← Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar
Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar
1/29/26: ICE Draws Down In MN, FBI Raids Fulton County Elections
00:55:40
Loading summary
Transcript68 lines
- [00:00]
A
This is an iHeart podcast, Guaranteed Human.
- [00:04]
B
Hey guys, Sagar and Krystal here.
- [00:06]
A
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.
- [00:13]
B
This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.
- [00:19]
A
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.
- [00:30]
B
We're we need your help to build the future of independent news media and we hope to see you@breaking points.com all right.
- [00:36]
A
So as you guys know, Greg Bevino is out of Minneapolis and Tom Homan has been brought in. He has met with the governor and the mayor and other stakeholders on the ground. And this morning he gave a press conference in which he said a number of rather interesting things. Let's go ahead and take a listen to a bit of that.
- [00:52]
C
I had a very good meeting the attorney general, Attorney General Ellison, and he has clarified for me the county jails may notify ICE of the release dates of criminal public safety risk to ICE people custody upon the release. Let me tell you why that's important. I know people are a lot concerned about the the manpower has been sent in law enforcement manpower. Look, I've said this many times before. I've said it for the last several years. Give us access to the illegal alien public safety threat and the safety and security of the kill. It's common sense. It's safer for the community. It's safer for the agent and they're safer for the animal. Does anything happen on the street away? It just makes common sense. And for the people that argue that we're welcoming community, we want victims and witnesses of crime that are here illegally to feel safe to come to police without fear of their work with ice. We're not going to talk to the victim, witness a crime. There's no problem there. They should feel safe to come to the police and ask for help. All we want is talk to the person that local and state law enforcement authorities locked in a jail cell. They chose to lock this person up. That's where you want to talk to the public safety trail. So that argument is that the sex victim witnesses a crime.
- [02:36]
A
So a couple noteworthy things there. He's saying he's going to get more cooperation from local officials in terms of, you know, public safety threats who were held in local jails, being able to be given directly to ICE and then, you know, presumably deported. And the other thing he says there, Sagar, is, you know, he really portrays, oh, we don't want to, of course, we wouldn't do anything with the victims of crimes. Meanwhile, we see, of course, them doing these, like, street sweeps and that the vast majority of the people they are picking up are, you know, people who don't have criminal records. So very dissonant from what the reality has been of their approach on the ground. Um, let me play one more part and then I'll get your reaction to this as well, where he indicates that as a result of what he's framing as increased coordination with local officials, increased cooperation with local officials, that they are going to do a, quote, unquote, drawdown. Let's listen to that.
- [03:28]
C
This is common sense cooperation that allows to draw down on the number of people we have here. Yes, I said it. Draw down the number of people here. Because we have the efficiency and safety of the jails in the prison.
- [03:43]
B
That's huge. I think that.
- [03:45]
A
Yeah, so, yeah, we'll see. You know, there have been thousands of federal agents which have been sent to Minneapolis, you know, the Minneapolis region. And these are not huge cities there, by the way. And to put things in perspective, the local police force, I think, is only 600 people. And so you've had thousands more federal agents than you have local police. We'll see what the numbers are, we'll see what the tactics are, all of that. But at least, you know, in this moment, they want to step back from the brink and we can get into, you know, why they may be taking that tactic at this moment.
- [04:17]
B
Well, there were a couple other comments because it's kind of difficult. This is all breaking while we were doing the show. But let me explain here. He says, quote, I am not here because of. The federal government has carried out its mission out perfectly. I do not want to hear, everything has been done here has been perfect. The direct shot right there at Greg Bevino, who specifically had said that every single thing they had done had been expert, had been lawful. Same thing at Stephen Miller. Another big one that he said is, I'm not here for headlines and for photo shoots. So that is a huge shot across the bow at Kristi Noem, obviously, who many of you probably have seen on your television screen after spending a quarter billion dollars on an advertising campaign for DHS and for herself. So I think this is a highly noteworthy thing. And as you said, it had to thread the needle this press conference and taking it all in. It had to thread the needle of being, look, immigration's not stopping, but we're here to cooperate. Yes, we somewhat disagree with Minnesota, but he said draw down at the end of the day. And if you read between the lines basically in all of this, this is effectively, you know, a rhetorical surrender now from the Trump administration because not only has he been put into place, Greg Bevino has basically been booted and demoted from his job. Kirsty Noem not appearing to have authority over these missions. He's saying that he is. Another thing that has not taken as much notice is he continues to emphasize targeted. Now, let's be ICE has always claimed that these are targeted operations, but he's been very specific saying we're going to be targeting specifically criminals, people. You know, as I said, it's kind of hard to parse because they've always said that. And it does remain to be seen whether it is true or not. However, if it were to be put into practice, it would mark a change in their strategy. I do think we should also note since Alex Preddys has was killed, we have not seen a lot of viral videos that have been coming out of the state of Minnesota or the city of Minneapolis. There have been not nearly the same level generally since Homan has been put into charge. There was a memo that has been circulating internally, apparently where they talked specifically about the change in targeting. Again, difficult to say because that kind of contradicts a previous memo. There's also so much information warfare happening. Bevino is very clearly leaking behind the scenes to all of his, you know, influencer friends, you know, who's trying to criticize Tom Homan. Don't forget Lewandowski has the phone number for every reporter in Washington and or many of these. So it's not like he isn't counter leaking. And there's quite a bit of, you know, internal warfare that is happening. And I just want to state that because it makes it very difficult to parse what's happening so far. Seems like Homan is in charge and his general direction is the one where things are going to go as always with things Trump, it could all change literally at any moment.
