can see like Democratic consultants in Washington just like drooling over the prospect.
Oh, they're going to love this guy.
He's like religious.
They have a very condescending understanding of what red state voters, working class voters want from the Democratic Party.
They're very like condescending and patronizing and out of touch understanding of why they're alienated from the Democratic Party.
No, nothing showed that better than when they had Kamala pick Tim Waltz.
And they really thought Tim Waltz was going to be this like avatar of masculinity with those plaid shirts and his like stint in the military and his hunting.
And that did not work.
They have like a theater kids understanding of what they're supposed to be conveying.
So they have this kind of, I don't know how like the best way to describe him, but he's a sort of candidate who, because he's religious, because he talks this very kind of like moderate rhetoric of unity, but he's also actually an economic populist, sort of, but he's like an APAC recipient, big supporter of Israel.
Good luck to them on that.
And we're going to get into him in a second, but before we do, we have to talk about one Jasmine Crockett because she announced today that she's running for the Senate.
She wants to run against him to be the Democratic nominee to challenge John Cornyn in November of 2026.
And here's the campaign ad she launched in order to announce it.
This new one they have, their new star, Crockett.
How about her?
She's the new star of the Democrat Party, Jasmine Crockett.
They're in big trouble.
But you have this woman, Crockett.
She's a very low IQ person.
I watched her speak the other day.
She's definitely a low IQ person.
Crockett.
Oh, man.
Oh, man.
She's a very low IQ person.
Somebody said the other day, she's one of the leaders of the party.
I said, you got to be kidding.
Now they're going to rely on Crockett.
Crockett's going to bring him back.
This is like a caricature of everything that has failed with the Democratic Party over the last 10 years.
It is an ad in which the candidate who is asking the people of Texas to send her to the Senate does not speak a single word, either in voice or in text.
She says nothing about her views.
She offers nothing to them about what she intends to do to improve their lives.
She doesn't take a position on any issue of the day, foreign policy, domestic policy, the culture wars.
She's literally mute.
She's totally silent.
Like, I have nothing to say.
And the star of the ad is Donald Trump.
Only he speaks.
And he speaks in a way that's, you know, mocking her, but also saying we'd love for Jasmine.
He wants to promote Jasmine Crockett as the future of the Democratic Party.
This is her ad introducing herself to the voters of Texas outside her district as to why she should become the Senate.
Basically, the only message that it conveys is Donald Trump hates me.
And I'm going to, you know, I guess like through body language, you know, that sort of like poser, defiant resistance energy that Democratic party-based idiots love.
Like that, she's like, my arms are crossed, like looking in the camera, like, let's go, Donald Trump.
And one of the reasons why Jasmine Crockett has become so popular among Democratic Party voters, they love her.
She's social media sensation is because she speaks in a very unhinged, uncontrolled manner about all the things she hates about Donald Trump.
She is good on television.
She isn't boring.
She, you know, draws attention to herself.
Mainly what she does, though, is she just like insults Donald Trump.
And obviously, Donald Trump used insults like that to draw attention to his campaign in 2016.
But the only reason it worked is because it was accompanied by a very detailed, clear, constantly repeated ideological framework on immigration, on war, on the economy, on trade, over and over and over, stated again.
So when he was insulting Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz or pretty much anybody, John McCain, it wasn't just that he was insulting them.
He had drawn very clear ideological differences with them on the issues people most care about.
But what the Democratic Party base seems to think is, and this is what they really think.
You look on Blue Sky where like the hardcore partisans are, but they don't think they're the partisans.
They think they're like the left-wing critics of the Democratic Party, but it's all just anger at the Democratic Party for not winning elections more.
I'm baffled by this because what they believe is the so obviously the exact opposite of the truth.
They believe the problem with the Democratic Party is that it has not stood up enough to Trump.
It has not called Trump enough names, not called them a racist enough, not called them a fascist enough.
The media hasn't called them a racist enough.
They hate the media because I haven't called them a fascist enough.
Believe they're losing elections because Democratic Party candidates, Democratic Party leaders, and their allies in the media don't insult Trump enough.
And it's, I just, you know, did these people live through the same last nine years as I did, as we all did?
The Democratic Party hasn't stood for anything in the last decade other than we hate Trump.
We're not Trump.
Trump's a fascist.
Trump loves Hitler.
Trump's a this and a that.
He's he's controlled by Russia.
He's correct.
I mean, this is all the Democratic Party politics, how all Democratic Party politics has been.
And it's gotten them basically nowhere.
And they seem to think that what they need is just somebody who's going to talk tough about Trump and the Republicans.
And Jasmine Crockett does that.
She kind of adopts a fake accent that white progressives love.
It's like a very black, recognizable accent that she had never previously used before, but now uses pretty much in every interview.
And white progressives love that.
Like, oh, she's so sassy.
It's like a very cheap form of identity politics.
And the issue, though, is she doesn't like a lot of people make fun of Jasmine Crockett on the right.
She's a big, you know, target for Fox News, conservative media, obviously Trump.
But it's never because she's out there explicitly defending ideology or policy.
Like, what is the cause with which Jasmine Crockett is most associated?
Besides using curse words and having no limits when insulting Donald Trump and Republicans, like, well, what is her cause?
You know, say what you want about AOC, and I certainly have a lot to say about AOC, most of it negative, but at least AOC or like Bernie or John Mandani, they are associated with causes.
You know, healthcare, Bernie wants like health care and Medicare for all.
