3697 - Is Israel Imploding Or Expanding?; Trump's Crippling SNAP Cuts w/ Ilan Pappé, Katie Bergh

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: The Majority Report with Sam Seder

Episode 3697 – Is Israel Imploding Or Expanding?; Trump’s Crippling SNAP Cuts w/ Ilan Pappé, Katie Berg
Date: July 28, 2026
Host: Emma Vigeland (in for Sam Seder)

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into two urgent political stories. First, Professor Ilan Pappé joins for an in-depth discussion on the paradoxical collapse and expansion of Israeli power amid intensifying violence, social fractures, and international impunity. Then, Katie Berg from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities examines the devastating, historic cuts to SNAP (food stamps) under the Republican “reconciliation law,” and the human toll that follows. Interspersed are irreverent, sharp-witted asides from the panel, assessments of Democratic Party dynamics, and critique of right-wing scare tactics.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. News Recap & Political Climate

• Democratic Momentum & GOP Response: The Republican House is distributing internal memos advising red-scare tactics—run against "communism" in the 2026 midterms despite the party’s declining popularity and a surge in left-populist candidates.
• Trump Administration Moves: Trump is pressuring for escalations with Iran and doubling down on anti-immigrant and anti-left policies, including urging investigations of “antifascists” via NSPM 7 and associating U.S. leftists with Cuba.
• Democratic Party Tensions: The party’s mainstream apparatus is cash-strapped and aggressively working against its left flank, even as public support for capitalism drops considerably.

Quote:

"Every accusation is a confession. That’s one of the tactics they use most effectively, and Stephen Miller is the most shameless in doing so."
– Emma Vigeland [14:26]

---

2. Interview: Professor Ilan Pappé on Israel’s Crisis

[21:18–47:55]

Israel: Implosion and Expansion Simultaneously

Key Arguments:

• Dialectical Crisis: Israel’s intensification of violence in Gaza, the West Bank, and southern Lebanon signals both a drastic expansion and a long-term internal disintegration.
• International Complicity: Even clear acts of ethnic cleansing and open genocidal policies are met with international indifference, especially from Western powers (the only actors capable of restraining Israel).

Quote:

"There is a dialectical connection... between escalation of the extreme behavior and acceleration of a long-term process of disintegration and weakening."
– Ilan Pappé [22:10]

Domestic Political Dynamics

• Netanyahu’s Role: Netanyahu is compared to a mafia boss struggling to control both messianic Zionists (pushing for annexation) and ultra-Orthodox Jews (resisting universal military service), riding internal fractures in Israeli society.
• Opposition's Weakness: The opposition offers little, focused solely on opposing Netanyahu, failing to address economic or social woes.

Quote:

"He’s a bit of a political magician...but there’s also the weakness of the opposition...its main message is we don’t want Bibi Netanyahu."
– Ilan Pappé [25:17]

Societal Breakdown and Emigration

• Economic Crisis: Widespread contraction in tourism, mass emigration, neglected northern regions, and loss of social & economic elites.
• Underreported Emigration: At least 100,000 from Israel’s elite have left, forming new enclaves in Greece, Cyprus, Thailand, causing local resentment.

Quote:

"Among what one can consider the social, economic, and cultural elite...at least 100,000 people bought a one-way ticket and already settled in different countries."
– Ilan Pappé [32:06]

Obscured Data and Genocide Figures

• Manipulation & Censorship: Both Palestinian casualties and Israeli emigration numbers are actively underreported; Gaza’s real death toll is likely many times official estimates.
• Historical Parallels: Difficulty in documenting genocides is typical, serving perpetrators’ interests, but ultimately, the full truth emerges.

Quote:

"Genocide usually is perpetrated by governments that take over the space...with very little incentive to expose what happens."
– Ilan Pappé [36:39]

Zionism vs. Neo-Zionism

• Ideological Shift: From pragmatic, occasionally self-limiting classical Zionism to a revolutionary, messianic, impatient “neo-Zionism” that brooks no compromise and views secular Zionists as traitors.

Quote:

"It was a more pragmatic implementation of the vision compared to the messianic neo-Zionist vision that doesn’t have patience...it regards pragmatism as a weakness."
– Ilan Pappé [41:08]

International Law and Its Failure

• Systemic Exception: The Gaza genocide reveals the self-serving nature of post-WWII international law, designed by colonial powers and shielded from fully addressing settler-colonial violence.

