1/23/26: Don Lemon Charges REJECTED, Gavin’s Davos Knee Pad STUNT, Gaza Whistleblower Runs for Congress

Summary

Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar

Episode Date: January 23, 2026
Episode Title: Don Lemon Charges REJECTED, Gavin’s Davos Knee Pad STUNT, Gaza Whistleblower Runs for Congress

---

Episode Overview

This episode explores three main topics:

• The legal fallout of anti-ICE church protests involving Don Lemon and activists charged under the FACE Act
• Gavin Newsom’s performative moments at Davos and his prospects as a national Democratic figure
• An exclusive interview with Anthony Aguilar—a former Army officer and Gaza whistleblower—regarding his independent run for Congress and perspective on U.S. policy

The hosts challenge establishment narratives, scrutinize political “performance” versus authenticity, and give platform to anti-establishment voices rarely heard on mainstream outlets.

---

1. Opening Banter: Cultural Politics and “Milk Discourse”

[02:44–07:13]

• Lighthearted discussion among the hosts about the culture war symbolism around milk (whole, raw, skim, oat, etc.).
• Krystal Ball: “I am a bit of a milk hater. I am. I am an oat milk drinker. I will own it.” [03:47]
• Ryan Grim shares an anecdote about drinking raw milk in Ireland, humorously noting its taste and the evolving “hippie” vs. “homeschooler” culture overlap.
• Sets the informal and debate-friendly tone of the show.

---

2. Gavin Newsom at Davos: The “Knee Pad” Stunt and Elite Liberal Performance

[07:13–20:34]

Newsom’s Remarks at Davos

[07:42–09:17]

• Plays a clip of California Governor Gavin Newsom discussing international relations and the Trump disruption at Davos.
• Newsom: “This is a rupture. This isn’t an anomaly… He [Trump]’s an invasive species. Donald Trump. He took over the Republican party…” [07:42–08:07]
• Laments how formerly independent figures like Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio now align with Trump for power.

Panel Analysis

[09:17–14:12]

• Ryan Grim dissects Newsom’s critique—argues the Democratic elite often focus on Trump’s style over substance:
  • “It epitomizes the elite Democratic objection to Trump, which is so much around style when… the substance of it [is] in our face.” [10:09]
• Krystal Ball asserts that attempts to revive the liberal international order via figures like Biden or Newsom have failed, partly due to complicity in issues like Gaza:
  • “You cannot put back in the box the fact that all of these countries… there’s no sign [Newsom] objected to our role in perpetuating a genocide, which you won’t even call a genocide in Gaza.” [11:32]
  • “I do think that that is over, dead, gone—much as Gavin Newsom would love to pretend none of this happened.” [12:51]
• Emily and the panel reflect on the “convenient fiction” of global alliances, referencing Mark Carney’s metaphor of the “signs” in his speech.

The Newsom Persona: Authenticity vs. Performance

[15:24–20:34]

• Clip of Newsom jokingly selling “signature series knee pads” at Davos, ridiculing his own attempts to “try on” populist-Trumpian swagger.
  • Emily: “You can tell he just… it's awkward. I don't know, sometimes it's funny.” [16:18]
• Krystal Ball:
  • “Who is Gavin?... He is not the guy who's gonna be the bomb-throwing… that persona online is purely that—it’s not even him that's running the account.” [17:23]
  • “He’s play-acting as someone with intense moral convictions. And that’s also very inauthentic.” [18:31]
• Panel consensus: Newsom’s ambition and political skill are offset by his apparent lack of authenticity and disconnect from the party base, especially on vital issues (AIPAC, Israel, ICE).
  • “He has been so consistently out of touch with the base that I am very, I am bearish on his prospects.” (Krystal, [19:53])
  • Ryan Grim: “But then… who else is there?… That’s his best hope—is that… he’s the last guy here.” [19:53]

---

3. Legal Deep Dive: Don Lemon, Church Protests, and the FACE Act

Guest: Pisco Liddy, YouTuber and Legal Analyst
[23:13–45:54]

Case Background

[23:25–25:07]

• Don Lemon’s criminal charges stemming from a protest at a St. Paul church are rejected by a federal magistrate, while three activists still face prosecution under the FACE Act.
• The FACE Act, originally aimed at protecting abortion clinics, has been used here to prosecute disruption at a religious service due to the pastor's ICE ties.

Pisco Liddy’s Legal Analysis

• Magistrate judge’s rare refusal to sign Lemon’s charges signals government overreach.
  • “It doesn't happen very often… It shows that perhaps the government is overreaching by going after Don Lemon.” (Pisco, [25:07])
• The FACE Act requires proving use of “force, threats, or physical obstruction” with the intent to interfere with religious rights.
  • “The intent portion is super important… you're not just trying to do the actions that disrupt, but for the purpose either to restrict some kind of reproductive service or to restrict people's First Amendment rights with respect to religious freedoms.” (Pisco, [29:10])
• Panel discusses lines between civil disobedience, trespass, and federal prosecution, as well as constitutional concerns:
  • “That [the FACE Act] has serious speech concerns baked into the law itself.” (Krystal, [36:40])
• Reacting to the cross-ideological use of the FACE Act:
  • “I think it is [hypocrisy]… bad arguments from Democrats that, ‘Oh, this law is just about reproductive services,’ and then you look at their track record and they're happy to use them to protect the religious liberties of other people when it suits them.” (Pisco, [35:27])

Prospects for Activist Conviction

[40:01–44:18]

• Pisco: Prosecution may try to combine FACE Act with “Conspiracy Against Rights”—a legal tactic that can sweep up entire activist organizations.
• Predicts the government will struggle, especially on intent and obstruction elements, and that juries in Minneapolis may be skeptical:
  • “It seems that courts have been quite liberal in applying the physical obstruction. Not totally… [but] the harder part is: are they really trying to interfere specifically with the expression of civil liberties regarding religion? I'm not sure.” (Pisco, [40:02])
• Critiques DOJ’s strategy and “weird” legal filings, highlighting unusual acquittals recently:
  • “Their failure rate is not usual given the track record of the DOJ… This is abnormal, and the department is going through some things.” (Pisco, [44:14])
• Pisco’s closing: “Thank you again, guys. Appreciate your coverage. It’s always really excellent.” [45:07]

---

4. Interview: Anthony Aguilar—Gaza Whistleblower Now Running for Congress

Guest: Anthony Aguilar, former Army officer, whistleblower, North Carolina Congressional candidate
[49:35–77:25]

Why Run for Office?

[50:11–53:11]

• Aguilar: After witnessing U.S. complicity in Gaza, he feels compelled to act:
  • “I was looking very much forward to a retired life, a quiet life. And then I went to Gaza and the things that I saw and witnessed… forced me to take a hard look at what our government is doing… tough questions need to be asked that aren’t being answered.” [50:23]
• Expresses frustration with both parties, says political system is “entrenched in corporatization”—decides to run as an independent.
  • “This menu of two options between Republican or Democrat is a anemic menu with no fortitude and no character and no sustainment and nourishment to the American people. It’s not a choice, it’s a dilemma. The least bad of two bads.” [53:11]

Platform Highlights: Foreign and Domestic Policy

• Foreign policy expertise and moral clarity on U.S.-backed violence abroad.
• Domestic focus:
  • Critiques ballooning military and DHS budgets, says money should go to health care, education, and living wages, not ICE expansion or endless war.
  • “Why are we funding [DoD] next year with a $1.7 trillion budget… That’s not what the American people want.” [58:40]
• Will not take money from PACs, AIPAC, special interests, or military-industrial complex.

ICE and Immigration Enforcement—A Reformist Stand

[59:57–68:56]

• Aguilar’s position: Do not “abolish the function” of immigration enforcement, but abolish ICE as an agency and its current personnel/culture.
• Argues ICE has become a “domestic army” targeting Americans, fueled by DHS’s binational security training (especially with Israeli agencies). Calls for defunding such programs, restructuring, and demilitarizing border enforcement.
  • “We, the American taxpayer, paid for that training… We don’t need that. We should abolish that. Abolish the entire agency? No… But we need some serious deep reform in those agencies from the top down…” [63:00]
• Chilling claim: Many ICE field agents are veterans of Israeli operations in Gaza who are now “already prone to an extremist viewpoint.”
  • “Some of the same individuals that were in Gaza shooting people… are now working in the field as ICE agents. That's a fact.” [67:13]
• Supports abolishing ICE as a structure, but rebuilding humane, legal immigration enforcement (possibly in the style of the pre-9/11 INS).