And so does AOC.
And Zoran ran on affordability and all these issues for buses.
Like these are substantive ideas.
You don't have to agree with them to like them.
I'm just saying they have ideas that they associate them.
What are Jasmine Crockett's?
She doesn't, she doesn't have any.
She's just like a cable news clown.
She's a good clown.
Definitely a very good clown.
I understand why cable news puts her on.
She's funny in like a way that she just speaks in a way that politicians don't normally speak.
And that can be more entertaining than listening to politicians who speak the way they all have always spoken.
That was one of Trump's media benefits.
Well, she's just an empty vessel.
And I believe more than anything, and I said it at the time, and I've said it many times since, independent of Jasmine Crockett, I believe the main reason Kamala Harris lost is because no one had any idea what she believed.
She was incapable of articulating a concrete, clear position in a declarative sentence about any major issue.
And we went on and we showed you so much of that.
Well, we'll show you a little bit about it, but that was our main critique of the Kamala Harris presidency.
It's like, she, for so long, she launched a campaign.
She didn't have an issues page.
And then when she finally got one, it was like so vague.
No, she had no confidence in herself.
The Democratic Party stands for nothing.
They stand for nothing.
And you can't win like that.
And to the extent we know anything about Jasmine Crockett's belief system, like the things she says she supports and believes in and the way she votes, it's the worst of the Democratic Party.
It's not left wing.
I know a lot of people, if you watch Fox News, if you're understanding where Jasmine Crockett comes from right-wing media, you're like, yo, she's far to the left.
She's not.
She's not like a left-wing populist.
She's not a radical at all.
She is a very conventional corporatist militarist Democrat.
And it's amazing that Democrats continue to think that this is the sort of thing that will win them elections, but they do.
It's like it satisfies them.
Like the people who are political junkies are always online, like, yeah, she insulted Trump.
We feel so good.
That is not what most people care about.
Here is Jasmine Crockett in her launch speech, giving you a sense of just how vapid she is.
Done with politics as usual.
I'm done with going along to get along and it gets us nowhere.
I'm done watching rural hospitals and public schools close their doors.
I'm done watching parents be afraid to send their kids to school or the mall or the movies because Republicans have flooded our streets with guns.
I'm done with the senators sitting around doing nothing while Trump takes your hard-earned money, skims your social security, slashes Medicare, and gives tax breaks to billionaires.
I'm done.
I'm done watching the American Dream on life support while Trump tries to pull the plug.
The gloves have been off and now I'm jumping into the ring.
I'm asking for your support to be the next United States Senator from the greatest state of Texas.
She's done.
She is done.
She's had it.
She's taking off the gloves.
She's getting in the ring.
There was like this laundry list of cursory grocery list items that if you're a Democratic Party candidate, you're going to talk about like protective social security or health care, but nothing at all substantive, nothing that she can show that she's ever done that she's advocated for.
It's just like written by the standard Democratic Party consultant.
Every Democratic candidate who launches a campaign says those kinds of things.
Now, let's talk about the things that she has actually in the past advocated.
Here she is in a tweet in October of 2023, October 13th, is the week after the October 7th attack.
And she was criticizing Mike Johnson and the Republicans, the House Republicans, for not passing bills quickly enough.
And she put up this tweet on X that was called the legislative lowdown.
And it says, while House GOP spent all week not picking a speaker, that was when they had that, when Matt Gates and Marjorie and Matt Gates particularly had ousted Kevin McCarthy.
They were trying to find their speaker.
While House GOP spent all week not picking a speaker, House Democrats were filing legislation to help working families.
I'm co-sponsoring.
She listed a bunch of things, normal Democratic policies for workers or healthcare, whatever.
But no, I had no chance of passing there in the minority.
But one of them was House Resolution 771, standing with Israel amid the barbaric war launched by Hamas.
Let me just remind you that the Democratic Party, or at least the liberal wing of it, the left liberal wing, every left liberal media show I know, independent media show, podcast show, every single one has spent two years calling what Israel was doing in Gaza a genocide.
Not just critical of it, a genocide.
That is a word that carries a very heavy responsibility.
It's basically the worst atrocity, the worst crime against humanity a country can commit.
And here you have Jasmine Crockett, who was a supporter of U.S. support for Israel from the start and still is.
And by their reasoning, she supported a genocide.
How is that not disqualifying?
The answer is because they don't care about the substance of anyone's views.
Do I believe that a lot of these people who are saying this is a genocide believe it?
I believe it, but do I think that a lot of the Democratic partisans who said it believed it?
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris both supported it, both financed it, both armed it, both continued to promise to support it.
If you actually believe that there's a genocide, again, think about it, a genocide, not a bad war, not a bad, a genocide.
And you have Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, who are the ones who paid for it and financed it and armed it and protected it like they did.
How can you reconcile calling it a genocide with then voting for them?
These two things don't reconcile for me.
Just two weeks ago, Hakeem Jeffries, who is the senior Democrat in the House Republican caucus, who's currently the House minority leader, a young city council member in New York, who's a member of DSA, Democratic Socialist America, that really spawned Zohan Mandani's candidacy, said he wanted to launch a primary challenge against Hakeem Jeffries.
Hakeem Jeffries is definitely vulnerable to a primary challenge.
And the reason is because Hakeem Jeffries is arguably the single most important weapon APAC has in the Democratic Party, in the House Democratic, in the House Democratic Party.