Quote:

"If international law does not apply to [Israel], that exceptionalism puts a big question on the validity of international law as a whole."
– Ilan Pappé [46:08]

---

3. Interview: Katie Berg on Trump’s SNAP Cuts

[47:56–62:55]

Historic Scale of SNAP Cuts

• Largest Reductions Ever: Over 4.5 million people, including at least 1.5 million children, have lost access to food assistance in just nine months (an 11% drop).
• Structural Changes: Expanded work requirements, slashed benefits, and unprecedented cost-shifting from federal budget to state governments.

Quote:

"The number of people receiving SNAP...fell by more than 4.5 million people. That’s a roughly 11% drop in just nine months."
– Katie Berg [49:38]

Alaska’s Exception

• Political Deal-Making: Senator Lisa Murkowski secured a two-year delay in penalties for Alaska in exchange for her vote—explaining why Alaska has not seen the sharp drop other states have.

Quote:

"Alaska is in a little bit of a unique situation because of the special carve-out...where they get up to two additional years before they face some of these very significant cuts."
– Katie Berg [54:09]

Pressure on States & Administrative Chaos

• Impact of Cost-Sharing: States now must pay a share of SNAP; most cannot afford it, leading to paperwork barriers, delayed benefits, and effective disenfranchisement of eligible families.
• Bureaucratic Evasion: States can avoid counting errors by denying or delaying benefits—hitting working families with children hardest.

Quote:

"What families are experiencing...is that the process to get and keep their benefits has suddenly gotten a lot more confusing...required them to track down a ton of documentation that they've never been asked for before."
– Katie Berg [57:57]

Disproportionate Harm to Children

• Children at the Sharpest Risk: Bureaucratic red tape, loss of automatic eligibility for school meals, and increased risk of food insecurity further burden children.

Quote:

"It's hard to overstate the devastating impact of even short periods of food insecurity for children...families are choosing between buying groceries and paying for rent and utilities."
– Katie Berg [60:29]

---

Memorable Moments & Notable Quotes

• On the Predictability of Right-Wing Tactics:
  "When capitalism is discrediting itself in everyone’s eyes, you have to freak out about the alternative." – RM Brown [06:20]
• On Internal Democratic Battles:
  "You have to ask yourself: Where have you seen the Democrats fight harder than in primaries against Bernie Sanders, against AOC?" – Emma Vigeland [16:15]
• On Media and Data Censorship:
  "Ben Gurion Airport...has turned into an American Air Force base...[reducing] flights to 40%." – Ilan Pappé [30:36]

---

Important Timestamps

• [03:06] Satirical and serious headlines, panel banter
• [21:18] Start of Ilan Pappé interview (Israeli society’s unraveling)
• [25:17] Netanyahu’s mafia-like role and political opposition
• [28:36] Economic contraction & exodus of Israeli elite
• [35:39] The challenge of accurate data on Gaza and comparison to other genocides
• [40:08] Defining neo-Zionism
• [45:58] International Law’s failure with colonial states
• [47:56] Start of Katie Berg interview (SNAP cuts)
• [49:38] Statistics on SNAP drop-offs
• [54:59] How and why some states (notably Arizona) are hit hardest
• [60:29] Details on child hunger and cascading effects

---

Tone and Style

The conversation is forthright, irreverent, and intellectually rigorous. Emma Vigeland and the panel blend sharp humor, pointed critique, and deep policy understanding, never shying away from the gravity of the issues nor from calling out both right-wing cruelty and centrist Democratic complacency. Ilan Pappé’s segments are somber, analytical, and historical, while Katie Berg provides precise, data-driven advocacy.

---

Conclusion

This episode is a comprehensive dissection of how reactionary political expediency—both in the U.S. and Israel—fuels humanitarian catastrophe, while institutions either fail to act or actively abet the crisis. It’s required listening for understanding not just the headlines, but the systemic rot—and the all-too-human stories behind the numbers.