The District and Practical Politics

[69:26–75:16]

• Running in North Carolina’s 13th district (Raleigh area and Fort Bragg), focusing on veteran issues and government waste (cuts to VA funding, extravagances like military base re-naming and Trump’s new “ballroom”).
• Critiques both major parties taking AIPAC money; sees himself representing independent and veteran voices disaffected with the system.
• On the cost of performative policy change—e.g., renaming military bases only to reverse the decisions and waste millions.
• “It’s a waste… It’s disgraceful. When you look throughout our country, you have hardworking Americans… while our president is building a lavish ballroom… If Great Gatsby was written in 1984 in a third-world country.” [75:16]

Notable Quote:

• “The reason I specifically wanted to ask Emily, Ryan, Crystal, is because you’ve always been a strong voice. You’ve always stood on the principles of truth, regardless of consequence, and you’re strong and courageous… you represent integrity.” (Anthony Aguilar, [75:54])

---

Notable Quotes and Moments (with Timestamps)

• Krystal Ball (on Newsom): “He is not the guy who's gonna be the bomb-throwing… that persona online is purely that—it's not even him that's running the account.” [17:23]
• Ryan Grim (on Democrat elite and Trump): “It epitomizes the elite Democratic objection to Trump, which is so much around style when… the substance of it [is] in our face.” [10:09]
• Pisco Liddy (on FACE Act use): “It doesn't happen very often… It shows that perhaps the government is overreaching by going after Don Lemon.” [25:07]
• Krystal Ball: “...that [the FACE Act] has serious speech concerns baked into the law itself.” [36:40]
• Anthony Aguilar: “This menu of two options between Republican or Democrat is a anemic menu with no fortitude and no character… It’s not a choice, it's a dilemma. The least bad of 2 bads.” [53:11]
• Aguilar (on ICE): “To the notion of abolishing the agency as it is, yes, I do not want to abolish the function… The function should be reinforced in a way that promotes immigration in our country…” [68:31]

---

Segment Timestamps Guide

| Segment | Topic | Start | End | |---------|-------|-------|-----| | Milk Discourse | Hosts banter, cultural politics | 02:44 | 07:13 | | Gavin Newsom at Davos | Newsom’s speech, panel analysis, authenticity vs. performance | 07:13 | 20:34 | | Don Lemon & FACE Act | Legal analysis w/ Pisco Liddy | 23:13 | 45:54 | | Anthony Aguilar Interview | Gaza whistleblower, independent candidacy | 49:35 | 77:25 |

---

Tone and Style

• Direct, critical, yet accessible. The hosts mix high-level legal and political scrutiny with humor, pop culture references, and frank personal takes.
• Authentic, debate-driven. They welcome disagreement, platform outsiders, and acknowledge nuance.
• Anti-establishment, independent. Repeatedly challenge both major parties, media narratives, and expressions of elite power.

---

Takeaway for New Listeners

This episode exemplifies Breaking Points’ mission: fearless coverage that challenges establishment power from left and right, unpacks complex legal/political issues with expert guests, and keeps discussion lively, real, and multi-perspectival.
If you care about what’s happening beneath the headlines—on the law, foreign policy, or the shifting American political landscape—this episode is a model of rigorous and refreshing independent media.

---

Transcript

[Krystal Ball]

This is an iHeart podcast.

[Saagar Enjeti]

Guaranteed Human support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It's IT screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like EFTs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors, llc SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures available at public.com disclosures hey.

[Crystal Ball]

This is US Olympic gold medalist Tara.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Davis Woodhull and I'm US Paralympic gold medalist Hunter Woodhull.

[Krystal Ball]

As athletes, our lives are about having.

[Crystal Ball]

A clear path and a team that you can absolutely trust. So when it came to getting the best mortgage, we chose PennyMac. PennyMac is pro proud to be the official mortgage provider of Team USA and.

[Anthony Aguilar]

You learn more at pennymac.com pennymac loan.

[Emily]

Services llc/housing lender nmls id 35953 licensed by the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation under the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act.

[Pisco Liddy]

Conditions and restrictions may apply.

[Emily]

Want to buy your way? Of course you do. That's why CarMax offers an experience designed just for you. Want to start online, then visit the lot, then go back online?

[Pisco Liddy]

Sure.

[Emily]

Want to talk to a real person or chat online? Either works. Want to take your time and compare all the makes and models? No problem. Then make up some time by filling out the paperwork at home and schedule express pickup or home delivery. Done. When it comes to how you buy, CarMax puts you in the driver's seat.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Want to drive?

[Emily]

CarMax delivery restrictions apply. See CarMax.com for details.

[Crystal Ball]

Hey guys, Sagar and Kristal here.

[Krystal Ball]

Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show.

[Saagar Enjeti]

This is the only place where you.

[Pisco Liddy]

Can find honest perspectives from the left.

[Saagar Enjeti]

And the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.

[Krystal Ball]

So if that is something that's important to you, Please go to BreakingPoints.com Become a member today and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited ad free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.

[Saagar Enjeti]

We need your help to build the.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Future of independent news media. And we hope to see [e-mail] hello.

[Krystal Ball]

Hello. Good morning, everybody. Happy Friday. How are you guys doing?

[Crystal Ball]

Happy Friday.

[Emily]

Happy Friday. I hope everyone here has their cup of milk ready to go.

[Crystal Ball]

Whole milk.

[Emily]

Whole milk. That's right.

[Krystal Ball]

Emily, can. I feel like we use you too much. It's like, can you explain this to me? But I do need. I don't need Milk Whisperer happened here with.

[Crystal Ball]

With whole milk.

[Krystal Ball]

With the whole Milk campaign. Yeah. Because they're acting like this is some like, edgy, countercultural thing to drink whole milk. And I did not know that whole milk was in any way lib coded or. Or like not drinking whole milk was lib coated?

[Ryan Grim]

I don't know.

[Krystal Ball]

I skim milk.

[Crystal Ball]

Is lib coated?

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah. Is that the idea?

[Emily]

I guess.

[Ryan Grim]

Soy.

[Emily]

Yeah. The original soy.

[Crystal Ball]

Well, I think it's about. They're like, they have this big campaign to have people have whole fats and high protein foods. So that. That's my best guess here. I'm sticking with 2%. I'm not a whole milk person, but that's my, like, that's my best guess.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, I, I find milk to be kind of disgusting in general.

[Emily]

So let's give people a taste here.

[Krystal Ball]

I am a bit of a milk hater. I am. I am an oat milk drinker. I will own it.

[Crystal Ball]

Many such cases.

[Krystal Ball]

I will own it.

[Emily]

Well, let's give people a literal taste here at the top of the show.

[Crystal Ball]

Griffin, I said ooh, ooh, baby. To. If you're listening to this, it's AI RFK Jr like at the Sphere with a couple milk. That's. I think it's probably not, but it just kind of looks spherical.

[Krystal Ball]

Is that an AI song too, or is that a real song?

[Emily]

That's a real. That's a real song and a real partier right here. If you see a guy partying with milk at the club, elect him.

[Crystal Ball]

Elect him.

[Krystal Ball]

Make him HHS secretary immediately.

[Emily]

Put him in charge.

[Krystal Ball]

Give him the vaccine schedule right away.

[Emily]

I think that there was clearly a raw milk push that they had to pivot at the last moment to hold.

[Crystal Ball]

I feel like they're not pivoting. I feel like they're still all in on the raw milk.

[Emily]

Well, then why aren't they promoting raw milk in these epic club?

[Krystal Ball]

That would own me so much harder if it's not raw milk would be owned.

[Crystal Ball]

I think you just can't persuade people to drink raw milk. I feel like it's going to be in the, like, the. What is the. The hippie slash homeschool middle of that Venn diagram. Yeah, they're still gonna have their raw milk, but nobody else is gonna be persuaded.

[Krystal Ball]

My favorite raw milk story is they passed in West Virginia state legislature some, like, raw milk pro raw milk legislation. And to celebrate, they, like, drank raw milk and then a bunch of them got violently ill. Yes. Really?

[Emily]

Here's what a. Here's what a raw milk party actually looks like. For anyone curious.

[Crystal Ball]

Why do you have these at such easy?

[Krystal Ball]

I thought he was ready to go with this.

[Emily]

Because I'm a producer. I come prepared.

[Krystal Ball]

But this is what real one with the kids. With the scary, like, creepy kids.

[Emily]

No, you caught me lacking.

[Crystal Ball]

You can't even tell anymore who's a hippie and who's homeschooled.

[Emily]

That's right.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah. It's melded together. No difference.

[Crystal Ball]

Really much love to both, by the way.

[Emily]

Well, we're all at home ready to school. Y' all on the news.

[Krystal Ball]

I'll be homeschooling my kids next week, so apparently with the storm coming in, so I can't talk.

[Crystal Ball]

I'd love to be homeschooled by you, but Crystal.

[Emily]

Yeah, that'd be actually awesome. Kind of like a.

[Krystal Ball]

You would have come out way differently. Emily, here's your Howardson and your soy milk, literally.

[Emily]

And we've got Ryan here. He heard that we were talking about raw milk, so he had to.

[Krystal Ball]

And homeschooling and homeschooling and hippies and how hippies. Most. Most appropriately hippies. Yeah.

[Ryan Grim]

I had had raw milk in Ireland this summer at Petty Cosgraves house.

[Krystal Ball]

How did that go?

[Ryan Grim]

County Donegal. It was delicious.

[Krystal Ball]

Was it?

[Ryan Grim]

Yeah.

[Krystal Ball]

Did it takes different than it was.

[Ryan Grim]

Also from, like, fancier cows.

[Crystal Ball]

Mm.

[Krystal Ball]

Okay. Gotcha.

[Ryan Grim]

So it was incredible.

[Krystal Ball]

I just. I just find. I mean, it's not that I like. I have plenty of dairy products, but I just find the idea of drinking a glass of milk to be revolting. Any kind of milk.

[Ryan Grim]

Well, you're a grownup, so that's.

[Crystal Ball]

Well, milk is good. Milk is good.

[Emily]

Mm. All right, well, we. Let's get to something.

[Pisco Liddy]

Actually.

[Crystal Ball]

This is what we do on the show. We have different opinions and we all.

[Emily]

That's so beautiful.

[Krystal Ball]

Come together and we're able to, you know, agree to disagree and this.

[Emily]

So we got Ryan. Ryan, we wanted to talk to you about the new Kushner Gaza plan. But that's a hard pivot from raw milk. So why don't we start with a little bit of Gavin here at Davos trying to clean up some of the Trump energies happening here. Let's take a listen to what Gavin has to say.

[Gavin Newsom]

This is a rupture. This isn't an anomaly. Yeah. And there's no going back.

[Anthony Aguilar]

And do you think that, I mean, do you think there's always an American leader.

[Gavin Newsom]

Yes. Can bring. I think, I think these relationships are in dormancy. They're not dead. I don't use those binary terms. Don't, don't, don't fall prey to that. That's a bit hyperbolic and I'm prone to a little.