Complete fanatical loyalist AIPAC into Israel.
And yet AOC and Zoran Mandani both said they oppose any primary challenge to Hakeem Jeffries.
And when Zaron Mandani went on meet the press, they asked him, do you want Hakeem Jeffries to be Speaker of the House?
And Zarwin Mandani unflinchingly said yes.
But according to their internal logic, this is somebody who worked very hard the last two years to fund, arm, and enable and defend a genocide.
And this is the kind of thing, I just, if you're going to go around saying things like that, this is a genocide, this is a genocide, this is a genocide, and then your actions don't remotely reflect the fact that you really believe that, don't wonder why people start doubting your credibility.
But the reason is because they don't care about policy or substance.
They just think getting Trump out of office is the only thing that matters.
And that has been the Democratic Party's posture for 10 years and it has served them very poorly.
And it seems like they're just doubling down.
Here's Jasmine Crockett before October 7th on April of in April of 2023.
And she said the following on X, quote, as the sun sets on the fifth day of the month of Yar, Yom, Yam Hatzamal, or Israel Independence Day, comes to a close on the 75th birthday of Israel.
Let's continue to dedicate ourselves to peace and prosperity.
Here's to the next 75 years of Israel.
Now, Michael Tracy, you may recall who he is.
He was somebody who made a lot of appearances on system update, and hopefully he will continue to into the next year.
I think one of the things he does best is interview politicians about things they're not really prepared to talk about or ask about.
He goes to places like the vice presidential debate between Tim Waltz and JD Vance, where they're only supposed to be there to be surrogates and say how they obviously thought of their Democrats.
Tim Waltz won, but he doesn't use the opportunity to let them read their script.
He goes there instead and as a journalist, asks questions.
And he went and found Jasmine Crockett and began asking her questions about her views on Israel.
And I just want you to listen to this and see whether there's any substance at all to this person.
I mean, everybody has their reasons for why they do stuff, but I will also tell you this: because the issue today has to do with the fact that Iran ended up firing missiles over into Israel.
After Israel invaded Lebanon.
Okay, but is Iran Lebanon?
Or is Iran?
Okay, so but this thing, it's a spiraling catastrophe that the Biden administration has done nothing to rein in.
Let's be clear.
When the attacks, which I will say, everything that happened in Lebanon or the initial attacks, at least that was more calculated and it was more, it was specifically intended for who?
For terrorists, correct?
I mean, these are.
You got to clarify what you're saying.
I don't follow.
Hezbollah.
So Israel was attacking Hezbollah, correct?
Well, they've done a ground invasion into Lebanon now.
They have now done one.
But to be clear, they were attacking Hezbollah, who is a terrorist organization, correct?
Right, but they've invaded the entire country.
They've bombed Beirut.
Well, they've bombed the country.
Okay, so.
So you think everybody who's been killed in the Israeli bombardment has been Hezbollah?
I didn't say that.
I'm telling you that what I am saying is that at least when Lebanon, we talked about what?
They had the pagers, correct?
Right.
And so they were literally more calculated in trying not to do.
Those pagers blew up in grocery stores and a little girl was killed.
I understand and I'm not disagreeing with it.
And I want to be clear.
No one should ever be okay with war.
Well, you voted to fund it.
No, I did not vote to fund war.
What I voted for.
Yes, you did.
You voted to supply Israel with armaments that they're using in their prosecution of the war.
You understand that we took more than one vote?
Let me ask you, since you know about it, I follow very closely.
So tell me about the rest of my votes.
On the Social Security supplemental?
Can you tell me about all the votes that we had?
Because we had more.
Yeah, you voted for Ukraine, for the Indo-Pacific, for.
Because we had three votes on Israel.
There have been like a million votes on Israel.
We had three votes.
Let me clarify.
We had three votes as it relates to funding for Israel.
So let me make sure that your record is very clear.
The very first vote was to fund Israel and defund the IRS because that's what the Republicans put on the floor.
Because the Republicans were in the House.
Okay.
What was my vote?
It was a no.
No.
We ultimately voted yes on the bill to fund Israel.
The second vote was to fund Israel and no other funding.
Okay.
The third vote, was it just for funding Israel or was it also to get money to the people of Gaza?
Which, yeah, which and that aid has been consistently blocked.
I mean, you can complain about Netanyahu, but he's the one administering the funding that you've said.
Is Michael Tracy a little bit obnoxious?
Yes, he is a little bit obnoxious in the best possible way that a journalist should be.
He was pressing her.
She has no idea what she's talking about.
But at the end of the day, this is not October 2023.
This is in the middle of the campaign in 2024, late 2024, a year into the Israeli destruction of Gaza, and she's still defending Israel.
She's defending Israel and its bombing of Lebanon.
She's defending Israel and its bombing of Iran.
She's defending Israel in its destruction of Gaza.
And she voted to pay for it.
So if you're somebody who believes and has made your primary cause in terms of like, or one of them, in terms of your media commentary, your political activism, your organizing, that the U.S. should stop financing and arming Israel and stop entering wars on its behalf, that you believe that what happened in Israel is a genocide.
How is Jasmine Crockett qualified for your support?
Why would you be excited about somebody who did all that?
How many people do you think even know she did that?
They know that she goes on, this is what they know.
They know, and I don't mean they just like political casuals.
I mean like political junkies who are Democratic partisans, but also political media figures.
They know that she goes on cable shows and speaks much more aggressively about Trump than most members of Congress.