Transcript

[Emma Vigeland]

It is Tuesday, July 28, 2026. My name is Emma Vigeland in for Sam Cedar and this is the five time award winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, usa. On the program today, Ilan Pape, professor of history at the University of Exeter and director of their European center for Palestine Studies, author of many must read books, joins us to discuss Israel's simultaneous implosion and expansion. And later in the show, Katie Berg, senior policy analyst on the Food Assistance Team team at the center on Budget and Policy Priorities, joins us to discuss the impacts of Republican food stamp cuts. Also on the program, Iran and Oman are scheduled, or actually not scheduled, are negotiating a side deal currently to create a toll mechanism for the Strait of Hormuz that can benefit them, plus the Gulf states as well. Sidelining Washington. This is a strategic failure on every level for the United States. Trump once again wants to talk to Iran now. Shocker. Netanyahu and Trump are meeting after Lindsey Graham's funeral this morning. He could easily manipulate Trump into escalation ahead of the midterms. Some of the more savvy Republicans warn. A top DHS statistics official resigned citing his inability to support Trump's war on immigrants. A couple recently deported by ICE was bound and killed in Guatemala in front of their 14 month old child. They had been in the US fleeing this kind of political violence. Mitch McConnell provides another wordless photo proof of life. Extending his leave as Kentucky governor, Beshear says he should disclose his health details or resign. Senate Majority Leader Thune pleads with Trump on Fox News to stop asking him to nuke the filibuster for the Save America Act. James Talarico leads Paxton by five points in a new poll. Interesting Wildfires rage in Oregon and Minnesota. Will you be shocked to hear that Trump's Doge cuts on forest fire prevention had an impact?

[Ilan Pape]

We gotta tariff ourselves now.

[Emma Vigeland]

You're right, we're creating the smoke. No, we tariff. We tariff Canada for complaining about it. A witness in the case against the former Olympic canoeist accused of vandalizing the reflecting pool has testified saying the pool was already damaged.

[Ilan Pape]

Worst thing that was ever done with a box cutter.

[RM Brown]

A likely story. Already damaged. It's a perfect pool. You damaged it.

[Emma Vigeland]

You damaged it. The witness is antifa. And lastly, a 6.8 magnitude earthquake hits Japan this morning. Hope everybody's okay. Many people are feared to be trapped in a shopping mall. All this and more on today's Majority Report. Welcome to the show everybody. It is Newsday Tuesday. As a reminder, Sam is out until Friday when he will make his triumphant return. And then all of next week he will be back, of course. And I'm really trying to line up the best guests possible just to stick it to him, as Haley Stevens would say, and show him what the Michigan way is all about.

[Ilan Pape]

I've always thought you were a workhorse

[Sam Cedar]

more than a show.

[Emma Vigeland]

I'm not a show horse. I work. And, you know, like Abdullah sayed, I've been on podcasts, so that might make Haley Stevens and I unable to connect. Here we'll talk about that insane debate in the fun half. I think it was about substance. It was about substance on his end. I watched the whole thing. And I would be hard pressed to think of a more dominant debate performance than Abdullah Sayad vs Haley Stevens last night. We're a week away from that election, by the way, folks. And of course, if you're in Michigan, will Lawrence Donovan McKinney, these are candidates that you should be supporting as well. So huge election coming up there and not just in Michigan. On that day, that upcoming primary day, the fourth, you've got Kansas, you've got Missouri, Virginia and Washington, I believe. And in that same week, next week on the Thursday is the Tennessee primary, where there are a bunch of progressive candidates as well, including Justin Pierson, amongst others. So speaking of the elections, let's start here. Stephen Miller and the Republicans are terrified about the Democrats doing well in the upcoming midterm elections. And earlier this week, the Washington examiner published an item. This is a paper that leans right, but they circulated and published this report about how the House Republican Conference is circulating a memo advising the members of the caucus to use red scare tactics and to run against communism in the upcoming election cycle. I mean, I guess this is all you have, right? When the economy is falling apart, when Trump started this war that's deeply unpopular,

[RM Brown]

capitalism is discrediting itself in everyone's eyes. So you have to freak out about the alternative.

[Emma Vigeland]

Well, it's funny you say that because Wall Street Journal survey in terms of capitalism discrediting, discrediting itself earlier this month found that under half of Americans, just under half of Americans, say capitalism is working very well or somewhat well. And that was 60% that figure a decade ago. So it's a precipitous drop. And it's not just Democrats and it's not just young people.

[RM Brown]

And I imagine a decade ago it was much lower than it was a decade prior to that because it was the wake of the Financial cris.