[Anthony Aguilar]

That at times.

[Gavin Newsom]

Dormancy.

[Anthony Aguilar]

We can.

[Gavin Newsom]

He's an invasive species. Donald Trump. He's not. He is. He took over the Republican Party. They're just, I mean, he's got, you know, a few of them. Lindsey Graham. I mean, speaking of the knee pads. I'm sorry. This is tough stuff. It's tough stuff. I don't recognize these people any longer. I used to respect Lindsay. I mean, Lindsay, why.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah.

[Gavin Newsom]

What Lindsey Graham said about Trump about the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. Do you think it's just these are the same people and this is why we. For things to change, we need to change. And that's why I'm changing my approach. And again, grateful.

[Anthony Aguilar]

I mean, I suppose.

[Gavin Newsom]

Do you think post Trump there's a path backstage? Is ever the kind of consult politics that you're doing here. But you.

[Anthony Aguilar]

I see you said you don't really enjoy it.

[Gavin Newsom]

You kind of seem to. I just putting a mirror up just. It got it. I was doing my 10 point plans before and I don't think any of you would have been here this morning had I done that. They would have been here. No, because it just wasn't working. Everyone's trying to figure this out in the Mark Carney crowd. Yeah.

[Crystal Ball]

No, but it's.

[Gavin Newsom]

How do you, how do you, how do you communicate? How do you respond to this moment? And it's for me, it's about iteration. It's an entrepreneurial spirit. It's a very California mindset.

[Ryan Grim]

What's it on the part about Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio?

[Crystal Ball]

Poetry.

[Ryan Grim]

What he's. What he's saying there is that what he liked about them was that they were critical of Donald Trump.

[Crystal Ball]

Yep.

[Ryan Grim]

And that they were polite. They had the same politics back then.

[Krystal Ball]

Yes.

[Ryan Grim]

I mean, they were warmongers then, they're warmongers now.

[Krystal Ball]

And so they're actually just more effective at getting their way now.

[Ryan Grim]

Right.

[Krystal Ball]

You know, figured out criticizing Trump to suck up to Trump and that's allowed them to get their, like, neocon warmongering goals accomplished.

[Ryan Grim]

It epitomizes the elite Democratic objection to Trump, which is so much around style when, when we're seeing the substance of it in our face, like the, you know, three, three threatened or carried out wars, like in a week plus ICE rampaging around the country. And the, the beef he has is that, you know, these guys are now obsequious to Trump rather than objecting to him. I, on his, on his broader point, I don't know, I feel like, yes, like Trump represents a rupture, but could it be healed with, you know, the world is becoming these, these kind of transnational camps of, you know, center left corporatist types that you have running the EU and that are, and that are, you know, pretty dominant in one faction of the Democratic Party. So if that, if they came back to power, you know, could they link up again? I think they could stitch it up somewhat together. But, you know, the rise of Russia and China are real things that have changed. That changed the calculus over the last decade too.

[Krystal Ball]

I think that Biden was the attempt to stitch it back up, in your words, Ryan, and it failed. Right. And there it's not just Trump.

[Ryan Grim]

Well, it's stitched.

[Krystal Ball]

It's not just Trump, though. I think the other thing that has destroyed, there's a variety of factors, but one of the other things that has destroyed the previous era of international relations is Gaza. You know, you cannot put back in the box the fact that all of these countries, and including, you know, I mean, Gavin Newsom's the governor of California, but there's no sign that he objected to our role in perpetuating a genocide, which you won't even call a genocide in Gaza. Um, you can't just put that back in the box and then pretend like, oh, no, we believe in human rights and freedom and democracy, blah, blah, blah. So Trump is very effective at demolishing things. And I think he is. This is what Tucker Carlson and his infamous, like, leaked messages said. He is a destroyer. That is what he has done. And I don't think that there is any stitching the, the liberal, you know, international world order, such as it was back together. And that's really what Mark Carney's speech was about. Right. Like I'm going to say out loud the thing that we all knew and that we did not say. I'm going to single handedly destroy what remains of this illusion. So that doesn't mean that, you know, the US and France couldn't go back to having better relations or, you know, Germany or whatever. But in terms of the overall structure of how this thing was held together and the understanding that underpinned it, I do think that that is over, dead, gone. Much as Gavin Newsom would love to just sort of, let's pretend none of this happened. Let's continue to imagine that Donald Trump, who now has been the dominant figure in public life for a decade, let's just pretend that was an aberration and see if we can rewind and get the good old Lindsey Graham back.

[Crystal Ball]

I think it's no longer viable. But the Mark Carney metaphor of signs that he talked about in his speech, like the signs, the green grocer. Right. Yeah. The sign that the greengrocer would put out. I think they will, like, they will, whatever happens, likely find a way to put the signs back outside and tell themselves the signs are back outside. And what did Carney refer to it as? Like a convenient fiction, something like that? I think they will, you can just hear it in Gavin Newsom. Like there's a desperation to like re establish that when he's saying it's dormant. So, so I think they, they will at some point do that. Like maybe it's post Trump they'll do that, but it's never going to be the viable coalition and that fiction is going to fall on deaf ears among the like normal people in their populations. It's just not as persuasive or efficacious anymore.

[Ryan Grim]

Yeah, you can't make bets on us either. Like, because even if you get AOC or Gavin for four years, you only have them for four years and then God only knows what you get after that.

[Krystal Ball]

So like, well, you're gonna do another deal with us?

[Pisco Liddy]

You really want to spend three years.

[Ryan Grim]

Three years negotiating some deal that the other party comes in and rips up just because it's your deal?

[Crystal Ball]

When they don't have control over media channels like they used to, like, they just don't have control over narrative like they used to. They, it's the, the, there's some decentralization that they're coping with and they're trying to find a way back to having more power But I mean, I guess that's the good news. In some sense this is responsive to people being furious. But on the other hand, I don't think they clearly like Gavin Newsom. This is the entire point of playing the clip, I think is like he doesn't get that you can't tell people everything is fine just by aping Donald Trump. And what did he say? Putting a mirror up to Donald Trump. The one thing Trump would never do is explain that what he's doing is a, you know, grand strategy and is totally fake and that's where it'll continue to fall flat.

[Ryan Grim]

Trump. Trump does actually a little bit of that.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Yeah.

[Crystal Ball]

But he doesn't do it like Gavin Newsom earnestly at Davos and, But also.

[Emily]

Intensely uncomfortable, which I'll play. I have another 20 second clip right here talking about, you know, he. It seems like they're comfortable doing the, the posts, but whenever he talks about the post irl, it becomes a little different. This is that the knee pad moment.

[Gavin Newsom]

Signature series knee pads, yeah. And they are available online. I told you the last one sold out. And, and I just wanted a serious moment.

[Ryan Grim]

We left.

[Gavin Newsom]

Anyway, these are available and in bulk too.

[Emily]

The knee pad moment.

[Pisco Liddy]

Yeah.

[Emily]

I don't know that Emily, was that.

[Ryan Grim]

Poetry seemed to do okay. There's.

[Emily]

You can't hawk your own merch. You should never hock your own merch.

[Crystal Ball]

Well, Trump can do it.

[Emily]

That's true.

[Crystal Ball]

I don't know, there's just something very weird about him compete, like trying to compete with Trump in this domain. And sometimes it works on X, but in person you can tell he just, it's, it's awkward. I don't know, sometimes it's funny.

[Krystal Ball]

It's inauthentic to him. I mean, to me the most revealing moment wasn't there. It was when he was interviewing Ben Shapiro and Shapiro was like, your press account said that ICE is committing state sponsored terrorism and Newsom immediately backs down. So it's like, okay, well this, you're letting these staffers do this thing because you think it's cool and it's getting you attention, but this is not actually reflective of who you are as a politician. And the thing about Trump, I mean the thing about any effective politician is, to your point, Emily, he wouldn't, you know, just expose like, oh, this whole Persona is a fraud and a phony. Um, he will sometimes tell give you a little bit of, you know, the true thinking going on behind the scenes that will contradict things that he said in public. But Trump is authentically Like a brash, ego maniacal asshole. And he wears that. And that is who he is. Who is Gavin? Like, I mean, actually we know Gavin is a very ambitious guy who found his way up through politics by being in good with like especially the donors in California where there's plenty of money to support him. He's been smart about positioning on certain political issues, like when he was coming up and being at the forefront of pushing for gay marriage at a time when that was, you know, that was really challenging on a national level, but good politics in terms of San Francisco. So he's made some savvy moves. He's an operator. Like, that's who he is. He is not the guy who's gonna be the bomb throwing, you know, he doesn't. That Persona online is purely that it's not even him that's running the account. And so that's the part of it where it is a little uncomfortable, him with the knee pad thing, because it's like this is not really who you, you're playing this character because you, that's, you understand that's the reason. Playing that character is the reason why you're on this stage. But this is not actually really who you are.

[Crystal Ball]

Yeah, I agree with that.

[Ryan Grim]

If there is a who he is. Right, Right, Yeah.

[Krystal Ball]

I mean, that's the other thing is, I mean, yeah, but that's what he's, he's play acting.

[Crystal Ball]

He's play acting as someone with intense moral convictions. And that's also very inauthentic because that's not who caven news.

[Krystal Ball]

100%, 100% correct.

[Emily]

Do you guys think he's peaked a little early? Like, do you think he's going to burn bright and burn fast?

[Krystal Ball]

I am very, I have always, I want to go on the record, been very bearish on the Gavin Newsom hype because of moments like, you know, what we saw when he got asked about aipac, right. Initially and he's like, oh, interesting question. Because he is too disconnected from where the base is today and in another moment a couple years ago could have worked. Now the base is much more clear eyed about what they want on policy issues. They have no patience for this like mealy mouth. Let me weasel my way through, you know, 10,000 words out of answering your question. They have very clear cut ideas on Israel on Ice, where they want you to be. And so if you can't come forward and give a yes or no answer on some of these things, you immediately are look squirrely to them. You look like the Democratic leaders who are failing them right now in this moment that they are so disgusted with. So even as Gavin has some talents that he brings to the table, there's no doubt about that. He has been so consistently out of touch with the base that I am very, I am bearish on his prospects.