And they know she's a black woman.
So they assume she's some sort of like progressive, like she's from the left wing or the left flank of the Democratic Party.
She's not.
She's not.
She's a corporatist.
She gets money from PACs for the crypto industry.
She serves the national security state.
She defends the CIA.
This is like the worst of the Democratic Party.
And if it actually mattered in terms of who a candidate was in terms of their ideology, people would focus on that.
But all they care about is this idiotic, anti-Trump, stylistic posturing.
And she since she's good at that, they love her.
It's the most primitive, empty-headed, simple-minded way of looking at politics.
And it's self-destructive.
Here's another Jasmine Crockett clip where she was asked about sending money to Israel and financing Israel.
What do you think about America being tired of us sending money to Israel?
I understand.
I also think that if people are going to vote as it relates to foreign affairs, which typically is not how people vote, people typically vote based on how are the gas prices treating me right now, how are my housing costs treating me right now?
What's my job situation looking like?
Those are the things that typically drive our elections and how people decide how they're going to vote.
When you start talking about foreign affairs, if that is going to be kind of like the precipice for determining whether you vote or who you vote for, then I want people to really dig into foreign affairs, right?
Like, and ask the question, which I think is a fair question.
I think it's a fair question of all the money, is to ask the question of, well, why do we send money to Israel?
Like, what is that about?
And learn about the fact that this is an allyship that existed before I was around, before, well, no, the president was a baby.
He was still around, though.
But it is an enduring relationship and learning the history of the region in and of itself.
And I would argue that the most disputed land in the world is that land.
And it goes beyond the Palestinians and the Israelis.
But I mean, you can go back to the Romans.
You can go back to like all the wars and fights that have existed in this land.
And, you know, trying to explain to people that are really frustrated and absolutely have every right to be because I think anybody that's okay with war may be a little off in some way because war is never pretty and there are always innocent lives that are lost, whether it's, you know, at the numbers that we've seen in Gaza or not.
Like, I take issue with loss of innocent lives, no matter where they are, including in this country, right?
And I do think that we have failed to open a real conversation on what does foreign affairs look like and how much money do we really spend on foreign affairs?
Because what happens is we do things like, oh, we're sending X amount of billions here.
We're spending X amount of billions there.
And one of the things that I try to do is contextualize for people.
And I tell them, and I ask them, do you know how big our budget is?
Nobody knows how big our budget is.
And so I told them when it comes to foreign aid, we spend 1% of our entire budget on foreign aid.
But when you start talking about numbers that people don't have in their own bank accounts, like I can't count to a trillion, which we have a multi-trillion dollar budget, right?
Like when you start talking about millions or billions, they're just like, that's a lot of money because that's more money than I have.
But my question that I really want people to ask is, what you doing with that other 99%?
So this is all defending financing wars in Israel and Ukraine.
Like, hey, just relax.
It's like 1% of the budget.
It's so misleading.
There's so much more that we spend to protect or defend these foreign wars.
We deploy our troops there.
We do all kinds of deals there.
We give aid to all the countries around Israel, like Egypt and Jordan.
But who cares?
Whatever it is, why is she supposed to be financing Israel?
And she's supposed to be rep you see who she is.
Like, there's nothing interesting about her.
She's a total like blob of a centrist, but doesn't even understand centrism.
She's controlled by PACs and by special interests and by like the establishment wing of the Democratic Party, the absolute worst part of the Democratic Party.
Needless to say, she's also massively in favor of financing the war in Ukraine.
Here she is in December of 2022.
Quote, with passage of yesterday's spending bill, we avoided a shutdown and the government will stay open through 2023.
Dems again, lead.
While MAGA Republicans lie, Ukraine has additional aid to beat back Russia.
Why?
Because a threat to democracy anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
Like that is like a eighth-grade understanding, not even an eight-year-old understanding of foreign policy.
Why do we fight in Ukraine?
Why do we give them the money?
Because they're a threat to democracy.
There's a threat everywhere.
It's like imbecilic.
And she's supposed to represent what, like marginalized people or she tries to, she's talking about how she's going to win with people of color.
You think these people want billions and billions and billions of dollars poured into foreign wars in Ukraine and Israel that have nothing to do with their lives?
Yet that's exactly who she is.
She was on CNN in April 2024.
And again, I'm showing you all this not to make you dislike Jasmine Crockett.
I think she's very easily disliked without my having to say a word.
It's to show you what the Democratic Party thinks is the key to their future, the type of people they think are key to their future.
People who stand for nothing.
And to the extent they have any views, it's the most bipartisan, consensus, establishment views that have just rotted and lingered and festered in Washington forever.
Here she is on CNN talking about the bipartisan support that she loves for a spending bill that they got enacted.
Joining me right now, Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett.
She is a Democrat from Texas.
Congresswoman, great to see you.
Okay, we heard real contrasting views on how to see the passage of these four foreign aid bills today from the House Speaker.
As it pertains to Ukraine, he says, you know, it provides for greater accountability, better outcome of the war, and there's that loan aspect, contrasting that with Marjorie Taylor Green, who says this is a sellout of America.
Where do you stand on this?
Well, that's like issue with things that both of them said.
I do want to applaud the speaker for finally waking up and deciding that he wanted to stand on the side of governance instead of obstruction.
And, you know, he said that this aid is timely.
It is not timely by any stretch of the imagination.