- [07:13]
A
Trump needed a scapegoat. And I think, you know, for now, Bavino in particular, and to a lesser extent, Kristi Noem and Corey Lewandowski are serving that role. Like, I want everybody to understand who Tom Homan is, if they don't already. I mean, he was one of the architects of the family separation policy in the First Trump term. So, you know, this is not someone who is soft when it comes to mass deportation whatsoever, the way I would look at this. And, and I think we can put the Susan Collins piece up on the screen as well, because I think that this dovetails with what I would describe as a tactical retreat in Minneapolis. Susan Collins is also saying that they have indicated they are ending the increased operations in Maine. You know, they, this makes sense to me. Again, we'll see what actually happens here and if that is accurate. But it does make sense to me in a sense from a political perspective. Why? Because they want Susan Collins to be able to hold on to that seat. She is the most endangered incumbent in the entire Senate and I think it's frankly very unlikely that she is able to hold on to that seat. But if they go in guns blazing and have a Minneapolis style occupation of the state of Maine, you can kiss that Senate seat goodbye. It is not happening. So I think there was a, you know, political decision that was made there. I was showing you the, I shared in the DMs, the map of where the most aggressive, like on the street roundups were occurring. And it's very clear a partisan divide here. Like blue states are being hit, red states are not. Actually, Christy Noem's own state of South Dakota has been like, completely ignored in the immigration enforcement action. So if you're an Iowa farmer or a meatpacking plant that is, you know, that employs a bunch of undocumented immigrants, you probably haven't faced a lot of immigration enforcement action. Because as I've been making the case, yes, this is about immigration. It's also about using this juiced up, massively funded ICE army effectively to go after your political opponents. So it is being wielded as a political weapon, which is why it makes sense that you may have this retreat, genuine retreat, in Maine. The other piece here, Sagar, that I think, you know, you actually flagged, I was a little bit skeptical of, but I've now been completely persuaded of is you have right now, Democrats have a little bit of leverage with regard to funding. Trump does not want the funding for his like Praetorian guard here to be taken away. So he is in a precarious position right now where the politics of this have been horrendous for him, where even you have a number of Republicans. It's like 27% of Republicans that think Alex Preddy was effectively murdered in the street for no reason. So it's a political optical disaster and coming at a moment when Democrats actually have a little bit of leverage where they could cut the funding at least back to, you know, what the levels were prior to the one big beautiful bill that surged the funding by some 66%. So we can put the New York Times here sheet up on the screen that had some of the details here. And I'm just going to read a bit from this because I think it is significant. So Trump and Schumer met, moved on Wednesday night toward a possible agreement to negotiate new restrictions on federal immigration agents, potentially averting a government shutdown early Saturday when funding for multiple federal agencies is slate under the emerging plan, according to two officials knowledgeable about it, the Senate would split off legislation funding DHS from a six bill package of spending measures. The Senate would pass those bills before a Friday midnight deadline. And Congress would also consider a short term extension for homeland security operations, which would prevent an interruption of services. Then that stopgap bill would give time for talks between lawmakers and the White House to draft a new homeland security spending bill that would include new restrictions Democrats have demanded on the tactics of immigration enforcement officers and more accountability for those accused of using excessive force. So the TLDR here is that they would split the bills apart. Okay. The other bills, funding bills would pass. A continuing resolution for DHS stopgap, like a temporary one would also pass. And then Democrats and Republicans would negotiate not on funding levels, but on things like they can't wear masks anymore or they have to wear body cameras or we're going to have. And these are specifics, I'm not making these up, these are some of the specifics that have been floated or you know, that there's gotta be some sort of a process that plays out when you have ICE agents or CBP who are shooting people. Again, those things don't touch the funding. And the funding is the most critical thing because listen, there's already all sorts of laws and guidelines and regulations around the way that these guys are supposed to operate that they just completely flout. So those things in a sense are relatively minor or unenforceable. But they allow Democrats to claim like, oh my God, we did something, we stood up to Trump and allows Trump to keep the size of his immigration enforcement budget, which he is using not only for immigration enforcement, but as a tool and a weapon against political opposition.
- [12:36]
B
Well, we've seen also, though we shouldn't forget, DHS and ICE has all the funding that they need from the one big beautiful bill. So you couldn't actually really hold up all of the ICE funding. You could, however, Just inflict pain on general DHS and you can use it as leverage to try and to get some of these concessions. I mean, at the end of the day, rolling back ICE funding is just not going to happen. You don't have control over it. You're going to have to win control of a chamber of Congress in order to actually try and get any of that done. You could, you know, actually hold it up and ignite a massive government shutdown. Which is kind of why I find this. I mean, I would see this as more of a retreat from the Democrats because an immediate CR gives six weeks to the administration. I mean anything can happen in six weeks. To put it in context, it hasn't even been six weeks since we kidnapped Maduro. It feels like a million miles, you know, a million years ago, but it hasn't even been. So that's what six weeks is. In our current modern times, we don't know yet whether they're going to agree to it or not. They could enforce some sort, you know, you were talking about mass, about some of the other protocol and I wouldn't poo poo it just as much Crystal, because you know, this can all be used if it is forced into law. And if let's say the Democrats do come into power in the House, at the very least you can use that as an investigatory tool and a method in the future and for potential like either future prosecution, violation, you know, investigation, oversight, etc, at the end of the day you do not have control over all chambers and you're not completely in power. You're not going to get, you know, even remotely all of what you want. But they are extracting at this current moment some now we don't know yet, you know, what those things are going to look like. But in the broader context of Homan and of the way that the administration has now clearly operated, they're operating in a way where it is full retreat. So you've already seen, you know, for example the Stephen Miller, Kirsten gnome stuff that you guys covered yesterday where Kirsten him was like, hey, I'm just listening to Stephen Miller. You saw Trump throw Bevino completely under the bus. He's like, he's a good guy. But in this one instance, you know, basically called him a screw up or something saying he's been demoted. Now you've got Tom Homan who is here and clearly like all sides are looking for some sort of off ramp from Minnesota officials, Tom Homan and others. And so this was I think a major turning point. We just don't know whether it's going to last and what that will look like. And then also how the opposition is going to respond with this cr, you know, continuing resolution with the Senate Democrats. I don't know. You know, because remember, they've got their own base too. If they actually don't, I mean, I think six weeks would be a political disaster for them. They're going to be like, really? You just continue to fund it for six months. You got nothing from it. So they have got to get something as a result of this. And the fact, you know, even if it is a partial government shutdown, which is, was looking likely but no longer looks as likely with a potential continuing, continuing resolution, I think a lot of the Democratic base would be furious with them and they have to think about that too. And whether, you know, which of these Democratic lawmakers are going to go along if they don't see any sort of pathway to get something. Because one theory right now is that Trump is being conciliatory only because he wants, he doesn't want the government to shut down. He just doesn't want to have to deal with that.