[Ryan Grim]

Yeah, but then there's, it's like who, who else is there? And so he benefits from that possibility. That's his, that's his best hope is that he just like who's, who's waiting in the wings and it's like, well, he's the last guy here.

[Krystal Ball]

I mean that lane is going to be, I mean that lane is going to be crowded though for the like empty, ambitious politician. You're going to have Pete, you're going to have Shapiro, you're going to have him, you're going to have, you know, people think Pritzker is a bit better. I'm not sure I'm really convinced of that. But they occupy roughly the same, you know, the same space ideologically. So there's going to be a lot of people in that lane, which is a real detriment to him.

[Saagar Enjeti]

Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like EFTs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors llc SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures [e-mail] disclosures so you want.

[Walton Goggins]

To start a business? You might think you need a team of people and fancy tech skills, but you don't. You just need Godaddy Arrow. I'm Walton Goggins and as an actor I'm an expert in looking like I know what I'm doing even when I don't. And I like the sound of starting my own business. Walton Goggins goggle glasses. But I'm an actor. I don't know what I'm doing. I needed help. Godaddy Arrow uses AI to create everything you need to grow a business. It'll make you a unique logo, it'll create a custom website, it'll write social posts for you and even set you up with a social media calendar. I didn't even realize I needed a social media calendar. GoDaddy Arrow will take your idea. That sounds good. And make a business that looks like you know what you're doing. GoDaddy Arrow can get your business up and running in minutes. You know what that sounds like? It sounds like a plan. Get [e-mail] Arrow that's godaddy.com Airo well.

[Emily]

The holidays have come and gone once again.

[Anthony Aguilar]

But if you've forgotten to get that special someone in your life a gift.

[Emily]

Well, Mint Mobile is extending their holiday offer of half off unlimited wireless.

[Anthony Aguilar]

So here's the idea. You get it now, you call it.

[Emily]

An early present for next year.

[Anthony Aguilar]

What do you have to lose? Give it a try.

[Krystal Ball]

Mint mobile.com/switch limited time, 50% off regular price for new customers. Upfront payment required. $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for 12 month plan taxes and fees. Extra speeds may slow after 50 gigabytes per month when network is busy. See terms.

[Emily]

That was Gavin at Davos. We now have our first guest of the Friday show here. Let's welcome him in. Crystal, who do we got here today?

[Krystal Ball]

Friend Pisco. YouTuber, legal analyst. All the good things. Great streamer. You guys should be checking him out. Great to see you, Pisco.

[Pisco Liddy]

How you guys doing? Glad to be here.

[Krystal Ball]

Good. So let me throw this tear sheet up. Do I have it up? Yes. So we wanted to get Pisco's legal analysis of this whole church protest and now the charges that have been filed against several of the protesters who've been arrested. Just to get a breakdown of like, what is the face act, what is the standard they're going to be judged by, et cetera. So here are the details. Three arrested in St. Paul church protests as judge rejects charges against Don Lemon. A judge in Minnesota rejected federal prosecutors attempt to criminally charge journalist Don Lemon in relation to his presence this week during a protest at a St. Paul church. Extraordinary rebuke of a justice department that has drawn criticism for its forceful response to demonstrations so they start with the Don Lemon part. But there were three other protesters who were in fact charged under the FACE Act. They say among those charged are Nakima Levy Armstrong, a civil rights attorney, former head of the Minneapolis branch of the NAACP, Chantal Louisa Allen, a member of St. Paul's School Board, and William Kelly, a protester who had dared authorities to try to arrest him in a video he posted to TikTok after he was identified online as one of the demonstrators present that day. Bondi said in a statement on the arrest, our nation was settled and founded by people fleeing religious prosecution. Religious freedom is the bedrock of this country. Will protect our pastors, we will protect our churches, we will protect Americans of faith. So, first of all, Pisco, before we get into the specifics on the Face act, and you know what the sort of legal bar the government is going to have to meet here is, how significant is it that the magistrate judge refused to sign off on the charges against Don Lemon?

[Pisco Liddy]

It's significant. I mean, it doesn't happen very often that a magistrate judge will refuse to sign off on those charges. And it shows that perhaps the government is overreaching by going after Don Lemon as opposed to the other potential defendants. And so it is significant. Legal commentators have noted it as showing a weak case with respect to the Face act on Don Lemon specifically.

[Krystal Ball]

So go ahead, then, and break down for us what the Face act is and what is the legal standard that the government will have to meet here with regard to the other three that have been charged. Yeah.

[Pisco Liddy]

So the Face act was a law that was passed in the 90s by Clinton after a big sweep of attacks at abortion centers and people trying to get reproductive health care. And it was passed with an intent to try to stop that, as well as certain religious freedoms and going after individuals who. Who target the exercise of religious freedoms in the aftermath of another law as well that Bill Clinton passed called rfra, and the actual criminalizes three kinds of conduct with specific purposes. That is to say, using force, threats, or physical obstruction to achieve one purpose, which in the case of reproductive health centers, is to try to, like, injure, impair, or intimidate someone in attempting to get those services, or in the context of religious freedoms, the same thing, but them exercising their religious freedoms. And so that's like the conduct is either physical obstruction, threats, or use of force, and that's the intent they have to prove. But there's some nuances we can get into.

[Ryan Grim]

And for people who are coming in new to this, can you just describe briefly, like, what. What what precisely did these activists do and like, what. And to. To what kind of institution?

[Pisco Liddy]

Yes, so that those facts are going to be super important. As far as we know, this is a private church. And they entered into the church and started yelling and made it kind of difficult for them to continue with the proceeding. And the reason, the purported reason for why this happened was because the. The pastor has some affiliation, in fact, potentially employment with. With ICE has done a declaration before for ice. And so that was what they did. They went in. There is some lack of clarity on the amount of time, but apparently they left before police arrived. And so it doesn't sound like they were there for, you know, hours and hours, but those are the facts as best we know them. Don Lemon was traveling with them and interviewed some individuals on his live stream.

[Crystal Ball]

And a couple of facts that I think are relevant to that is Lemon's livestream. I went back and watched this portion of it. It's like six hours long. But I went back and watched this portion of it last night. He, when he's interviewing Nakima Armstrong, she's very clear that what they're about to do is, quote, disrupt. So that's going to be. That will be raised by the prosecution that she explained explicitly said that part of this operation was to disrupt. Don Lemon said when he was in the church, I am here as a journalist. I'm not here with the activists, which is going to be. I mean, that's probably one of the reasons the charge was not signed off on. So there's all kinds of stuff in the live stream that people can go and watch for themselves. But I think those. Having just gone back and watched it last night, I think those two moments are pretty important.

[Pisco Liddy]

They're very important. Oh, go ahead. Sorry.

[Ryan Grim]

What would be the difference between a private and a quote unquote, public church? Like, like, doors are swung open and it says all are welcome.

[Crystal Ball]

Yeah.

[Ryan Grim]

So then it'd be harder to charge them. This is. This is more like, hey, like, we're doing our thing in here. Be quiet. Like, don't mess with us.

[Pisco Liddy]

Yeah, I was referencing more sort of like the fact that the space is owned privately and it's not like a sort of open forum where they're doing some kind of service, where the, you know, the First Amendment turns on such that, you know, those additional standards relating to traditional public fora apply. But presumably they asked the people to leave. If this was like a church that was open to people to generally come. And they asked, yeah, ask them to leave. And so that would be relevant to the analysis under the Face Act. There have been cases that have been sustained under the Face act for conduct that happens within a location. And so the fact that it's private might weigh into that determination of how much obstruction was it? And is the First Amendment implicated in any respect as applied? Every court to deal with the Face act on its constitutionality has upheld it as constitutional because you're really not targeting speech, you're targeting these kinds of conducts. The intent portion is super important. What Emily just brought up, and it's unclear. A lot of courts have construed the statute as requiring dual intent. That is to say, you're not just trying to do the actions that disrupt, but for the purpose either to restrict some kind of reproductive service or to restrict people's First Amendment rights with respect to religious freedoms. And so one argument you could see the protesters making is, well, we're not here to disrupt religious services and religious freedoms. This is us trying to, like, whistleblow on the pastor with respect to his dealings with ICE has nothing to do with the religious expression. Now, whether a court ultimately will buy that as a distinction for the dual intent purposes, unclear. But you can see the kind of arguments. We didn't physically obstruct, we didn't use force, we didn't use threats, and, you know, we don't have that intent.

[Ryan Grim]

Right, Interesting.

[Krystal Ball]

So, say again, Pisco, what are the. There were three. It's either obstruct, intimidate, or actual violence. So those are three.

[Pisco Liddy]

It's force, threat, or physical obstruction. You need to show one of them. And so.

[Krystal Ball]

And when you say threat. Threat of what?

[Pisco Liddy]

Threat of force. And threat is interpreted by courts in the context of true threats. These are a First Amendment standard that are, like, they're not protected by First Amendment jurisprudence, and they usually require some, like, reasonable person to apprehend that they're actually trying to put you in fear of bodily harm of some kind. And so if you're not seeing these. These protesters shouting things like, we're going to hurt you, we're going to, like, kill you, or something like that, or, you know, wielding some kind of weapon to put them in fear, probably less likely for. For the threat prong, the physical obstruction, that's where, like, the more complicated analysis is. And there are tons of decisions that try to interpret what physical obstruction means. Can it be constructive obstruction? Most courts say no, not constructive obstruction. But can it include that a kind of.