This is one of those things that he finally had to settle in and realize that there's actually more support for Ukraine than he thought.
He could have actually passed every single piece of legislation on a suspension.
He didn't even have to go through rules.
That's how much bipartisan support existed.
Now, all right.
So that was her basically saying that she was in favor of this bipartisan bill.
She's so happy the money is now going to flow again to Ukraine and to these other wars.
I mean, this is basically who she is.
Now, The Atlantic in July of this year published a profile of her designed to sort of say, this is who we've been waiting for.
The title of the article was A Democrat for the Trump Era.
Like, this is the kind of Democrat we need.
Apparently, like, one who loves Israel, wants to send money to foreign wars, wants to serve corporate interests.
But because she talks stuff about Trump, she's supposed to be so exciting.
She's young, even though her views are like the same as Stenny Hoyers.
And here's part of what this article said: quote, in late May, Crockett brought me along to a private meeting in the greenwalled office of a freshman member, Maxine Dexter of Oregon, where she made her pitch.
The Democrats have a communication problem, Crockett said.
Quote, the biggest issue with Joe Biden's presidency wasn't, quote, that he was a great president, Parrish thought.
That wasn't it.
It was that no one knew what the fuck he did.
This is like a very standard Democratic peacemaking posture.
We've talked about this before.
When the Democrats lose, when people hate the Democrats, they never look inward.
They never think there's anything wrong with them.
It wasn't that Joe Biden was a bad president.
Wasn't that his brain was melting in front of everybody when they lied.
No, it was just because he did such great things, but we did a bad job telling these idiot voters why they should be grateful to Joe Biden.
Very classic Hillary Clinton.
The economy was great.
We did great things for them.
They just didn't appreciate it.
They didn't understand it.
We have to explain it to them better.
Then she goes on in this very interesting paragraph where she's kind of distancing herself from both AOC and Bernie on the grounds that they're a little too critical of the Democratic Party.
And this is what it says: quote, Dexter asked Crockett about her relationship with leadership.
Another young firebrand, representative AOC, had bumped up against then Speaker Nancy Pelosi when she arrived in Congress.
Dexter noted, Crockett dismissed that concern, explaining that she had never wanted to, quote, burn it down and prefers to be seen as working on behalf of the party.
The national quote fighting oligarchy tour featuring Senator Bernie Sanders and AOC is a good idea, Crockett said, but it kind of makes people be like, oh, it's about them, right?
Instead of the team.
So she's basically saying our only duty is just to work for the Democratic Party, not critique it, not criticize it, not try and change it, not try and reform it, not make it less corporatist, not less beholden to corporate interests, just to like make all we want to do is just communicate better about how great the Democratic Party is and people of us.
Here from 2020, when she ran is the record of the special interest and PAC money she accepted.
She boasted about the fact that her opponent got $191,000 and she got only zero.
So she's basically saying, I won't take any corporate PAC money.
And yet, how he now here is our Jasmine Crockett, she's all grown up, big girl in the house.
Here from Open Secrets, PAC spending 2023-2024, total PAC money for Jasmine Crockett, $739,000.
A number of contributors, 443.
Now, one of the issues in Texas is that people don't want more immigration.
That was why a lot of even Latinos voted for Trump.
They think there's too much immigration.
Jasmine Crockett, and of course, Texas is a border state where that sentiment is.
And it was really the Latinos on the borders cities that for the first time, even in 2020, they turned against the Democrats that voted for Trump, but they led the way in Latino vote shift for Trump in 2024.
And obviously, if you're a Democrat in Texas, it's hard to win no matter what happens.
They're the best of luck.
But if you're not getting the Latino vote, you can't, you have no chance.
And she's been an outspoken proponent of more immigration.
She's criticized the Trump administration for trying to stop immigration.
And her rationale for why we need immigrants to come to the United States.
I remember the first time I heard this, I couldn't believe it.
Let's just show it.
I don't want to, I can't do it justice until you hear it.
So I had to go around the country and educate people about what immigrants do for this country or the fact that we are a country of immigrants.
Right, right.
The fact is, ain't none of y'all trying to go and farm right now.
Okay, so I'm lying.
Raise your hands.
You're not.
You're not.
We done picking cotton.
We are.
You can't pay us enough to find a plantation.
So what she's saying there is the reason we need immigrants is because black people are not going to do farm work.
They're not going to do agriculture work.
They're not going to pick cotton no matter what you pay them.
They're not doing it.
I don't know where she got off on this idea that she's been anointed spokesperson for all black people.
I think a lot of black people do work hard in the agricultural industry, but she's saying we're not picking cotton.
We're not going into the fields.
We're not farming.
That's beneath us.
We need these scummy inferior immigrants.
They'll do it.
They'll do the shitwork.
We're not going to do it.
So it's like simultaneously demanding the influx of more immigrants, at the same time insulting huge numbers of people who do farm work as being too beneath her and other black people.
It's like she's demeaning immigrants while at the same time demanding their influx.
And not just demeaning immigrants, but anybody who does farm work or work in the agricultural industry.
I mean, good luck.
Good luck, Democrats, with this candidate in Texas.
The opponent that she has is James Tallarico.
And, you know, he's trying to kind of be this hybrid candidate from the Texas Tribune September of this year.
And U.S. Senate bid, Representative James Tallarico, he's a member of the state house, promises to take on GOP billionaires and bridge political divides.
He's a Christian pastor, but he like has very liberal social policies.