- [15:54]
A
Yeah, that's.
- [15:54]
B
And so the moment you pass a six week continuing resolution, you lose a ton of leverage. I mean, there could be an Iran war that breaks out, you know, in the interim, like it could. So the entire nation's politics would be different six weeks from now. And then what will the argument be? Oh, we have to fund the government because we have a war that's happening right now. Right. That, that's literally, I mean, you could see that happening very clearly. So anyway, I mean, I do think it's, I do think it's interesting. I've never seen them back down like this before, ever in the second administration. Not even close. And I do think it has caused a serious reshaping of the White House's kind of theory of immigration enforcement. The only question is about lasting and about what that will look like.
- [16:38]
A
Yeah, well, that's, I mean, in my view it is a total taco from the Dems. To your point or daco. Dems always check it out. It's, it's a total daco from the Dems who are always looking for, I mean the Schumer led Dems are always looking for a way to cave. Right. And so I think they have found their way and I think it's a partial taco from Trump because I am very skeptical that this is anything more than a tactical retreat that we won't see, you know, another occupation of a city that pisses him off for whatever reason, that we will see a shift in tactics because I think this is very central to the way that they, the way that they operate. And, you know, Stephen Miller is still going to be in there. He's not going anywhere. And this is ultimately, this is his baby. You know, I'm, I also, I, I see the nature of not just ice, but specifically ICE a bit differently than you do. Like, I, yes, immigration is the pretext, but the people who have been battling in the streets in Minneapolis, largely not immigrants versus ICE agents. It's largely, and this will actually transition us to the new video with regard to Alex Preddy. It's largely like white liberals and, you know, rural conservative ICE agents. You know, it is this sort of like low grade ideological skirmish and it has been deployed intentionally in that way. I mean, going to Minneapolis, just. If your actual concern is immigration, going to Minneapolis makes zero sense because there's a proportionally very low number of undocumented immigrants there. You know, there's a large Somali community. The vast majority of them are American citizens. This is not a hotbed of undocumented immigration at all. There are many other places that you would target before you targeted Minneapolis. But in Minneapolis, you have a governor that is hated. You have a mayor that is hated. You have this whole Somali fraud thing which they make a lot of political hay out of. You have the legacy of the George Floyd and the Black Lives Matter protest that paints a target on Minneapolis's back. So that's why I see ICE much more the way it is wielded as a force against political opposition than it is even centrally about immigration.
- [18:52]
B
Well, it can be partially true, I think, I think, of course, I think all of these are partially true. 250,000 people have been deported. That is the vast, vast more in one year than the entire Biden administration actually deported. Not fake like Obama and Biden in terms of turning people over. So you can't say that it hasn't been deporting people. They obviously have been. And yes, I mean.
- [19:12]
A
Oh, yeah, I'm not saying, I'm not saying that there's not a reality of, you know, master.
- [19:16]
B
I do think that's important because people are like, oh, well, they're not even. It's like, no, that's, that's literally like. That is. There actually are like a large amount of deportations that are happening now to the way that it has been enforced. Yeah, I mean, if someone asked somebody, I think you asked me on the show, you're like, why Are they in Minneapolis? I was like, yeah, because the Nick Shirley video. I'm not. I'm not gonna say that it's all purely because of proportionality or of. I'm sorry, not in terms of proportionality. In terms of the illegal population. A lot of this is about shock and awe tactic. It's specifically about sanctuary cities, too. And I do think that's one part that Democrats don't want to talk about, is that sanct cities are literally a magnet not only for illegal migration, but do create these types of situations where there's a lot of lack of cooperation from the cities, the jails, prisons, et cetera. And in terms of sharing that information with, like, Minneapolis, for example, actually had more of an extreme way of cooperation with ICE than even the state of California, just to put it into perspective. So it's not like it also wasn't an outlier. Now, let's be clear. That certainly was part of a campaign to try and pressure the state or the city of Minneapolis into changing their policies. Policy, which, by the way, is illegal currently under federal law. I'm not. I'm. I'm being very clear and, like, trying to thread the needle about, yes, there's a sanctuary reality. There's also about pressure. There's also actual deportation, which is happening. And so that's why, I mean, you know, there is no, like, full defense, really, of a lot of their conduct. A lot of this really was, you know. Yes, a lot of it is about political retribution. I don't think that's necessarily deniable. I don't. I mean, I would say, say Trump has taken it to an extreme. I don't think it's exactly like, completely out the realm of possibility for how a lot of politics has operated. However, by being so extreme and turning this into this clash, this is why I think that he has lost and the Republicans have lost a lot of the messaging around immigration because. And let's be clear, it's a reality problem. But they had high rhetorical ground on immigration and unmasked deportation. I think that's undeniable. The way that they have created and, you know, chaos and other in the cities, they have started to make it so that people are like, well, hold on. I was upset about chaos and immigration, illegal immigration specifically. But it looks like you guys are the ones who are currently out of control. That's what's caused a lot of the discourse, and especially in the wake of Renee Goode, and it's really after Alex Peretti, which I think, again, I think is a Genuine turning point, I think for the Trump administration. So looking forward to the question for them is how can you possibly get back to where you are? This would require a significant change, not only in ICE behavior, but really it kind of gets to what you're talking about, where you were talking about Iowa, you know, Iowa and some of these red states. Yeah, here's the truth. A lot of these people, you know, the Iowa meat packers, a lot of them are Republican donors. They're super rich. And that's always been the big tension in the Republican Party capital or class. Right. And that part of the issue right now is that we are not, not doing, you know, Florida very competently had mandatory E Verify and they didn't have to do literally any of this. And guess, you know, you may be bitching and moaning about it and saying, oh, but people are not showing up to the job sites, but there weren't crazy ass videos in the streets. And by and large the pushback was not all that politically like horrible. For Ron DeSantis, that is a very simple way. We could also immediately tax remittances which would effectively nuke the entire illegal migrant, you know, sending money back home through the illegitimate banking system that similarly would invite mass self deportation. Again, you can cry about that because if you think that they should be here, but that is a very simple way. Going after employers, using the irs, for example, if people are not reporting any of this stuff properly, all of that actually would be a far more effective way to systematically do. And, and I said it would also ignore a lot of the like, like civil liberties concerns now that are undeniable, you know, around all this. So maybe this is a good way, a transition to the new video that we have about Alex Preddy. Some. What is it, 11 days prior to him being killed. Do we want to go ahead and play it?