[Emma Vigeland]

And so what do you do if you're a Trump administration that is committed to the most rapacious form of capitalism possible and crony capitalism in particular, that benefits your friends? Well, you play up the threat of socialism and Marxism, Marxism. And you don't just do it in rhetoric like saying Obama is a communist because he puts Dijon mustard on his hot dog or whatever the hell they do this in action. Ken Klippenstein, we had him on last week to discuss these details, but he's been on this for months, if not years, since Trump 2.0 got underway. I mean, we told you to take Project 2025 seriously. We're telling you to take this seriously as well. NSPM 7, the memorandum that Trump and the White House has been sending around to federal law enforcement agencies to say, prioritize investigations of people who are under the umbrella of antifascism. And they can be anti American, anti capitalist, anti Christianity, they can be extremists on gender and race, which can mean basically any leftist. Trump at his speech at Mount Rushmore talked about how we have to, you know, vanquish communism and how the communist menace is coming for us. And then recently the State Department tried to link US leftists to Cuba, which they called a essentially a terrorist organization. Just copy pasting from the 1950s to say that certain individuals on the political left and organizations are working with Cuba, which they call a threat to the US I would call a threat to capitalism, just because it exists as a communist country in spite of all odds right off of the shores of the world's capitalist superpower. And that is a humiliation for the United States. And so leftists in this country bear the brunt. The Cuba Report named a bunch of targets for the administration, some that make no sense to me, like Karen Bass, who is not a barn burning leftist or socialist or anything close to that. The mayor of la, but also Maxine Waters as well. This document seemed to have a particular fixation on black women. Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley as well included. The administration shares that that fixation, that racist fixation. But it also included groups like CodePink, Black Lives Matter, PSL, the Democratic Socialists of America, Antifa, which isn't a formal group but is an anti fascist movement. And then familiar names like Hasan Piker, Zoran Mamdani, Amy Goodman and including George Floyd in that. Essentially to say that he was in coordination, I mean like posthumously saying he was essentially a domestic terrorist coast it's astonishingly racist. It's astonishingly troubling. In terms of what it could mean for their anti Democratic efforts ahead of these midterms, because they've got. They don't have public opinion on their side. The Republicans are already a minoritarian party in its construct. And Trump has shown a proclivity for using anti Democratic repressive means when he's unable to get his way. And so Stephen Miller went on Sean Hannity show last night to talk about DSA in particular, which I think is going to be an increasingly central focus because of the success DSA has had. Here they are talking about DSA and what a threat they are. And keep all the context that I just laid out for you in mind, because this is not a laughing matter.

[Stephen Miller]

Then we have a different point of view. The very survival of freedom, liberty, humanity, your family, your children, your future depends on ensuring that we do not allow communism to take hold in America. And that's why President Trump has courageously and necessarily framed this upcoming election around keeping communists out of power. Because if they gain power, then you, the American people, will lose everything. You know, I know I've said this in the past, but it's never been this bad. All right, Grandpa Bernie and aoc, AOC now leading in that New Hampshire poll for. As the leading candidate for 2028. That make you very happy? Make me very happy. I'm fine with that. You have El. Sayed. You know this nut that replaced Graham Platner? His. His. His chosen replacement is almost as nutty as he is. You got six gender. Talarico, God is non binary. Oh, and champion. Yeah. The Christian who hates Christianity. Very popular in Texas. Okay, then you got aoc, the squad.

[RM Brown]

Stephen, you look like a demon.

[Katie Berg]

Yeah.

[Emma Vigeland]

Also. Yeah, right. Pause it for a second. The Christian who hates Christianity. Like this. Is that gonna work? Can they. Can they decide on the tactic if he's transgender or if he's a Christian and isn't he a pastor or preacher or somebody? He's ordained a minister. All right, but I don't even think Stephen Miller is Christian, by the way. I believe that he is a Jewish scientist himself. But. Okay, lecture everybody else on who gets to be a religious person in their chosen faith.

[Stephen Miller]

Aoc, the squad, Mamdani. And no Democrat, but John Fetterman and I give him props every night.

[Ilan Pape]

Yes, will even do.

[Emma Vigeland]

They're literally laughing about him.

[Stephen Miller]

The insanity that now dominates that party. They have 35 DSA candidates running this midterm. 35. Yes. And all the recent primaries that have been contested in the Democratic Party have been won by socialists and Communists. And to your point, minus Fetterman, not a single leader in the Democrat Party has been willing to condemn the Democrat Socialists of America, again, who represent an ideology that in the last century killed tens of millions of people. You have Democratic. Prominent Democratic opinion makers, spokespeople who are praising Mao. These are people. You don't have that.