But James Tallarico has a website where he's running his campaign from.
And as of December 9th, which is today, if you look on the website, you can go to the issues page and you'll find basically no policy positions.
Can we put that up?
Why I'm running, it says, and then let's show why he's running.
Is there anything there?
No, I think that's all there is why I'm running.
It's just like no policy positions.
Now, what is really interesting about that is that that was Kamala Harris's strategy, as you might recall, to take no positions on policy.
And a lot of Democratic media people decided this was a really good strategy.
She didn't need to say what she believes about anything.
She didn't have an issues page on her campaign for so long.
She couldn't answer questions.
She wouldn't do any media.
And the New Republic, one of the hackiest DNC sites, published an article in September 4th saying Kamala Harris doesn't need policy to win.
In fact, a detailed platform will hurt her campaign more than it will help.
Imagine being a journalist and telling, advising a candidate, a political campaign that's running for president that you want to win, that they shouldn't, they're right not to have any policy positions.
They shouldn't say what she thinks about anything.
That not only is that like a good ethical thing to do, but it's also a good strategy.
How did that work out for them?
That Kamala Harris is like this blank slate.
They were just, oh, she's not Trump, so she'll win.
This is what they've been thinking forever.
The New York Times on September 8th ran a survey with new polling data that I know we covered this at the time saying new polls suggest Kamala Harris's support has stalled after a euphoric August.
And part of the reason almost 30% of voters said they needed to learn more about her.
Then finally, on September 9th, barely two months before the election, The Guardian reported Kamala Harris campaign lists policies finally on the eve of the debate with Trump after criticism of vagueness.
But even there, you'd look at them and it was like, make rent more affordable, support American innovation and workers, stand with our allies, stand up to dictators, lead on the world stage, like these platitudes of the kind that Jasmine Crockett is capable of and barely no more.
This is like a repeat of all the failures of the Democratic Party.
One of the funniest things that happened during the campaign was when Kamala Harris was finally pressured to issue a policy position.
She issued one specifically on how she was going to appeal to black men because polls were showing that black men were really not into her candidacy at all, that record numbers of them were going to vote for Donald Trump or stay at home.
And when she issued her agenda for black men, it couldn't have been more racist.
It was like, this is what we're going to do for black men.
We're going to legalize weed and promote crypto.
And there were a lot of black people who was like, what?
That's what you're going to do for us?
You're going to, that's your agenda for black men?
You're going to legalize weed and promote crypto.
And you may recall that some of her worst moments occurred when she just couldn't say who she was or what she believed or where she wanted to take the country.
She's like afraid to take a policy position like Jasmine Crockett.
Here she was on Stephen Colbert, and of course he was supporting her.
He was trying to give her the easiest possible interview.
He laid up this question for her that should have been the first question she was prepared to answer when she became a candidate months ago.
And here's what she said.
Polling shows that a lot of people, especially independent voters, really want this to be a change election and that they tend to break for you in terms of thinking about change.
You are a member of the president administration.
Under a Harris administration, what would the major changes be?
And what would say the same?
Sure.
Well, I mean, I'm obviously not Joe Biden.
I know that.
And so that would be one change in terms of.
But also, I think it's important to say with 28 days to go, I'm not Donald Trump.
And so when we think about the significance of what this next generation of leadership looks like, were I to be elected president, it is about, frankly, I love the American people and I believe in our country.
I love that it is our character and nature to be an ambitious people.
You know, we have aspirations.
We have dreams.
We have incredible work ethic.
Can you believe that?
It's like the easiest, most basic question on the planet.
Like, what will be different if you win?
She's like, well, I'm not Joe Biden.
That's one difference.
Want to hear another?
I'm not Donald Trump.
And they're like, okay, but like, what about the differences?
Like, how's it going to be different?
Like, substantively.
And she was like, I love the American people.
I love our ambition.
And our, it's like, and this is, this is, was, I believe right after, it might have been right before, but I believe it was right after she had gone on the view.
And again, these are the shows that like are the easy, they're, they're, they're begging her to just give good answers.
So she wins.
And she went on the view and they were like, what would you do differently than what Joe Biden did?
What would you have done differently?
She's like, I can't think of anything.
The Democratic Party has no soul.
It has no substance.
It doesn't believe in anything.
And Jasmine Crockett, despite all the excitement about her, maybe because of all the excitement about her, she's one of the people who has the least.
But she sure is sassy on cable shows.
She doesn't take any gruff from Donald Trump.
But that ad today was such a perfect embodiment of all the things shitty and unlikable and failed about the Democratic Party.
Imagine launching a candidacy to convince the people of a state outside of your district to vote for you for the Senate and you decide not to say a single word about what you're going to do for their lives.
And when you give a speech, you just run through a laundry list that they've heard a zillion times from members of all parties with no substance involved.
And the only person who speaks is Donald Trump and he says mean things about you and you're like, do you see that?
Donald Trump doesn't like me.
Vote for Jasmine Crockett.
That is the mindset of the Democratic Party.
It's unbelievably pathetic.
To the extent we know anything about Jasmine Crockett, it's that we know she's going to serve the same warmongering and the same militarism and the same corporatism that the Democratic Party has been serving that has driven so many people away from it.
She may not look like a conventional Democrat.
She may not speak like a conventional Democrat, but at her core, she absolutely is one.
And that's one of the worst things you can say about someone.
Are privacy concerns keeping you up at night?
They...
They probably should be.