- [23:27]
A
Yeah, let's go ahead and cue that up. And this is footage. It was before you put it on the screen just to clear things up. I'm forgetting the name of the news outlet that recorded this, but it was initially shared that this came from the BBC. It did not come from the BBC, but BBC Verify did verify. And Alex Preddy's family has now confirmed that this is Alex Pruddy in a confrontation with ICE or CBP agents in Minneapolis 11 days before his shooting. So let's go ahead and put this up on the screen and I can narrate this a little. So you see him in the jacket, I mean you can really tell this is obviously wearing like the same type of outfit. He spits at them, he yells at them, and then he kicks out their taillight. They then come and jump out of this vehicle and, you know, accost him. They don't actually. Don't arrest him. They just, you know, have this fight with him. We had known before that he had had his ribs broken by ice, and presumably, you know, we don't know for sure. Presumably, this is the interaction that led to his ribs being broken here. So before I offer my thoughts, Sagar, what. What were your thoughts on this video?
- [24:38]
B
Well, I mean, there's so much to say, because really what has come out is people are like, see, this is why I deserve to get shot. And, you know, I have talked previously about how this is kind of a Waco moment for me, and it kind of reminds me similarly, they're like, oh, David Karash, he was a pedophile. And he was. And I go, yeah, yeah, that's true. Okay, yeah, it was bad guy. Okay. No one's saying that.
- [24:59]
C
Did.
- [24:59]
B
Did that mean that you should burn women and children alive in this? In the compound at Waco, though, the answer is no. And so that's what's really, really frustrating to me is, is that. And I'm. I'm not defending Alex Per. Frankly, I think he looks unhinged in that I. He genuinely looks completely unhinged. And he did commit a crime, specifically whenever he knocked out the taillight. That does not merit execution. In fact, by the way, you know, for all of this enforcement of law stuff, why did they not arrest him? You know, it's like, this is where we talk about, you know, law and order and all of that. We did just in. We just saw this mass arrest of people who were protesters interfering with HSI or with ice. He should clearly have been arrested after this incident where he's spitting. Look, put the spitting and all that. Even though I think that's. I forget the case law, kicking tail light, like, it's open and shut, you know, Right. In terms of attacking property. Yeah, It's. It's done. Right? Like, if you or I did that to any police thing, you're going to jail. And instead, they just, like, came out, kind of, like, roughed him up, and then ran away way. Right? And it's like, guys, that's also not the right way. Right? So you see, like, two sides of behavior here, which are unhinged and out of control. If he had been arrested, hopefully this never would have happened. So, actually, there you go in terms of law and order. But second, this doesn't mean he deserved to get shot and killed. This again, just like Ruby Ridge, right? They're. Oh, Randy. Well, actually, did you know he was a white supremacist? Which, by the way, was a kind of a lie. But you know, they're like, oh, he was actually a white supremacist. I'm like, look, look, the core question is, should you shoot the guy's wife and dog? Period? End of story. Did d. Was David Koresh a bad dude? Yes. Did that mean that we should burn these people alive and then cover up the entire story? That's what I find really frustrating about it. So. Okay, sure, yes. The.
- [26:47]
C
What?
- [26:47]
B
Legal observer. You know, look, I mean, it's not a secret. I kind of saw this with Renee. Good, too. Yes. Some of these people are troublemakers. It's not. It's not deniable. I don't even think that the people on the street there would deny it. Like, blown like they. They want the chaos. And that's why I'm not going to completely absolve everybody of that out there. But that doesn't really make any difference when you see the video. And oh, that's another gun thing. You could make the argument that what he did there was 10 times worse than what he did in the. In the actual video of the shooting. He had the gun visible.
- [27:19]
A
Doubt about it.
- [27:19]
B
Well, not just the assault crystal. He had the gun visibly in his waistband, by the way, it didn't look holstered properly. So illegal carrying and. And violating the creed of concealed carry. You do not seek violent confrontation while you are carrying a firearm openly and clearly making it and violating the law like that is. If that had been the precipitating event in which he'd gotten shot there, I mean, it would be a very different story. Again, not saying it should have been, but I'm saying it would have been a totally, totally different story. So that video only puts it in the context of. And I guess really what the ride is objecting to is people saying he was a peaceful protester or whatever. It's like, okay, yeah, I mean, I'm not denying. Yes, he. I think he clearly was a violent agitator. Like, I think that's pretty obvious in that one video. It still does not change that when he got shot in the circumstances, again, of a man's death in that instance, if anything, maybe you could say he learned from his behavior because he was acting very differently, you know, at least I think whenever. Whenever he was in the video. So anyway, that's like my broad based thoughts. I'M sure people will get upset because I said it. A violent agitator, I, I literally don't think it's deniable. I have warned ad nauseam about liberal protest norms and about how, why they think they can seemingly just do whatever they want. That's a good example of how you shouldn't be acting and is clearly going to diminish your cause in the long run. But I'm also not going to sit here and say, yeah, fuck him, he deserve to die. Because just like I said with Waco or with Ruby Ridge, it does not like the character precipitating the, like, trampling of Second Amendment rights. And death in this, this clearly unjustified shooting is actually immaterial to how you feel about not only the use of force in the specific act in which Alex was killed, but also in the administration's reaction afterwards. Because, remember, they did not know any of this prior to that, right? So they did not have any of this video calling him domestic terrorist or saying he wanted to massacre. They literally had no idea. They just said it. And this is part of why, like, in a normal time, you said, oh, we're going to have an investigation, these agents are going to be put on leave. And then you could put together this whole thing. If they'd done that, they'd be in 10 times better ground. But that's not what they did. Instead, you had Trump out yesterday, like, oh, I'm really upset that he had a gun. You know, you can't do that.