[Crystal Ball]

That's what Sagar does.

[Pisco Liddy]

Yeah. Where you're kind of making it, like, more difficult and you're not actually physically blocking at all, but you're making it, like, difficult for. For them to go into the. Into the given area, either the reproductive health service center or into the church. You can imagine someone on the street yelling and. And saying something that's very emotionally resonant, but not necessarily physically obstructing. That said, there have been cases where it seems kind of trivial, the obstruction, where people are walking up to the individuals in their path with, like, flyers and leaflets, and that's treated differently than someone giving a leaflet from the side because you're. You're trying to like, stop their path. Exactly. So the physical.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, so. Well, I was just gonna say, so in this instance, people were, you know, were leaving the church as the protesters are there. Like, they weren't obstructing, at least from what I watched the stream as well. They weren't obstructing people's like, physical ingress or egress to the church. They were obviously obstructing the ability of the pastor to continue his sermon. So does it. Is it like, physically obstructing into the actual building that is the legal standard, or is it obstructing their, you know, ability to continue what they were doing in the building?

[Pisco Liddy]

Yeah, it's not just ingress and egress. The statute defines physical obstruction, and it contains ingress and egress. And so I think they're not seemingly trying to block ingress or egress, but it also includes kind of conduct that makes it, like, unreasonably unsafe or. Or difficult to get into the. The service place. Now, the question is there have been some cases where protesters were, for example, in an abortion clinic or something, and they. They're sticking around because they know the cops are going to be there, and they. They kind of are anticipating that they're going to stop the services. And you can see the kind of proximate cause of chain that they pretty much knew it was foreseeable that people are going to be asked not to enter. So the question is, like, in terms of that Actus Reyes component, the physical obstruction, how much are we getting into constructive obstruction by their conduct within? There have been some cases where just conduct within has been enough, but not always.

[Krystal Ball]

Let me ask you this. This was a saga requested question, but I think it's a good one. So this was an article from the Washington Free Beacon about Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ell, who's been defending the protesters inside the church. And they are alleging that he is hypocritical because in some other instances, he supported the use of the FACE Act. Specifically, one of the cases they talk about here was involving a mosque. There was an activist who was filming the members of the mosque and their children over the course of. I believe it was years. Over the course of years, they were sort of recording people going into and coming out of this mosque outside of Minneapolis. It says, as Minnesota attorney generally submitted a brief in a 2020 federal lawsuit that accused a Minneapolis woman of violating the First Amendment rights of parishioners at Dara Al Farouk mosque outside of Minneapolis by filming them without their permission. Go on to say in 2015, as a house member, Ellison urged Obama civil rights chief Vanita Gupta to investigate whether a group of protesters in Phoenix violated the FACE act by holding firearms during protests outside a Phoenix mosque. Quote, these demonstrators argue they are exercising their First Amendment rights. What they fail to understand is that First Amendment rights are not absolute. They are limited to protect the safety and rights of others. So does. Do they have a point here, Pisco? Is this effective hypocrisy burn on Attorney General Ellison?

[Pisco Liddy]

I think it is, yeah. I'm going to be honest about that. And listen, I'm a liberal Democrat and I. So I put my cards on my, my chest, but that, yeah, I kind of don't like these bad arguments from Democrats that, oh, this law is just about reproductive services. And then you just go back and look at their track record and they're happy to use them to protect the religious liberties of other people when it suits them. And there are some things that AG Ellison has done that I've. That I've liked. But in general, yeah, I think that that's like a bit of hypocrisy on that. And additionally, what that article, I think details is his unwillingness to do anything about this. Specifically, putting aside the Face act violations, there are potentially like, you know, trespass statutes that could be applied here and other state analogs. And it doesn't seem like he has any willingness to do that. I'm not saying that he should, but it's just something that people should take into consideration when sort of judging that conduct. If you think that that's acceptable, you're essentially saying that the law breaking in this context, which it probably was some form of trespass, is justified given the interest. Now, I'm somewhat sympathetic to certain arguments to that effect, given what ICE is doing and the overwhelming illegality there, but it is a determination that you're going to have to make if you want to defend the actions or inaction Well.

[Crystal Ball]

I just want to jump in there and say one of the reasons that people on the right like Mike Lee have long called for the repeal of the FACE act is that actually a lot of what is covered in the Face act, if not all of what's covered in the Face act, is already illegal for other reasons. And trespassing is a really good example of that. And it's a really good example from last Sunday as well. So it's. And Pisco, you can speak to this. But from my perspective, it's always been, since it was going back to 1994 when it was signed, it's been a serious threat to free speech. I mean, the way the law is written. You were pointing out just the question about leaflets. If you're on a public sidewalk handing out leaflets, are you implicated under the FACE Act? That's crazy. We have laws about trespassing on the books. And that applies to, you know, there are a lot of pro lifers who will intentionally go up and violate the FACE act as an act of civil disobedience, and they know that they're going to be charged under the FACE act, but then it can be used to build conspiracy against rights cases and all of that. So it's just whether it's. Whether it's a church or an abortion clinic, you can speak to this piececo. But I think it's almost a bipartisan. And, you know, if you. If you catch people in honest moments on the left and the right, they will tell you that the FACE act has. Has serious speech concerns baked into the law itself.

[Pisco Liddy]

Yeah, no doubt about that. And you put out a bunch of great points there. I want to hit them all. The first is the legislative basis for the law in the first place. Putting aside the First Amendment issues like where does Congress derive that authority to even legislate in this domain? It's a government of limited powers that has been sustained under the Congress's commerce clause abilities. And I know a lot of commerce or sorry, conservatives have a lot of things to say about that specifically and whether or not it's gone too far and how much Congress is legislated in that domain. So I understand that totally. I think people would have less of a problem if it were just the force or threat part and the physical obstruction, to the extent that it existed, was ingress or egress. Only, like, then it seems like, okay, maybe there's something there. If it's a really important interest and you raise something, a nuance that is super, super important. The conspiracy against rights part which the administration is talking about incorporating. The KKK act has a criminal part of it, and Trump was actually charged with this as part of the Jack Smith indictments. If you. He just went up to Congress as well. That requires some sort of federal right in it. And you can use the KKK act, the Conspiracy Against Rights, and incorporate underlying face act violation, or at least some courts have held that. And so yes, the face act being there, it's been sustained for its First Amendment on facially at least there could be a NAS applied challenge. Gives a lot of powers for the federal government to get involved and then hit you with that Conspiracy Against Rights. If they can show that there's like more than one person agreeing to do this stuff, which often you can.

[Crystal Ball]

Yeah.

[Krystal Ball]

So go ahead. Right.

[Ryan Grim]

Then they'll try to roll up an entire like, activist organization or Everybody in a WhatsApp group. Or everybody on Facebook.

[Krystal Ball]

Exactly.

[Ryan Grim]

Yeah. That's disturbing. Yeah.

[Krystal Ball]

Pisco, bottom line, this one for us, you know, what would be your estimate of how likely the government is to succeed on these charges against these three activists?

[Anthony Aguilar]

Oh, boy.

[Pisco Liddy]

Hard to say. I think they're going to try to do the Conspiracy Against Rights and incorporate an underlying face act violation. I think if I were to judge the arguments just based on the evidence so far of what I've seen of the facts, I think they're going to have an easier time on the intent prong of it than potentially the. The prong of physical obstruction. It seems that courts have been quite liberal in applying the physical obstruction. Not totally in 100%. I'm not saying that every disruption at a proceeding or something constitutes a physical obstruction. But here you have, what is it, like 40 people, the numbers involved here, the pre planning. I think it can be analogized to some of these cases in reproductive healthcare centers with like 2, 3, 4 people where they cause a disruption, sort of anticipating police to be involved. But you know, here you have a difference where they didn't necessarily stay as long, but yeah. So I think there's a lot of room for courts to judge that this was a physical obstruction. The harder part is like, are they really trying to interfere specifically with the expression of civil liberties regarding religion? I'm not sure. An example I would think about. And you guys tell me what you think of it. Suppose that we had a priest who's like accused of being inappropriate with altar boys and someone, a group of five people come in and say he's, you know, having inappropriate relations with altar boys. Would we consider that purpose, the intent there to be to interfere with the expression of religious liberties. Just because as a consequence of trying to expose a crime or some kind of corruption, that it entails stopping the service. That seems a little bit more far fetched to me that the mere disruption constitutes the intent prong. But who knows? We'll see what the courts will decide. And as of now, without any court documents or any kind of complaints or indictments, I'm not comfortable doing that estimate and how much.

[Krystal Ball]

So this would be. This would be a jury trial in Minneapolis, presumably.

[Pisco Liddy]

Yeah, this would be in federal court because it's a federal cause of action and. Yeah, so it would be. You'd have a right to a jury trial there. And to do the. The determinations. I will note that I think the case against Don Lemon is significantly weaker. To the extent that there's a weakness on the intent prong for the protesters, there's an even harder case for Don Lemon. And so I think it's kind of absurd, frankly. But specifically, the Don Lemon one, I think is offensive.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah. With regard to, you know, the fact it would be a jury trial. I mean, we've seen, we just saw yesterday a jury almost instantly find this guy not guilty in Chicago who had been charged with supposedly putting a $10,000 bounty on the head of Greg Bevino. And in Chicago, as part of the reporting on that, they were pointing out that of the, I think 31 non immigration char. That were filed in the context of what was that one Operation Midway Blitz or whatever, that none of them have been found guilty yet. And 15 of them have. Either the charges have been dropped or they've been found not guilty. And we've seen a bunch. Bunch of instances where juries are. Grand juries are not indicting, where juries are finding, you know, are finding people not guilty. This was another example of that. So how much does. Does that also play into the possibility of how they'll view the actions of this pro, these protesters?