After all, Sam Altman recently announced that ChatGPT can now reference all your past conversations.
Do you feel comfortable knowing that an AI platform chaired by a former intelligence official has access to all your thoughts and dreams?
Luckily, there is a promising alternative, which is Venice AI.
Venice AI lets you use AI without handing over your sense of information.
They utilize leading open source AI models to deliver text, code, and image generation directly to your web browser.
That's where it's saved.
The interface looks stunning.
There's no downloads, no installation.
And your conversation is history is stored only in the browser, your browser, keeping your privacy intact.
With Venice AI, you can ask it to explore stimulating hypotheticals about future events, generate images without restrictions, upload PDFs or summaries, and even modify how Venice interacts with you.
And with their Pro Plan, you can do all of this without any limitations.
I've been using Venice AI, and it's been a game changer.
I ask it anything without worrying about my data being stored.
It's versatile, it allows me to switch between different models and generate unique images.
If you want to use AI without fear of handing over your most intimate thoughts, you can get 20% off a pro plan using my link, venice.ai/slash Glenn.
Don't miss out on this opportunity.
Click the link in the description and use the code Glenn to get started today when the family headed by Larry Ellison, the richest or second richest man on earth, depending on the stock market, announced that it was buying Paramount and CBS, some of the most coveted legacy brands in media and entertainment.
Everybody was so excited.
It was like, oh my God, they're coming to save the day.
David Ellison's like this young hip Hollywood producer.
Yeah, he was raised in obscene wealth, and everything he has in his life was because his daddy is extremely wealthy.
But so what?
Like everyone has their flaws, but he's a man of ideas, like super buzzy.
He's and he's an outside-the-box thinker, and he's going to really transform this old, broken, addled, ossified CBS news into something relevant again.
And to prove that, he went and hired not a network executive, not somebody who has ever run any kind of television network or had any experience producing television or television news or doing even any reporting.
He went and hired the opinion columnist and blogger Barry Weiss.
And in a massive coincidence, and a lot of people are making a big deal out of this, it's a total coincidence.
Larry Ellison is a fanatical supporter of Israel, has gone to Israel a zillion times, donated millions of dollars to the friends of the IDF, which is a foreign military.
He just don't, he's an American citizen, got all this wealth because of the United States, but he donates it to American to a foreign army.
None of his kids fought in the U.S. military, but he's supporting the Israeli military.
And his son, too, is an outspoken fanatical loyalist to Israel.
And Barry Weiss is the same.
And that is who he picked to run CBS News to shape its coverage.
Again, total coincidence, total coincidence, but a lot of people are making a big deal out of that.
And so CBS News has been lagging behind in third place, sometimes even in fourth place, with what had been, you know, CBS even news to be very storied.
It's like Walter Cronkite and Edward Armuro and then Dan Rather.
It was, you know, one of the staples of American news in and news brands for throughout the entire latter half of the 20th century since the advent of television into the 21st century.
But now nobody watches it.
And part of Barry Weiss, part of Barry Weiss's mission is to revitalize it, to get people to watch it again, to make it exciting, to make it relevant.
And they made their big announcement today.
They have a new anchor for CBS News.
And I think when everybody heard this, they were like, wow, that is some out-of-the-box thinking.
This is going to change everything.
This is a game changer.
Millions overnight are going to start watching CBS News to see this.
You know who they chose as their anchor?
Someone named Tony Docapil.
Tony Docapil.
Good evening, CBS News.
I'm Tony Docapil.
Everyone's going to be like, oh my God, that's like must-watch TV.
And here's the New York Post, page six.
Some today, CBS News has picked Tony Dachapel as CBS Evening News' anchor source.
Quote, Docopil44 has never been a frontrunner for the job.
Oh, sorry.
He has been a frontrunner for the job and a favorite of both Barry Weiss, the network's editor-in-chief, and Tom Sobrowski, its president.
As the post first reported last week, Docopil44 has been a frontrunner for the job.
He made headlines at the, listen to this.
This is when I don't think anyone heard of Tony Docappil before.
I had never heard of Tony Docopil before.
I can guarantee you that.
He, I think, is one of the hosts with like Gail King, Oprah Winfrey's platonic friend, as my friend and very acerbic cultural commentator Maureen Sullivan calls her.
If you don't watch Maureen Sullivan's show called The Nerve, which is some of the most acerbic, insightful, journalistic, cultural commentary, scathing against all the right people, you really should.
She talks a lot about Oprah Winfrey and Gail King and always refers to Gail King as Oprah Winfrey's Platonic friend.
So that's where I think he is.
He's like, that's morning news.
He's like one of the co-hosts with Oprah Winfrey's Platonic friend, Gail King.
That's, you know, morning news.
Who watches that?
Under 80, anybody?
And this is the person Barry Weiss decided should be elevated.
And the way that people heard of him for the first time was, as the New York Post said, quote, he made headlines at the network in October 2024 for his contentious interview with author Tana Hizzi Coates about the controversial author's pro-Palestinian framing of Hamas's war with Israel last year.
He ruffled feathers at CBS News at CBS Mornings for its grilling with then CBS News boss Wendy McMahon and her number two, Adrian Rourick, admonishing Docopil, who is Jewish, before staffers and saying his interview wasn't up to the network's editorial standards.
Barry Weiss's news site, The Free Press, broke the story, revealing the culture clash and bias inside the network.