- [29:35]
A
So Trump, by the way, re posted post. I guess it was on True Social that called him a domestic terrorist again, by the way. So he's, he's back to that language. But no, I mean, your core point is correct, that a video of him doing something 11 days prior has literally nothing to do with the legal analysis of whether it was appropriate for them to execute him in the street. Zero to do with that right now. The reason why I think this video has become important to a lot of the psyche of the right is like, let's be honest, they've been, since he was killed, they've been looking for some way to say this was a bad guy. And he, he basically had it coming. And so this gives them that ability to do that. In the same way that the video of Renee Goode and her wife. Wife, where her wife is, you know, yelling at the, the agent who ends up killing Renee Good. That served a similar purpose. It didn't provide them with any more sort of like legal justification, but it did Mark Renee Good as one of them as. Especially with, you know, her wife being the sort of like, butch lesbian. It's like, okay, this is one of the bad guys. So now we don't have to feel bad about this at all. I didn't think.
- [30:44]
B
And I think, I think it's because she was screaming and yelling. And look, I mean, let's not deny, like, they're causing trouble.
- [30:50]
A
That's what they wanted to do, but that's what they want. But again, that's part of what I'm, I'm saying here is because. Because that doesn't have anything to do with what her wife is doing, doesn't have anything to do with good. But it marks them as like they're, they're on the other side. And so we don't have to care. They. They deserved it. Like, they got what they deserved. And so I think that is the real significance of this video. There's one other thing that I think could be significant about this video is we know and, and you talked to Glenn about this, and Ken Klippenstein has done good reporting on this.
- [31:20]
C
This.
- [31:20]
A
We know that all of these activists are being entered into a variety of databases. In fact, Ken has a new piece out about. He got. Had a whistleblower send him, you know, a bunch of information about all of the different lists that are being compiled. And so these activists are being tracked. So it does make me wonder, you know, it's not definitive here, but it actually does make me wonder since he had had this prior hostile interaction with these agents, if he wasn't tracked and in a sense, targeted, and that that's part of why they came in so hot when all he was doing in, you know, when he was murdered was just recording. And then he's trying to, to help this woman. And nevertheless, they're pepper spraying, they attack him, they've got eight agents on him, et cetera. I think that's a reasonable question to ask based on the fact that we know that he had these, you know, this, at least this one prior interaction with them.
- [32:12]
B
Look, it's definitely possible. I mean, look, and this is. People can hate me for saying it, but, like, this is, this is the point pro, where you're going to give credence to the idea of keeping database. Like, if you were out there attacking, spitting and kicking and acting like a lunatic out in public, like, yeah, you're not going to have a lot of sympathy.
- [32:30]
A
You even said, you know what the, the agent did in that situation? Yeah, it was what you're supposed to do. You're not supposed to get out. You're supposed to get out. Yeah, you know, you got your buddies there. Arrest him, right? There's a legal process for handling this that doesn't involve, now, I'm gonna kick the shit out of you and break your ribs and then, you know, enter you in as a domestic terrorist for kicking out my headlight and then possibly, we don't know this part, but possibly target you later on. Like, that is not remotely how any of this is supposed to operate. As let me as said as you could be about, you know, his actions in that moment.
- [33:03]
B
I agree. And I'm not disputing. I'm talking about, like, again, this is why, much to the chagrin, I talk about liberal protest norms because this shit is way too normalized and people are acting real fast and loose. And we all know that if this had come be like, oh, well, you know, he was just upset, you know, at the time. Like, no, you cannot be acting like a lunatic in public destroying property, Period. End of story. Like, that is. This is why I freaked out about the whole Don Lemon thing. I mean, you guys, you violate the social contract and then. Yeah, look, well, people can.
- [33:34]
A
People can go back and watch our debate, which I really don't want to rehash. I will just say, for me, I think that law enforcement protects, quote, unquote, professionals should be held to a higher standard for de escalation and professionalism than random citizens.
- [33:51]
B
I agree with you. We just didn't excuse random citizens. Random citizens shouldn't be acting like this, by the way, who are also being massively funded and now supported. And I do think that a large lot of the progressives.
- [34:01]
A
Wait, wait, wait. What do you mean by that?
- [34:02]
B
Well, look at. Barack Obama just tweeted out this whole, like, link about how to support financially a lot of the protesters that are in Minneapolis. I. I'm not even saying it's illegal. Like, can we be clear? It's fine. It's a free country. You can donate to an NGO or whatever who's supporting the protests. Do what you want. Like, come on, let's be honest. Like, the ICE database and all that just happened completely out of nowhere. Like somebody's paying for it. I'm not saying it's domestic terrorism. Let me clear. I'm not saying that.
- [34:27]
A
I just, you know, in any way want to be really clear because there's a lot of conspiracy theories and Cash Patel's FBI is investigating. Now this Signal Chat, chat group, which, you know, I mean, there's nothing again, Illegal about signal chats. Yes, protests are organized. Like, yes, there is coordination. That's. That doesn't mean they're inorganic. It doesn't mean. It's like.
- [34:47]
B
I didn't say.
- [34:48]
A
Yeah, I'm just. I know you're not saying. I just want to be clear because there's a lot of conspiracies that this is some sort of, like, inorganic, I don't know, George Soros or whatever funded thing. These are Minneapolis residents who are very upset. Are there NGOs, or is there a systematic, you know, coordination through these signal groups of whatever? Yeah, of course. That's the way, like, effective organizing actually works.