[Emma Vigeland]

So can you pause it for a sec? I love that, because that's not true. But he's referring to Hasan there because of Hasan's suit, which seems to have broken the brains of so many people over on Fox News. I don't understand. I mean, these are the same people that lost their mind when Obama wore a tan suit. So I guess Hasan with the high collar is really breaking their brains. But let's continue.

[Stephen Miller]

Very popular in the Democratic Party. But that just underscores. Sean, the people you mentioned, the names you mentioned, AOC, Bernie, the Squad, Omar. These are people who even 10 or 15 years ago would have been relegated to the outer extreme fringes of. Bernie was a Democrat Party. They're now the center of the party. The. They're the heart of the party. They're the soul of the party. So the Democrats have become a party of freaks, weirdos, losers, and crazies. But you can't laugh it off, because it's deadly serious. When you give these people power, everything you know and love in this world falls apart. You have chaos, corruption, decay, violence, poverty.

[Ilan Pape]

That's. Yeah, that's how it ends.

[Emma Vigeland]

There we go. So projection. And every accusation is a confession. It's one of the. The tactics that they use most effectively, and Stephen Miller is the most shameless in doing so.

[RM Brown]

I mean, he's a hysterical fascist down

[Emma Vigeland]

to the freaks and losers, which is exactly what was deployed against them in the 2024 cycle and is a lot more accurate when you see that spittling Nazi on television.

[RM Brown]

This idea that they come for your freedoms. This guy has feds occupying the streets, pulling guns on people and shooting them in the streets if they. If their vehicle obstructs an ICE officer. He said that Kamala Harris was gonna support wars, and there's no way Trump just wants to end him. And he's had no reflection on that because he is a demonic foot soldier for white supremacy.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah, and we said this before, that these tactics are gonna be increasingly deployed as they lose their grip on power and public opinion.

[Ilan Pape]

And.

[Emma Vigeland]

And they have the ability to use their ICE Gestapo to terrorize people at polling stations if they have a willing governor. And I worry a lot about that Texas race. I worry about other states that have Republican governors in control. And the fact that they keep mentioning DSA here and they see DSA as a threat should probably be instructive. Because while they're not speaking about it in these fascistic terms, the Democratic establishment has had a similar response to the DSA threat in a way that they haven't had for the fascist one. So it begs the question, where do liberals stand here? There will be some liberals that come to the right side and want Democrats to win. But in terms of moneyed institutions, the Democratic National Committee is in debt right now as the Republicans have over 120, $130 million in cash on hand. Plus Trump's super PAC hasn't spent a dime in these primaries and is sitting on $400 million. The Democrats are so desperate for that corporate cash that they will throw leftists under the bus regardless of what it means for the future of the country. Because the institutions that prop up those same Democrats are the ones that are just more enthusiastic about Republicans. It's a rotten institution and it's weak in its construct by design. And so you have to ask yourself, where have you seen the Democrats fight harder than in primaries against Bernie Sanders, against in primaries against aoc? So he's. Stephen Miller is unfortunately wrong. The Democrats are eschewing this exciting populist left flank and they're having. And the DSA is going to have to take over parts of the Democratic Party in an aggressive manner electorally. I wish that the party was embracing this stuff in the way that Stephen Miller says. But what's unfortunate for people that want to make progressive and change in this country and progress and change people's lives is that no, they're not our only opponent. We have another one in this primary cycle right now that are burning their resources to oppose the left. Instead of sitting on a war chest like the Republicans are for the general

[RM Brown]

election, this idea that we can, the DSA left is going to do some sort of 20th century style atrocities. There's one of those going on right now, and it's in Gaza and the West Bank. Like you guys are doing it. Fetterman supports it. The guy you're touting, y' all are doing it right now. That's why they need to point the finger, because the entire world should be pointing their finger right at these sorts of freaks.

[Emma Vigeland]