[Pisco Liddy]

You really have to at times doubt the seriousness of this Department of Justice. Not just on some of these cases, like the sandwich thrower case.

[Krystal Ball]

Really?

[Ryan Grim]

Really.

[Crystal Ball]

The binders.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, it's devastating.

[Pisco Liddy]

Recently, for example, Lindsey Halligan, did you see the news where she's like, she's not actually appointed lawfully under the acts providing for interim officers for the Eastern District or for the Virginia District Court or, sorry, district attorney's office, and go for it.

[Krystal Ball]

Oh, go ahead. I was just saying the Eastern District in Virginia.

[Gavin Newsom]

Yeah.

[Pisco Liddy]

And the officers in the Department of Justice, when they were. When they're trying to like justify her using the title, the title of u. S. Attorney. They're basically using the court filings as another forum to air their grievances as though they were on a news media. The judge specifically called them out for being too, like, polemical and being too weird.

[Ryan Grim]

And.

[Pisco Liddy]

And the court's like, we're not going to stoop to your level.

[Emily]

Weird.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, it's so weird.

[Pisco Liddy]

It's. It's honestly boggling sometimes. Like, and the say nothing of the James comey indictments. So they. Their failure rate is not usual given the track record of the department of justice. Department of justice is known for having, like, very good case rates and usually being able to convict on all their stuff. So this is abnormal. And the department is. Is going through some things.

[Crystal Ball]

That'S. Well said.

[Pisco Liddy]

Well said.

[Emily]

Well, Pisco, thank you so much for teaching us about the law today. Where can. Where can people find you? And you know, guys, I love Pisco. He's a debate gladiator. Okay. I. I've seen him in the ring. I saw him on a Tim pool cast. He debated five people on stage and the crowd. So got any big debates or any big streams coming up soon, Pisco?

[Pisco Liddy]

We have some people that are. That are lined up. Some people from the right, some people from the farther left. But yeah, we're trying to work stuff out. I just had a conversation with Drew Pavlou. Do you guys know who this person is? He's like an online Australian. Yeah. And so he actually came to New York City and he's like, hey, do you want to put on, like, a show or something? Like a week before he's supposed to arrive? He wanted me to do a ticketed event so they could come to the Pisco Drew hour or something. Totally wasn't going to happen, but he at least came and we filmed the thing together and it was a fun debate about the Venezuela strikes and about whether or not Trump is doing a good job. But you can find me at piscoliddy on all the platforms, YouTube, Twitter, whatever. We're always doing debates. And thank you again, guys. Appreciate your coverage. It's always really excellent. And yeah, looking forward to seeing what you guys.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, of course. Pisco also did one of the world war.

[Pisco Liddy]

World war debates.

[Emily]

Which also Pisco had a very interesting logo, Very similar to the logo of our old breaking points logo. Yeah, some interesting AI happening at that event.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah.

[Pisco Liddy]

You guys tell me if you want to file, like a trademark thing or something, maybe we can work something out.

[Emily]

But no, we. We don't do lawsuits. Okay, we just talk to lawyers.

[Krystal Ball]

That's right.

[Pisco Liddy]

But yeah, the word war debate, that was the one where Anna and Hannah Pearl Davis had this discussion about feminism was a total blowout. But I was actually like the undercard. They're trying to do it like ufc. And so if you want to learn about birthright citizenship, we had a very interesting debate between me and another lawyer regarding Trump's executive action on birthright citizenship.

[Krystal Ball]

Amazing.

[Pisco Liddy]

Awesome.

[Emily]

We'll check all that out.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Peace.

[Pisco Liddy]

Go.

[Emily]

Liddy will be in the description of this video and we'll see you later. Peace, girl.

[Krystal Ball]

Thanks. Peace.

[Pisco Liddy]

Thank you so much. Have a good one, guys.

[Saagar Enjeti]

Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like EFTs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors llc. SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures [e-mail] disclosures so you want.

[Walton Goggins]

To start a business? You might think you need a team of people and fancy tech skills, but you don't. You just need Godaddy Arrow I'm Walton Goggins and as an actor, I'm an expert in looking like I know what I'm doing even when I don't. And I like the sound of starting my own business. Walton Goggins Goggle glasses. But I'm an actor. I don't know what I'm doing. I needed help. Godaddy Arrow uses AI to create everything you need to grow a business. It'll make you a unique logo, it'll create a custom website, it'll write social posts for you and even set you up with a social media calendar. I didn't even realize I needed a social media calendar. GoDaddy Arrow will take your idea. That sounds good. And make a business that looks like you know what you're doing. GoDaddy Arrow can get your business up and running in minutes. You know what that sounds like? It sounds like a plan. Get [e-mail] aero that's godaddy.com airo Military.

[Emily]

Life isn't predictable, but earning your master's degree can be. With American Military University 40/ flexible online Master's programs, you can stay mission ready while you get market ready. Learn anywhere, anytime with an education built to keep pace steady, reliable and always accessible. Plus, military service members, veterans and their families can save up to 45% on master's tuition with AMU's special rates and grants. Learn more at AMU Apus Edu Steady through every mission. Okay, Ryan, we've got another guest in the mix here that we're going to bring in right now. Why don't you introduce him for us, Ryan?

[Ryan Grim]

Oh yeah, I was going to say. So sometimes on the Friday show we invite candidates. On other times we speak with Anthony Aguilar. Today we're doing both in the same segment. Turns out you are crazy enough not just to blow the whistle on the Gaza Humanitarian foundation, but also to now run for Congress in the 13th district of North Carolina, which covers what Raleigh and some, some of Fort Bragg. Anthony, what are you thinking?

[Anthony Aguilar]

Well, great question, fair question. And you know the, this district covers all the way up to the, the North Carolina, Virginia border because of the gerrymandering last year to separate District 2. It wraps around Raleigh and down south to where I live, where I have lived for the last 13 years, where my children are raised, where they go to school, where we live and where I retired. So why, right. Like why would I do this to myself? You know, after 25 years of serving in the United States army and retiring, I was looking very much forward to a retired life, a quiet life. And then I went to Gaza and the things that I saw in the things that I witnessed and what our government was complicit in forced me to take a hard look at what our government is doing, what our government is doing abroad and domestically. And as we've seen the course that we're on, tough questions need to be asked that aren't being answered. So, so since I returned from Gaza from July until now, I was just in D.C. last week talking to members of Congress. And last week, by coincidence with Doctors Against Genocide, we talked to Brad Knott, who is the incumbent and the current holder of this district. And in speaking to his staff, his staff was not aware of any of the House resolution legislation for block the bombs allowing aid into Gaza, the reference to the, to what's happening in Gaza as a genocide, any of the War Powers Acts votes which we've seen go twice now in a dead tie broken by the Vice President. If his staff isn't aware of those things, it's because he doesn't care about those things. But of all the members that we talk to, senators and Representatives, both sides of the House, bipartisan, they, they have excuses for hard questions. And it's led me to believe that our traditional party system and those in power right now are compromised and they do not have American interests in mind. So once again I feel that I need to step up and answer the call and you know, dust off my boots, so to speak, and go back into serving the nation. I find that as a calling. I don't see it as a, as necessarily any type of political move in terms of me wanting to be a lifelong politician. This is not what I had on my bingo card going into the new year. But I'm doing it because I care about our country. I care about the trajectory that our country is on and I care about all of you. I care about our fellow citizens. I care about my children and how they're going to grow up in this world.

[Krystal Ball]

Anthony, I was, I was going to ask you referenced it there that, you know, you feel frustrated with the, the two party system. You feel let down by, by both parties and you've decided to run as an independent. I love for you to just speak more about what led you to make that choice.

[Anthony Aguilar]

So a couple things in, in reflecting on my own political views and where I fell and, and kind of how I felt coming out of the military, seemingly in a very apolitical type of mindset and then becoming very political, I would say in my viewpoints and where I stood on certain issues. But if you look at the landscape of America right now, most millennials and Gen Z are identifying as independent. 40 to 50% of adults are identifying as independent. I'm a millennial and I understand why we're identifying as independent. The problem is, is that there isn't really a good choice. This menu of two options between Republican or Democrat is a anemic menu with no fortitude and no character and no sustainment and nourishment to the American people. It's not a choice, it's a dilemma. The, the least bad of 2 bads. So looking into the parties to run with, I felt I cannot under good conscience, morally and ethically run with Democrats or Republicans. I cannot align myself to not only what they, what they have been doing in action, but what their actions over the last, frankly the last decade have been same for the Republican Party, I mean even worse. So I looked at this and I'm like, what is the history of American politics and why do we just hold so tightly onto this two party system? And you know, it wasn't until our 18th President Grant before we broke into this two party system. And since then we've had 19 Republicans and 11 Democrats. And where has it gotten us? We're at war with the world, we're in debt through our eyeballs, we're selling off our children's future, we're destroying the planet. We have people in America that can't afford healthcare, who put food on the table. Before we had this two party option, whether you could choose a Democrat or Republican, you know, George Washington himself ran unaffiliated. Then we had the Federalist Party, then we had the Democratic Republican Party, then we had the National Republican Party and then we had the Whig Party. And it wasn't until Andrew Jackson came along as the first Democratic runner and when he ran against John Quincy Adams, they called him the same thing. Oh, you're going to ruin, you're going to spoil the race. And he won. He won because of the principles he stood on as a candidate, not the party. And then the Republican Party didn't come around until Abraham Lincoln. And then in Abraham Lincoln's second term, he didn't run as a Republican, he ran as a national Union party. So this idea of this two party system is a lie. It's a lie to keep America entrenched in corporatization and make Americans feel that your vote has to go one way or another. And if you don't, you're wasting your vote. I believe that's why we have seen a greater number of voters not turning out to vote, of voters feeling like they don't have an option and voters feeling more and more that they identify as independent or a third party, but still voting for a Democrat or Republican because they feel they don't have a choice. I don't feel that in this race I'm a spoiler. I feel that I'm enriching it. Who in this race, who in the district and many in Congress have the experience I have in foreign policy at the tip of the spear for the last quarter century or have felt the Repercussions of domestic policy back home after returning from combat. I have.