- [35:10]
B
I take your point. Again, I'm not saying that this is some. You know, I've always believed, by the way, in January 6th case and all of these cases that, you know, I don't think anybody was being paid by BLM.com to go out and to riot. That said, you know, there were clearly NGOs and all these other people who were involved. So things can be organic and they can also be supported. And I do think that people go way too far, both right and left. Left. Everyone always remember they said, oh, the Tea Party thing was totally fake. No, it wasn't. Sorry. Yes, you may pay for buses. That doesn't mean you can fill the buses. That's generally how this is always operated. People are always screaming back and forth each other about organic or inorganic. If tens of thousands of people feel something, yes, there will also be organizations to support that. So let me be. And I've always held that position now, whenever it comes back to Alex and the reaction of this video, I remember now what I was going to say. I do think. Think this is part of the issue. A lot of the progressive left press, I'll call out Zateo for one, they were, you know, they put it out as if this was some sympathetic incident before they had the information. And this video, it makes them look bad. Like, they were like, oh, he got his rib broken. Because he was. It's like, no, guys, he started it. Like, very clearly he was started it. He initiated it, he continued it. It looks bad for him. And that's why I think people. And by the way, including the Border Patrol agents case, just snap coming out, out and clearly saying, like, oh, did absolutely nothing wrong and is a hero is going to create the space to make you look like an idiot. Like, in this particular case, Alex clearly was violent. He clearly was very upset. I do not think that it means he deserved to die. I do think that it's going to pierce a lot of people's, you know, you know, the oh ICU nurse and all. It's like, well, you know, acting like this in public is a serious red flag. Like end of story, period, period. Yes, you have a right to be upset. You have a right to peacefully protest. But your behavior as a gun owner in that situation was out of control, completely contrary to the norms. And in that particular case, like not just norms, even in the law of the way that you were conducting yourself while doing that, that was very, very out of bounds. However, they didn't handle it properly. And that's why I'm not going to sit here and defend the ICE agents or any of those people. But this is why, you know, general chaos, violence and actual law and order is to going good. He should have been arrested. If he had been, hopefully this never would have happened. And instead, you know, I guess they just beat the out of him and walked away. And then it leads to this horrible incident on later. So tldr, this is why law and order actually saves lives. And yes, also no absolution whatsoever of the law enforcement officers here who also handled clearly the situation poorly. I saw some people blaming Minnesota. I don't see any reason why the feds can't arrest him. I mean, mean, they've arrested plenty of people in the state. Well, they, A lot of people were saying the min state officials or city officials should have arrested him as a result of that. Should have evel after that incident. And they were like, see, this is why, you know, the police officers not doing anything. I'm like, well, the feds have arrested plenty of protesters and clearly he was liable to be arrested. And so acting in the way that they did and just letting this slide, it was the wrong thing to do. Do all around.
- [38:18]
A
Yeah, they could also in that instance, since the ICE officers or CBP or whatever, like beat the out of him, maybe they should have been arrested too. But I mean, the reality is Minneapolis has many fewer police officers. They are wildly overwhelmed. This is something that the local police chief has talked about. And so, you know, I mean, yes, if he kicks in a headlight, like it would be. I would not object to him being arrested and that you, okay, you broke the law. Ah, there we go. But you know, I, I think for myself and I know you're not equating these two things like kicking in a headlight versus executing someone in the street for zero reason are not, you know, not on the same level. And I know you're not saying that they are. But just to.
- [39:00]
B
To put that out there, the major right wing grievance is basically that, you know, oh, they turned him into St. George, you know, St. George, Floyd. And then this, look, this. This is unfortunate. It always happens is that, you know, the victim is always somebody who's never did anything wrong. And they're actually like rosy heroes and everything. And that's just not humanity, period. But that is why I don't really care. Like, we, you know, we've talked about the Ashley Babbage shooting, and it's like, you know, do I. Do I think it was right to, like, break in? No, but, you know, and a lot of people stood by, like, oh, she got what she deserved. When you look at the case pretty clearly, like, it wasn't necessary, use of force, a lot of right wingers understood that, you know, on January 6th, and by the way, that one was way more, you know, in the realm of understanding, I think, than, let's say, what happened here with Alex. So I try to keep generally, like, I try to keep a general, principled view of this and to look at it. And that's why, for me, it is still a Waco moment, as in. In the moment moment. There is no dispute about who did something wrong and then the government who lied about it and then period, trying to trample on a Second Amendment right that we all have. For me, that is the bigger story. And I will still acknowledge, like, with Waco, what, you know, David and his own behavior of the Branch Davidians. But ultimately, sometimes that is a bit of a cop out used by the people who defend that behavior because they're like, well, he was such a bad guy, he deserved to be killed. And that's where I'm just like, no, that's just not. Not true, period. So that's why January 6th.
- [40:33]
A
January 6th is a good example, not only because of Ashley Babbitt, but, I mean, you had people who genuinely assaulted Capitol Police officers who were pardoned and, you know, treated like they were political prisoners by the right because they were part of a movement that they support. So, you know, zero consistency, even on just like the basic, like, law and order, respect authority, obey authority mantra that you're hearing a lot.
- [40:58]
B
Yeah. Not helpful, is it? And. And, you know, that's another good case where they, you know, what didn't. Threw the books at them a lot of times. Extraordinary. The biggest FBI, you know, investigation and all of that in history. I think it was way too far the way that. That it all went down. But, yeah, I mean, you're right. Pardoning people, you know, who attack police. And then in this case, we're like, oh, fuck. It's like, all right, well, we need to have some level of consistency here, folks. It actually does matter. And that's why, you know, in general, looking at this, I think the border or whoever the agents were in that situation acted very stupidly. They should have just arrested him. I think Alex acted terribly in that situation. It doesn't really change how I feel about the shooting, period. But I do think this will be kind of a rhetorical propaganda win, I think, for a lot of right wingers, because for them, what they get most annoyed about, and I can sympathize with this not an Alex situation, but more broadly, is that anytime there's a left shooting cause celeb, they're a hero. They've done absolutely nothing wrong. And that's just usually not the case in a lot of the, in the way that humans are. Like, if you look at anybody, there's generally going to be like a, you know, yeah, look, we're, we're, we're colored.