In a moment, we're going to be talking to Ilan Pape. I'm very excited about this conversation, one of the most important Israeli historians around. But first, a word from one of Our favorite sponsors. Nutrafol is game changing. And we've spoken about this on the show before. I knew somebody, before I even started working here who had gone through some health issues and had lost a lot of hair. And Nutrafol was a godsend for her and she swears by it. What's different about Nutrafol is that it's actually built like a real game plan. Physician formulated and clinically tested, Nutrafol is the number one dermatologist recommended hair growth supplement brand used by over 1.5 million people. Sam is a Nutrafol customer. I know somebody, I know another person who also swears by it as well. And it's a lot of times people just don't want to take another pharmaceutical for some experiencing hair loss. And that's totally understandable because, you know, those things have side effects. Nutrafol has formulas, though, built for men at different life stages. Nutrafol men for guys 18 to 49 and new neutrophil men 50 plus, which is the first product of its kind specifically made for men over 50. It addresses the key root causes of thinning wherever you're at in life, grow visibly thicker, fuller hair in three to six months. It's not a pharmaceutical, as I mentioned, so it's essentially natural ingredients. You don't have to go to a doctor for it. Nutrafol is a way for you to address some of your issues with hair loss without all of, you know, having to get on another prescription like that, which I know a lot of people don't want to do. Start Nutrafol today and make the hat optional. Visit nutrafol.com and enter promo code TMR10 for $10 off your first month subscription and free shipping. Find out why Nutrafol is the best selling hair growth supplement [e-mail] spelled n u t r a f o l.com promo code tmr. That's nutrafol.com promo code tmr. Link down below in the video and episode descriptions and at Majority fm. All right, quick break and when we come back, we'll be joined by Ilan Pape. We are back. And I'm thrilled to be joined today by Ilan Pape, professor of history at the University of Exeter, director of the university's European center for Palestine Studies, and author of many books that you should be reading, but including Israel on the Brink and the Eight Revolutions that Could Lead to Decolonization and Coexistence. Professor Pape, thanks so much for coming on the show today.

[Ilan Pape]

It's A great pleasure, Emma, to be with you today.

[Emma Vigeland]

The pleasure is all mine. I speak about your work very frequently and recommend it to so many people. So I, I'm very excited to speak to you about kind of a big picture view right now about Israeli society specifically in the shadow of these escalating pogroms in the West Bank. So last time you were on the show, our show over a year ago, we discussed your view that Israeli society was less durable than it may appear. Do you still feel that way even as Israel begins to take territory in the west bank and southern Lebanon and you have Israeli government officials on the Gaza border speaking about how it should be resettled?

[Ilan Pape]

Yes. Even more so because there is a dialectical connection, unfortunately, between a more even an escalation of the extreme behavior, the one or policies on the ground that we've discussed a year ago, and the acceleration, I think, of a more long term process of disintegration and weakening. There are of course, very elastic red lines for those who can stop Israel. We know that even a genocide in Gaza did not cause them to change their policies and impose sanctions and so on. So I don't expect that the president series of pogroms or the declaration today of the Israeli Minister of Defense that he ordered the army to expel another refugee camp in the west bank and totally ethnically cleanse it. I don't expect right now that these escalation would change the response in the region or international community, which I feel are the only factors or actors who can tame the Israelis. But as an historian, I know that there is a moment where there is a limit when a certain Red Cross red line is being crossed. It's very unfortunate that we haven't reached these red lines, but we will reach them. You know, I wouldn't only look at the west bank, look at the Gulf. The Gulf states that normalize relationship with Israel felt that they found the golden mean between normalizing relationship with Israel, having a cordial relationship with Iran and maintaining American bases on their soil. Well, it's not working. It's not working in a very dramatic way. So I do think that certain things that have been happening in the last year since we spoke in the long run would cause some dramatic changes in the, in the views and attitudes of those who have the potential, if not dramatically change the reality on the ground, at least change it for the better. But I'm afraid I'm talking about long term processes as I, as I did last year, and not short term processes

[Emma Vigeland]

in the short term. How does Netanyahu play into this and some of the political headwinds that he is facing domestically in Israel. I mentioned those protests at the Gaza border. Half of Israel's government showed up there and that was pressuring Netanyahu to go further to allow them to settle Gaza. So we understand that the opposition to Benjamin Netanyahu isn't in favor of Palestinian liberation, and yet he's such a central figure in as a wartime leader that, you know, I wonder what your view is about his role in this context.