[Crystal Ball]

Well, talk to us about your domestic policy, Tony, because we've, we've talked to you in the context of foreign policy, but what does your domestic policy agenda look like? Do you. How would you describe it?

[Anthony Aguilar]

Well, so first of all, right now, and I just as a, as an anecdote to my overall view, if you look at the Department of Homeland Security's strategy for the next five years, 2023 to 2027, so we're about halfway through that strategy. $169 billion to continue to fund specifically ICE within the program of DHS to increase ICE agents from 400 field agents to 10,000. Why we can be putting money into health care, into education, into better jobs and a living wage where Americans don't have to spend on. Live off a credit card, where here in my own district, where we have fracking and we have AI installations or AI sites going up, sucking our water and our power. So when I look at these policies and how they're being employed and why I'm not someone that thinks in this hyperbole of abolish ICE or, you know, or in this, this bombastic sense. We need reform. We absolutely do need reform. I don't believe that our system is broken. I believe that the people running the system and the people that have set the rules that we all have to abide by over the last decade plus don't have our interests in mind. So I would look at domestic policy from a standpoint of the programs that we fund. Looking at the National Defense Authorization act, looking at the national defense strategy. Why are we funding the national defense strategy to the Department of defense with a $1.7 trillion budget next year after this year we just gave them 981 billion. That's not what the American people signed up for. That's not what the American people want.

[Krystal Ball]

Want.

[Anthony Aguilar]

We do not want to be entrenched in endless war or war in our own hemisphere or making enemies of our closest partners between Canada and Mexico, where we can take advantage of the prosperity of what we have in this nation and not selling it to foreign lobbyists. I think that our domestic policy has been sold to foreign interest. I want to sever that as a candidate. I will take no money from political action committees to include, yes, aipac. I will take no money from large lobbyist groups or special interests, nor the military industrial complex. I have seen firsthand how the military industrial complex stretches its tentacles deep into our domestic policy where we move weapons Facilities where we move Space Command headquarters, whether it should be in Alabama or Colorado. Colorado back to Alabama simply because the President has a friend in Alabama. Wasting American dollars. I know that I could look through the NDAA just in that one piece of legislation, document earmarks and save the American taxpayer billions, but also put that money back into things that Americans want in our country.

[Emily]

Anthony, on the reforming ICE position now. Abolish ICE has become a very popular position within the Democratic side of the party. You know, ICE has the incredibly large funding, larger than the GDPs of many countries. A lot of people are fixated on this killing of Renee Goode.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Yes.

[Emily]

So what does reforming ICE look like? Especially because ICE has only been around for about two decades. We didn't have ICE before. Why do we need ICE now? And like, what are the specific reforms you're suggesting?

[Anthony Aguilar]

First of all, as a, As a, you know, as a candidate in Congress, that one of the first things I would get to work on is drafting a resolution to bring to my constituents and caucus on, on disbanding the bird program under the Department of Homeland Security. And that's the bina, the Binational Industrial Research and Development Program. That is the program that attaches ICE to training with foreign entities such as the Israeli national or Ministry of National Security. I would sever that program. That program is nothing more than a program to put Israel in the forefront of our, of our domestic agencies. It serves no purpose. They are not trained. Well, we've seen the result of the training now when someone says abolish ICE or abolish the Border Patrol or abolish the police under the current leadership and the current personalities that run those organizations. Kristi Noem, Greg Bovino. Yeah, it's pretty easy to want to say that, but in this country. Do we want a Border Patrol? Yes, we do. We share a large border with Canada and Mexico. Do we want a, an, an immigration control element for illegal immigrants? And so that we have a responsible immigration policy. We do not. Under the way that, under the current way that it's funded where we have turned the Border Patrol and we have turned ICE and we have turned the TSA and we have heard other components of the DHS into a internal policing security mechanism against American people funded, as you said, more than the GDP of some nations. And we're turning them into an army. 4, 400. Right now, what we're seeing on the streets of our country, Minneapolis, Washington, all around the country, that's only 400 ICE agents. Imagine 10,000. That's what the current budget, this budget that was just passed, that was pushed through to get us to this 1.7 trillion. You know, where we're supposed to thank Congress for doing their job. Approved DHS Security Strategy FY26, which we've now started in October, into 27 for that funding that I just described to you, for 169 billion to field 10,000 ICE agents. We don't need that. We should abolish that. Abolish the entire agency. No. I have been in the military long enough and I have lived through budget cuts and military expenditures and spending cuts that when you take a cut to the bone through programs, you make things worse. We should be surgical in our approach to what we cut. We should be surgical in our approach to what we fund, because that's what the American people deserve. Every single penny that goes into these programs comes out of our pocket, comes out of the food on our table, the. The college fund for our children. And that penny should be spent responsibly. And it's not. So I am not an advocate of saying abolish this or abolish that, but I think that we need some serious deep reform in those agencies from the top down, all the way down to the field agents. The behavior and the tactics that we saw on the streets of Minneapolis, that's not a coincidence. We, the American taxpayer, paid for that training through the funding of the Binational Industrial Research and Development Program outlined in the dhs, funded under the NDAA and written off by this Congress to continue to pay for into 2027 and what comes in 2026. Midterm elections next election coming up, presidential election. We're going to have 10,000 ICE agents on the streets of America. That's scary.

[Krystal Ball]

So, Anthony, the reason why myself and others who support abolish ICE do so is not because, I mean, I'll speak for myself, not for everybody, but not because I want to completely end immigration enforcement, but because I believe this particular agency is a rogue agency. And I'll tell you what I mean by that. So you're obviously retired military, highly decorated, and even though I think the Trump administration is doing things to try to turn the military into just their personal foot soldiers, I have confidence that if you elected a Democratic president, that the military command would follow the leaders, the leadership of the commander in chief, that they would obey the orders, the lawful orders of whoever the commander in chief was, whether they be Democrat or Republican. I believe ICE is different in that they are, especially this surge of recruits are being brought in specifically to be the foot soldiers of this administration and to pursue this particular policy, not to be loyal to the country regardless of who is in charge. That's the reason why, while I support, you know, having some immigration enforcement, why I think this particular agency is so rotten and so rogue it needs to be eliminated entirely. And that we could go back to the system that we had prior to the war on terror, where immigration enforcement was housed in, you know, in a different agency.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Ins.

[Krystal Ball]

Yes.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Yeah. Being. Being from South Texas and living in a border city, I'm very familiar with the previous policies that INS and why ICE was, was created very much a product of the global war on terror and the Patriot act and, and looking at Americans as the enemy. So in the sense of abolishing the agency about. So what I would say to clarify my position is we should not abolish the function. Abolish the agency and its current operations and its current agency and the people that are in it? Yes. I do not want to abolish the function. If you look at the function prior under Immigration and Naturalization Services or ins, and that function we didn't have militarized federal agents storming the streets of America, kicking indoors without warrants and arresting 5 year olds. We have that now because of the agency and what it has become. So to that point, I agree with you wholeheartedly. And to the point of who they're recruiting. Yeah, True, true story. Many of those infidels, motorcycle club bikers that served in the GHF because there was the hottest thing going. Guess where they're working now. Ice.

[Krystal Ball]

You know that for a fact?

[Anthony Aguilar]

I know that for a fact. Not only have I seen them on videos, I have identified them and I have seen some of them that have celebrated it. Some of the same individuals that were in Gaza shooting people in the face with, with tear gas, shooting at people with machine guns, Billy clubbing people and spraying them with. With the entire can of mace in the face. Palestinians, unarmed Palestinians.

[Krystal Ball]

Wow.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Are now working in the field as ICE agents. That's a fact.

[Emily]

We should also note that we spoke with the chap and face spokesperson for the GHF and refer people to that interview to hear their perspective on.

[Ryan Grim]

Yeah, we can link, we can link to it in the bottom here.

[Crystal Ball]

Sure.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Yeah. When I, when I look at things like that, that demographic is what ICE is recruiting. Individuals that are already prone to an extremist viewpoint against immigrants or Arabs or any type of minority or quote unquote foreigner who already have a propensity for violence. Those are the People that they're hiring. And how much are they paying ICE agents now? Around 200 grand. How much were they paying us while we were in Gaza? In Gaza? About two grand a day. It's about the same. That's the price of freedom. That's the price of truth. That's the price of integrity. Give someone two grand a day and they will turn their back on all American values and they will be the extremist gestapo that you want them to be. And that is what ICE has become. So to the notion of abolishing the agency as it is, yes, I do not want to abolish the function. So therefore, when you talk about abolishing the agency, you have to be very careful when it comes to fiscal year and calendar year spending and earmarks in the Congress. You have to plan ahead for that. So. So if you abolish the agency, you then do not have an agency to build within that for the function. So abolish it. Yes. But do not abolish the function. The function should be reinforced in a way that promotes immigration in our country, because after all, we are a nation of immigrants.

[Ryan Grim]

You could send them all a fork in the road email, too.

[Krystal Ball]

There you go.

[Ryan Grim]

We're going to actually follow the Constitution now. Fork in the road, like if you want to do that.

[Anthony Aguilar]

No, I find it to be a very, A very simple notion, very clear set of guidelines that if we follow the Constitution and what it was designed to be as a document for our nation. Right now, if you know the. The Constitution is in left field of Wrigley Stadium, we're somewhere in Barcelona. We're nowhere near it. We're not even in the same sport.