- [42:06]
A
Nobody, nobody is perfect for sure. No one's perfect. Like, in this instance, it was actually looking like this guy was, you know, pretty, pretty close to a model citizen, VA ICU nurse. Like, all the testimony coming out from people. And so, like I said, I mean, they were searching high and low for anything that could mar his reputation. And they got that with this, you know, that's his own fault.
- [42:27]
B
Okay. And not to besmirch the dead, shouldn't have, shouldn't be acting like this in public. All right? Period. And I, I hope people look at this as a, you know, as a lesson, because if this video didn't exist, you'd be on a lot, you know, better footing. And in general, if you're going to put yourself in these types of situations, again, as a gun owner, you have a much higher responsibility to act responsibly. And he did not meet that bar whatsoever in this video. But again, that did not have any bearing on the video in which he was killed, where he actually did not.
- [42:55]
A
What happens 11 days has nothing to do unless he was targeted for that previous interaction. And that's a question that should be explored at some point. It should be investigated.
- [43:04]
B
I agree with.
- [43:05]
A
Yeah, let's, let's get to the other side of the equation. What the government is doing, which has, you know, vastly more power than any of these individuals. One thing, they did decide to place the agents involved on leave. And I say agents, and this is Something we talked about before, it wasn't just one guy, guy who shot Alex Preddy, it was two. And you have, you know, not only do you have the initial shots fired after, you know, it seems like someone, someone yelled, he's got a gun, he's got a gun. He's disarmed before any shots are fired, then after he is lying motionless on the ground, they continue to pump bullets into his likely, you know, dying body. And so in any case, both of those agents have now been placed on administrative leave. Now the administration is saying like, oh, that's standard protocol. Well, it should be standard protocol. But as far as we know, it hasn't happened in any of the other many ICE shootings, not just the one that we, you know, the Renee, good one that got so much attention, but in the Miramar Martinez one that didn't happen either. That is, that is standard protocol for tip like your average cop. Even if it was a totally in self defense, totally justified clear cut case, you're still put on leave. But it took an extraordinary amount of pressure for that to happen here. In any case, that is what they're saying at this point.
- [44:25]
B
Yeah, I again, I read that as part of the whole tactical retreat around dhs, around funding potentially, you know, significant and important. So we'll see. Okay guys, turning now to the FBI, we're going to go and put these images up here. On the screen you can see FBI agents at the Fulton County Elections office removing some ballots. But what was really stunning was actually the appearance of the DNI Tulsi Gabbard, who was spotted here by a photographer surreptitiously on the phone. All of this being set up in the context of Trump's claims that the election in 2020 was stolen and some of the pressure on the state of Georgia to release their voter rolls and other information. So as you can all see, the Tulsi Gabbard story really is the most most important part of all of this.
- [45:17]
A
This administration has even sort of toyed with about now that they've got Maduro and they believe these like stupid Venezuela election conspiracies, that maybe he's going to cut a deal with them to say whatever it is they want him to say about this 2020 election rigging. And now that they have these ballots and they're out of the hands of the local authorities, which again, Georgia is a, you know, still has a Republican governor, by the way, the way, but in any case, now it's out of the hands of those authorities. They can say whatever they Want about what these ballots actually contain. Like the truth is no barrier for them. We know that whatsoever.
- [45:55]
B
Yeah. The search warrant has not been publicly released. Like all like the pretext for it. They say the action is a court authorized law enforcement action and the warrant was seeking records tied to the 2020 election. I mean, what is crazy the Tulsi thing thing is the element which should make everyone say what the. Because as you just said, this is the odni. It is highly unusual for an ODNI official ever to be involved in a law enforcement operation like this one we will recall. Well, I think there's some personality stuff that should be explained here too. Tulsi's out on the outs. Crystal, you and I know that she was marginalized in the Venezuela operation where she basically wasn't even told. Reportedly they said DNI means do not inform, something like that. Right.
- [46:43]
A
Do not invite.
- [46:44]
B
Do not invite, you know, to any of the meetings around that. She spearheaded that whole Obama gate thing that they said was a conspiracy which went absolutely nowhere. Iran is currently happening. Allegedly she had spoken about against that behind the scenes. Not again. I can't 100% confirm that, but that's kind of what I've been told. Well, this is a good way to get into the President's graces is to be the spearhead of whatever this is. And you're right, I mean it could be be some part of a Venezuela operation. But more importantly, I think what people should really understand is that this was not just an FBI operation, but reportedly the head agent who would be in charge of this was actually relieved of duties last week prior to this major operation. And I mean in Georgia, by the way, they're taking this very seriously. I saw the Senator Austin off speak out against us. Like you said, they have a Republican governor, remember that many of the targeted officials from Stop the Steel not only won reelection, they survived primaries whenever they were specifically like David Perdue and I'm forgetting who challenged Ravensburger. He. Yeah, both of them survived. Brian Kemp and Rasberger all survived electoral challenges. So they're going to have strong state, you know, guidelines to sit on. It's. I mean, I had heard one theory that this could be potentially also about the. Remember the Fannie Willis prosecution investigation. They've been salivating trying to go after Fannie Willis after her failed prosecutorial attempts back while the Biden administration was in power. And of course she had her own scandal with, you know, the way that that entire thing went down. But yeah, I mean, just right now we don't really know a whole lot. We just know that they seized, you know, like, ballot records here. And the fear from Georgia Democrats and Georgia officials is obviously, this isn't about 2020, but it's going to be about 2026. And specifically the midterm elections in a highly contested battleground state, which is a legitimate fear. I mean, if we're being honest and looking at all this. Right.