[Ilan Pape]

Yes, Netanyahu is a bit like a mafia boss who is overseeing a group of unruling and wild, you know, gang members, so to speak, and he doesn't always control them. This is true in two directions. One is the one you mentioned, I mean, the messianic Zionist component of his alliance that are pushing for annexation of the Gaza Strip, annexation of South Lebanon, annexation of parts of South Syria, and of course, total Judaization of the West Bank. The other direction or the other kind of gang members he doesn't always control are the Orthodox Jews and their insistence that their young members of their society would continue to be exempted from military service, which even among his own voters is not a very popular policy. He's a bit of a political magician. I think he would know how to navigate or juggle before the elections, although it's a tall task on his part compared to the previous election campaigns he participated in. But there's a good chance he might still be able to do it, and not only because of his abilities as a politician, but because of also the weakness of the coalition or the opposition, rather, that faces him. It is disunited. It doesn't really offer any significant alternative to the Netanyahu government policies. And its main message is we don't want Bibi Netanyahu. It can work for a while, but, you know, this is not really an alternative. And these are not solution for what a lot of Israelis do feel are problems that they are facing economically, socially. Of course, unfortunately, they don't bother that much about their relationship with the Palestinians. But economically and socially, the implosion from within all of this does trouble them. And they can't find really answers when they go to the leaders of the opposition. Apart from the message we are better than Netanyahu in dealing with these issues.

[Emma Vigeland]

And can you shed some light on Israeli society? I know you're not there right now, but it's very difficult, I think, to get accurate information about those who are leaving Israel up to date totals on population figures and on the economy and Israel so reliant on tourism, it's difficult for me to imagine there being not a serious contraction at the moment. Are those impacts being felt? And obviously it needs to be more acute. You know, sanctions would accelerate this. But is it having an impact at all on Israeli perception of their war aims?

[Ilan Pape]

Yes, there is a kind of a bizarre reality when you examine the Israeli Jewish society right now. If you look at surveys and polls among young Israelis, especially those who just finished high school and are about to be enrolled to the Israeli army, they seem to be even more racist and extreme than the current generation who are in their late 20s and early 30s. So on the one hand, there is. There seems to be a trajectory in the direction that we've talked about last year and we've just talked about today. On the other hand, this clashes with the difficulties that you are pointing to. If you engage in war on five different fronts, it becomes a war economy. And a war economy means that you are not putting money in welfare and other needs of your own society. Not to mention that in the process, you also have to satisfy your allies in the coalition, so there's even less money for the benefit of your own society. Talk to people in the north of Israel for three years. They claim, and they're right, rightly so, that the government has totally forgotten them. They have very little job opportunities, and they have not yet reconstructed the damage that was caused to them by the war of the last three years and so on. You mentioned tourism. Of course, one reason tourism decreases is because it's not a very attractive place to visit these days. But you have to remember Ben Gurion Airport, the only real airport that Israel has, the only exit point for Israel, has gone down to 40% in the numbers of its flights. And the reason is not just the fear of people to come and visit Israel, is because Ben Guyon Airport has turned into an American Air Force base. Most of the big American airplanes that are used to fuel the fueling aircraft, the huge one, are occupying about half of the airport, which doesn't leave many slots for flights for Israeli airlines. So each one of these factors, of course, by itself doesn't change people's quality of life or living conditions, but put together, they begin to impact people. Now, I just want to add something about, you said it's very difficult to gog how many Israelis have left. You're absolutely right. I don't think the Israeli Bureau of Statistics would be very keen to tell us the numbers. But, you know, we have friends who are statisticians and demographers And I believe them. I mean, there are ways apparently of, you know, evaluating, of course, roughly not accurately. So one thing we do know for sure, that among what one can consider the social, economic and cultural elite of the Israeli society, at least 100,000 people bought a one way ticket and already settled in different countries. But there is a larger number, of course involved, not necessarily of people that had capital and jobs that could easily be reignited. But there is great attraction to places where real estate is not very expensive, like Greece, Cyprus, Thailand. In Greece, Cyprus and Thailand, you have now huge expatriates, communities of Israelis with their own newspapers, their own educational system. Not very popular among the natives, so to speak, because of typical Israeli kind of behavior, I suppose, but also because a real estate business means, of course, that you also invest in great projects that usually comes at the expense of the people themselves and increases the. It's kind of a gentrification of the sort, what it causes to the prices of the houses and homes and so on. You know, I'm talking to you from Taroniki. The Israeli community has grown exponentially. And when you talk to people, there's a lot of resentment about the construction projects that they are involved in, both in Saloniki and in the islands, in terms of its connection to Greek heritage, to the landscape, to ecology and so on. So if this is a group that already causes some alienation, of course I'm generalizing. I'm sure some of them are welcome and behave well. But it just shows you that this is a phenomenon, this is a mass immigration. But I don't think we'll ever be able right now to know the exact number. But it's a significant number for a population of 8 million Jewish people.