Basically what happened was Tanahezi Coates had a new book out documenting the obviously apartheid-like conditions in the West Bank and the brutality with which it's enforced.
And he went on CBS Morning News and Tony Dachapel said to him, I'm shocked by some of your criticism of Israel.
This sounds like stuff that would be in a scribbled by a radical and found in a backpack.
Basically accusing Tanya Zukoza being a terrorist, like an Islamic terrorist, found in the backpack of a radical.
It was a very, you know, scholarly book, but very impassioned about the injustice of the Palestinian people.
And Tony Docopil would never challenge anybody on any issue before except this, which is why it made a splash.
The article says Tony Docopil is Jewish.
He actually, I guess he is.
He wasn't born Jewish.
He became a Jew.
He converted to Judaism in 2014.
He had married an Israeli woman.
They had children.
They decided to raise their children Jewish.
She was born in Israel, lived in Israel.
I believe they lived in Israel together.
And then he converted to Judaism and he wrote a very personal account.
Brave, raw, candid, personal account of how he had foreskins snipped as an adult in order to be circumcised as part of his adherence to Jewish law.
He actually wrote an article like My Adult Circumcision by Tony Docopil.
And he's a fanatical supporter of Israel.
Again, total coincidence.
I know people are thinking like, oh, obviously Barry Weiss and David Ellison picked Tony Dachapel to be the anchor of CBS News because like them, his primary cause is Israel.
Yes, all that's true.
That's a coincidence.
Come on with all these conspiracy theories.
All right.
At the time, the free press vehemently defended Tony Docappil from the free press October 7, 2004.
How is CBS, how is CBS marking October 7th?
By admonishing Tony Dachapel.
The journalist did his job by asking tough questions of Tanaheesy Coates.
That's when the trouble began.
So they were angry that CBS should have been commemorating October 7th by paying tribute to Israel, by centering the victims of October 7th, which had happened a year earlier, not the tens of thousands of Palestinian kids and other people killed by Israel since.
But instead, they were admonishing Tony Docopil.
So Tony Docopil has been kind of a cause of Israel for a long time.
If you want to go watch the interview with Tana Hesi Coates, you can, but it was very contentious.
Like no other politician, no writer of Tanah Coates' stature would ever have been questioned on any of these shows about any topic other than Israel.
Israel is the only thing that could have provoked Tanahezi Coates to be interviewed in that manner.
And so he became a hero, the pro-Israel, the pro-Israel cause.
And so one of the very first things Barry Weiss and David Ellison do after they buy CBS News, and everybody knows they're buying it to turn CBS News into yet another propaganda outlet for Israel at a time when support for Israel is unraveling.
Same reason why Larry Ellison, the son, the father of the boy who bought CBS News, David Ellison, is leading the consortium to buy TikTok, knowing that's where young people get their information from, is to repropagandize America into loving Israel.
So Barry Weiss and David Ellison just elevate a guy who nobody knows, no one cares about other than the fact that one time he attacked Tanah Coates for writing a book critical of Israel.
This is the only thing drawing to anyone.
Let me ask a question.
The mission of Barry Weiss is supposedly to revitalize CBS News as a relevant, exciting news network that young people and people across the spectrum go and watch.
And our first big announcement to accomplish that is to fire John Dickerson, drive out the other anchors of CBS News, and to elevate Tony Dacha Pill.
Is there anyone who thinks that you or anyone in your life is more likely to watch CBS News now because Tony Dacha Pill, CBS News tonight, it's December 8th.
I'm Tony Dacha Pill.
Is that going to be anything that's going to make people go watch it in front of the TV and watch CBS News?
That's not the mission.
The mission is to propagandize Americans into loving Israel again.
They have the second richest family in the world behind that goal.
Benjamin Netanyahu, who said this is the most important thing happening for Israel, that and especially the forced acquisition by Donald Trump and the Congress to close TikTok or force it into the hands of pro-Israel fanatics like the Ellison family.
Benjamin Netanyahu said that's the most important victory in the battlefield of information.
And we've been covering this from the beginning because I don't think there's anything like this before.
I don't think it's ever been the case that huge amounts of American media and social media have been all bought up at once by someone with the obvious, stated, explicit, lifelong goal of inducing Americans to love a foreign country and to support sending billions there and to go to war for it.
It's remarkable.
And every one of these steps aligns with that goal because that is the obvious goal.
And we're going to keep following this story because of its remarkable commentary about how our country works, what kind of power is being applied, who's applying it, and toward what ends.
And of course, you can make fun of the emergence of Tony Docopil as the anchor of CBS News, kind of like you make fun of Jasmine Crockett, but it obscures a much more important point that is anything but amusing.
All right.
So that concludes our program for this evening.
As a reminder, system update is also available in podcast form.
You can listen to every episode 12 hours after it first broadcasts live here on Rumble on Spotify, Apple, and all of the major podcasting platforms, where if you rate, review, and follow our program, it really helps spread the visibility of our show.
Finally, as independent media, we do rely on the support of our viewers and members, which you can participate in by joining our locals community where you get a wide array of exclusive benefits.
But most of all, it is the platform on which we really do rely, the community on which we rely to support and enable the independent journalism that we do every night.
All you have to do is click the red join button right below the video player on the Rumble page and it will take you directly to that community.
For those of you who have been watching this show, we are, needless to say, very appreciative.
We hope to see you back tomorrow night and every night at 7 p.m. Eastern Live, exclusively here on Rumble.
Export Selection