[Ryan Grim]

So on the horse race, what's the. What's this newly drawn district like when it comes to the composition of registered Republicans, Democrats and, and independents and third party. And Brad Knot, who was running for reelection, I haven't even.

[Anthony Aguilar]

So. So here in this district, the incumbent, Brad Knott, this is his first office holding right now. He will run as an incumbent. The incumbent Republican typically sweeps in the primary, which will be in March. And then when he goes into the general, he'll have to face me. He is an APAC recipient, big time APAC recipient, and he'll have to answer for that. I think Americans are tired of that. The other piece with District 13. District 13 encompasses eight counties, Wake county being one of them, where Raleigh is, which is the capital of North Carolina. And now District 2, Deborah Ross, a Democrat who also takes APAC money. It cuts Wake county in half and As I was looking at where to run in North Carolina, 13, I, I didn't want to be a carpetbagger and run out of district or run just to run like a Randy Fine or someone to that nature. I want to run where I live, where my children go to school, where I pay my trash bill, where I pay my electric bill, where the school bus picks up my kid and drives them to school, on public roads, where I live, where my wife lives, where we live and work and, and raise our family. That's where I want to represent because I live here. It's a self interest in a way. But I also, I deeply care about the people in this district because a lot of them in the four district or at the four counties that surround Fort Bragg are veterans and military, and they're getting screwed over. And part of my platform is advocating for veterans, for veterans benefits, for mental health. As an example to yesterday, I had a VA appointment. And because funding was cut to build the VA hospital in Sanford where I live, which cuts the distance in half for people that live between the two. Wasn't funded. It wasn't funded because we're spending money on ice. So whenever I have to go for a VA appointment, free health care offered by the government, I have to drive an hour and 15 minutes away. That's not putting veterans first. That's not putting Americans first. And it was in the funding and it was cut. Where did that money go? That money went to a ballroom. That money went to ice. That money went to war in Venezuela and secret sonic weapons.

[Emily]

Apparently Trump is paying for the ballroom himself, but I think the other ones soliciting donations pay.

[Anthony Aguilar]

He took donors to pay for the first 130 million. The price tag is now 319 million. And that is coming out of our pockets because it's going to fund the National Registry of Historic Sites through the national parks. That money is going there. What I always say, follow the money.

[Emily]

So you're with Sagar on demolishing the, the ballroom.

[Anthony Aguilar]

What's that?

[Emily]

Sagar wants to demolish the ballroom once Trump is out, would you support that?

[Anthony Aguilar]

You know, I, I was in the army when we went through this kerfuffle of naming all the bases, and I thought, okay, well, if we're going to name all the bases, we're never going to make everybody happy. So let's just name the base for the city it's in. Let's just do like the Navy does or what the Air Force does, like mountain home or let's just name it for the city it's in. But we went to this whole kerfuffle of changing the name, which cost the American taxpayer for military bases that were named after Confederate generals, which I agree with the notion of that cost over $30 million. Signage funding, ridiculous. And within the first week of Donald Trump coming back into office, one of his first executive decisions was to change it back. So now I watched it. I literally watched at Fort Bragg on the road that I drive on every day coming home from my son's school where that sign went from Fort Bragg to Fort Liberty to Fort Bragg. And the same dude that worked for the Department of Public Works was the one out there changing the sign because I took a picture with him. I'm like, don't you think this is ridiculous? And he was like, he was like, yeah, man. He's like, I, I, I just took this sign down last week. I was going to take it home and put it in my garage, but before I could even leave work today, they were telling us to put this new one back on. So $60 million down the drain because.

[Krystal Ball]

Of some, at least that guy's able.

[Anthony Aguilar]

To pay job creation. Yeah. You know, and it's just, you had, you know, when they, when they're like, oh, it's going back to Fort Fort Bragg, you know, you had all the, all the old timers that have been working on Fort Bragg since before I was born, like, have to go race back to their garage to get stuff out. Like, you know, they were, they were heirloom, they were, they were historic items. So, yeah, it's, it's a waste. So when you look at this ballroom piece, it's, it's disgraceful. It's absolutely disgraceful that when you look throughout our country, you have hard working Americans, hard working Americans, not Americans taking handouts and that in most cases will refuse even a hand up because they want to work hard and they want to provide for their family and they make ends meet by working two, sometimes three jobs, both in the household work. I know that because where I go to school in the neighborhood that I live in, we're very close and we sometimes have the neighborhood kids over when their parents are at work. And we, and we kind of help with that, that communal aspect of, of, of, you know, caring for, caring for the neighborhood kids. And I see people having to work incredibly hard just to put food on the table and pay the bills. Well, our president is building a lavish ballroom in front of our eyes where the price tag was lied to us and is tripled. He's not A good builder, as he says he is, or the real estate magnate. He is not those. He's horrible at it. He just has endless money and he's entitled. And when I look at that, the scene that goes through my head is like if Great Gatsby was written in 1984 in a third world country.

[Krystal Ball]

Anthony, thank you so much for choosing us to break the news of your candidacy. We're very honored. We're grateful for you stepping up to serve in a new way once again. Tell people where they can find more about your campaign and support you if they're inclined to.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Aguilar for US Congress dot com. You can find all the information and links to the social media associated to the platform. And then also, when I saw you last, I myself was not on social media. I am now. I have become part of the new generation. So look out, America. I'm learning how to do Tic Tac and Instagram.

[Crystal Ball]

It's crazy.

[Krystal Ball]

But amazing.

[Anthony Aguilar]

The reason I specifically wanted to ask Emily Ryan, Crystal, is because you've always been a strong voice. You've always stood on the principles of truth, regardless of the consequence. And you're strong and you're courageous. I follow everything that y' all do. And when I first came back from Gaza, you were one of the first that wanted to hear the story. And that amidst the lies and the slander that were just incredulous, you stood strong against that with truth and integrity. And whether or not we agree on everything, I know that I can trust you because you're. You're. You're a platform of integrity. And that's what's important to me. Integrity. And you represent that. And you are warriors that. You are warriors out there asking hard questions. Asking hard kidding questions. I've watched your platform, and when someone's in the hot seat and you ask them a hard question and they're BSing you, you do not let them off the hook. I love that.

[Krystal Ball]

Well, that means a lot coming from you, Anthony. So thank you so much for. For all of those kind words. And also, like I said, for. Look, I ran for Congress once. I know it is a major sacrifice, the level of scrutiny you're gonna get. It's not always a fun thing. So thank you so much for putting yourself in the hot seat once again.

[Anthony Aguilar]

I think the mudslinging with the GHF prepped me. Well, I'm ready.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, that's true. You are ready.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Well, thank you very much and have a. Have a great day and have a safe weekend. I know we're Going to get some winter weather, so be safe indeed.

[Ryan Grim]

Yeah, be safe. Anthony.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Thank you.

[Ryan Grim]

Good luck. Anthony Aguilar, independent for Congress.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Thank you.

[Ryan Grim]

Carolina's 13th district.

[Emily]

All right.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Perfect.

[Emily]

Perfect. That was Anthony. And that's going to be the end of the first half of the show, folks. We're going to be talking about a lot of stuff here in the second half. We're gonna be looking at Jared Kushner's plan for New Gaza. We might be looking at Elon's promise that we're all going to have a personal robot in the next two to four years. Look excited. That and maybe we will take some intensive looks at Trump's hand. That has not been looking good lately.

[Krystal Ball]

Definitely gotta do that.

[Crystal Ball]

He clipped it on a table. He clipped it.

[Emily]

Many such cases. Crystal. It has to go to a gymnastics meet. Is that what's going on? So everyone looks for.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, we had some. She was supposed to be this weekend because of the snow. They moved it up. So now it's today. So. Yeah, but I. You guys better do excellent medical analysis on this hand situation. Okay. I'll be checking in mail if you.

[Emily]

Want to see the rest of the show. Second half of the show, you can go to breaking points.com to sign up, become a member and support Breaking Points and we'll see all there in just a moment. Bye bye.

[Anthony Aguilar]

This is Julian Edelman from Dudes on Dudes with Gronk and Jewels. Sunday mornings I've got my game day ritual. Coffee, lucky socks and now new morning uncrustable sandwiches.

[Pisco Liddy]

It's all about that 12 gram protein.

[Emily]

Boost with the new uncrustables Bright eyed.

[Pisco Liddy]

Berry or up and apple flavors.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Bright Eye Berries got a feisty receiver.

[Emily]

Energy up an apple.

[Pisco Liddy]

Your classic do it all tight end.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Soft pillowy, packed with protein and easy enough for Gronk to grab from the freezer.

[Pisco Liddy]

Whether you're on the couch, driving to the tailgate or heading to the locker room, new morning uncrustable sandwiches are the MVP of snacks.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Your new Sunday kickoff ritual starts here with new morning uncrustable sandwiches packed with 12 grams of protein.

[Pisco Liddy]

With Venmo stash a taco in one.

[Anthony Aguilar]

Hand and ordering a ride in the other means you're stacking cash back. Nice. Get up to 5% cash back with Venmo stash on your favorite brands. When you pay with your Venmo debit card. From takeout to ride shares, entertainment and more, pick a bundle with your go tos and start earning cash back at those brands. Earn more cash when you do more with Stash Venmo Stash terms and exclusions apply. Max $100 cash back per month. See terms at Venmo Me Stashterms Running.

[Pisco Liddy]

A business is hard enough. Don't make it harder with a dozen apps that don't talk to each other. One for sales, another for inventory, a separate one for accounting. That's software overload. Odoo is the all in one platform that replaces them all. CRM, accounting, inventory, E Commerce, hr. Fully integrated, easy to use, and built to grow with your business. Thousands have already made the switch. Why not you try Odoo for [e-mail] that's odoo.com this is an iHeart podcast.

[Krystal Ball]

Guaranteed Human.