- [48:46]
A
Yes, of course. And not just in Georgia. Look, what they do is they test the limits they constantly put. What can we get away with? What can we get away with? What can we get away with? Can we routinely flout court orders, voters to the tune of hundreds or thousands? Actually, thousands of. Yes, we can apparently get away with that. So we're going to keep doing it. Can we interfere in this state electoral system and get a, get a judge to sign off on it? And, you know, as you were mentioning, the agent in charge of the Atlanta field office was removed last week. You know, I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to put two and two together and figure out whoever that was was not too keen on this operation. And so they just push him out of the way. Can you get away with that? They're pushing the boundaries of what they can. You know, we have to connect it back to Minnesota as well, because one of the things, Pam Bondi put this in a letter to the state, she was like, yeah, we'll leave if you turn over your voter rolls. And the state, to their credit, were like, no, we're not doing that. And that actually significantly hurt the government's case in court, too, because it very much clearly looks like they're trying to bully and coerce Minnesota into doing things Minnesota, you know, does not have to do and does not want to do. So in any case, case that made it pretty plain that part of what the goal was of the operation in Minnesota was unable to grab these voter rolls. They're pushing every state in the country to send them these voter rolls. You know, some of the very first executive orders that were signed. If we go back, you know, this long year ago to the beginning of the Trump administration, had to do with, quote, unquote, what they call election integrity, which is an effort to, you know, to change who is on the rolls and help to try to control these results. The other thing that's scary to me, I put it together with the massive influx of funding to ice, which has been deployed as this, like, political weapon. So do you think it's crazy to imagine that they could also use those same forces are very loyal, especially the new recruits, to Trump and to Stephen Miller to intimidate people or, or Trump has actually said now that he regrets not having the national guard and put E7 up on the screen. He regrets not having the National Guard seize the ballot boxes back in 2020, but he said that he was worried maybe they wouldn't have been up to it. Well, maybe now with ice, he feels like he's got the force that would be up to it. This all sounds insane and I feel insane saying it, but we already saw this man try to steal one election and, and this thing with Tulsi Gabbard involved and going back in and seizing ballots from 2020 for God knows what reason. And the theories about Maduro and whatever, like these are things that all really happened. So even though they sound insane, you have to look at where things could be going. He knows he's not popular. Right. He knows the midterms. He even says outright that typically the person in power, like they end up losing ground. Ground. He knows it is very likely that they're going to lose the House if not the Senate. And so if he feels like politically he can't control that outcome by changing people's opinions, well, what levers is he going to reach for? And so I do see this as like a shot across the bow for 2026.
- [51:58]
B
Yeah, look, I'm, I wish I could say that it's crazy, but when, and I could, I would even say it's, it was less crazy, but Tulsi being involved is like, whoa, man. Like I, I really don't think people understand how, how extraordinary that is because like you said, that could potentially, I mean, who knows, you know, some foreign interference thing. Don't forget this is Cash Patel's FBI who is the one in charge of this entire investigation. And I mean, I guess my only saving grace is eventually this will have to come out in court and we will actually see what it is that the so called pretext, you know, for this will was from what I was reading, I have it here, is that they said ballot images produced by scanned ballots, all voter rolls, tabulator tapes. The warrant signed was sought as an investigation into possible violation of federal law against destruction of a later election related record. Another statute that makes it a crime to knowingly procure fraudulent voter registration or fraudulent votes. That is as of it stands right now. What it is, these would actually have to be proven in court. Don't forget yet. Do we have that Rudy Giuliani thing?
- [53:06]
A
Yeah. E6.
- [53:07]
B
Okay. E6. Let me put that up there on the screen. At one point, some of this was litigated in court. And Rudy Giuliani had to pay $148 million of defamation against two election workers that he had accused previously of tampering with the presidential vote in Georgia. And this was. Was this a state case? I forget exactly. No, I believe so. Okay. Yeah. So anyway, so just reminder that some of this, at the very least, has been litigated previously, but with Trump in charge, who knows? I'll tell you this, we're going to pay attention to it because it definitely is going to be important story. Very important.
- [53:42]
A
Yeah. And just to remind people related to the Giuliani thing, the big conspiracies were. I mean, you had the. The thousand. Ten thousand mules or whatever. You had that whole Dinesh d' Souza conspiracy, but specifically in Fulton county, they had this whole conspiracy about, like, suitcases of battle ballots being brought in. And that was the center of a lot of the conspiracies. Again, the Trump administration pursued a bunch of these claims in courts. Not just this Rudy Giuliani thing where he was found guilty of defaming these ladies, these election workers, but a bunch. I mean, he made so many claims in court, they were all thrown out right there. We. There is no there there. If there was any there there, we would. They would have found it. They would have shown it. Even, you know, Trump in the run up to the election, when he was on with Rogan, Rogan asked him about it. He was like, well, there's a book you should check out. I mean, he couldn't explain.
- [54:30]
B
Still talks about that. He's like, really? He's like, he came here and you made. You still didn't have anything. Like.
- [54:36]
A
Yeah. So, I mean, we know there's no there there, but that doesn't mean. Look, these people will destroy. They're in court now arguing they're allowed to destroy evidence in the killing of Alex Preddy. Like, we can't put anything past them in terms of destroying ballots, changing ballots, what they present. I mean, it's just. I don't know. It's. Yeah, it's very disturbing. It's crazy to me that a judge signed off on this, but you also have all of these, like, Trump sycophant judges who've been put in place and gotten their positions on the bench solely because of their loyalty to Trump. So maybe it was one of those people who signed off on it. We don't actually know at this point.
- [55:10]
B
Yeah, I don't know either. I was just looking a little bit into her background. No, I don't have anything I can confirm as of right now. We'll stay on the story. Okay. Sorry, everybody, that it went late. It is what it is. Breaking news in the middle of the show. Sorry. And of course, we're at home. We're hoping to be back in the studio next week if possible. If the snow and the ice melts even a modicum. Unfortunately, the entire DMV remains a complete shit show as a result of our local government. So we apologize for the week, but we hope to see you all next week. And of course, there'll be a good Friday show for all you all tomorrow. See you then. This is an I Heart podcast.
- [55:47]
A
Guaranteed human.