[Emma Vigeland]

It is amazing to me how I guess I was naive to the ability for our institutions to accurately reflect certain data points. And how much is Israel, their state? Control over such numbers obscures so much of the larger narrative here, including, you know, how people in Gaza have been forced to use an immensely conservative formula for calculating the dead because otherwise they will be smeared as terrorists. And so we've had a doctor on this program, Dr. Tarek Lubani, who said that, you know, if your whole family is bombed in a home, what is the point of taking that family to the hospital for them to be calculated as a part of the dead? They're not included in the death toll though, because they were not officially counted in a hospital and that death did not occur. And so we don't know the true death toll in Gaza by many times over in addition to the lack of information that you're speaking about as well, about what's going on in Israel proper, I guess, and I guess I'm wondering as a historian if there's any precedent for you in understanding this and if it colored, of course, your own challenges in uncovering the true history of Palestine throughout your many works.

[Ilan Pape]

I think there's a difference between what we might be able in the long term to, in finding out, because right now Israel does not allow any journalists, any international investigation to take place on the ground. So we obviously understand that the numbers that is being, quote, between 72 to 73,000 dead and 20,000 children among them is very low compared to the real number of people who were killed in Gaza. And the figures, at least the conservative estimation, is more than 100,000. But I think it's possible that even more as an historian, I think that it's not that unique. I must say, maybe it's a bit more surprising in this particular time of history where we should be able to have access to all these, to this data. But of course, even with the kind of cutting edge technology that we all enjoy, the government still have power in limiting our access. But I think historically, if you look at cases of genocide, like the genocide of the Armenians or the Kurds or the Assyrians, I'm talking only the genocide in my part of the world. But of course, it probably is true to others. It took a long time before the full magnitude of the mass killing and even the methods of the mass killing were uncovered because most of these, and Gaza is a good case for this as well, genocide usually are being perpetrated by government that take over the space where the genocide had occurred. So they have very little incentive in exposing in full what happens. So I think as an historian, I'm not worried so much that in the future we won't be able to uncover the magnitude of the destruction. Of course, as an activist, I'm frustrated like everyone else and outraged that it still goes on because even without the full data, what we know is enough, should be enough for every human being with a modicum of decency in them to do something about this. And it's quite unbearable that. You know, I'm coming back to the announcements this morning by the Israeli Ministry of Defense cuts. He knows that he can openly do a press conference and say the army has been ordered to ethnically cleanse a total refugee camp, another refugee camp, and totally destroy it. And I haven't heard even responses from, you know, ambassadors or embassies or legations in Israel on the ground to this, let alone, you know, any official government. It seems like people say, yes, well that's what the Israelis do. What can we do? But I hope that someone will wake up because every response like this encourages worse actions in the future.

[Emma Vigeland]

You spoke about how Israel, and perhaps I believe you're referring to Smotrich's comments from a little while ago, speaking about the west bank as an inseparable part of Israel and speaking about how settlements are necessary because that land of Judea and Samaria is theirs and that preventing Palestinian construction in the west bank is an anti terroristic act. I mean, the subversion of the truth here and the inversion of it is dystopian. And part of this too is you argue that Israeli society has transitioned from an ideology of Zionism to neo Zionism. How do you draw that distinction and what are the features of neo Zionism?

[Ilan Pape]

Well, every ideology to begin with has precepts, principles, assumptions if you want, that remain as long as the ideological movement is alive, whether as a movement or as a state. However, the implementation of these principles, the vision, changes with time according to the capacity of the movement or the state, the resistance to the policies and so on. So I think the difference between Zionism and neo Zionism is not so much in the change of the basic vision, namely that Palestine was and has to be a Jewish state or Jewish homeland and every means is justified in achieving that vision and nothing on the ground, including the presence of millions of indigenous people, is not going to change it in this respect. These are variation of the theme if you want. However, if you look at more classical Zionism, so to speak, or mainstream Zionism over the years there was an awareness that there is a limit to the implementation and even if there are challenges because of self limitations that the movement itself imposed on itself, this is a price to be paid because of the complex reality on the ground. For example, the idea was we may not be able to have the whole of historical Palestine, at least not all of it, under direct Israeli rule, or we'll have to come to some sort of an agreement with some Palestinians. We have to take into account the position of the international community we'll have to find living together as a Jewish society, even if there are real tensions between secular and religious Jews. If you want. It was a more pragmatic implementation of the vision compared to the neo. The messianic neo Zionist vision that doesn't have the patience, is not interested in pragmatic implementation. In fact, it regards pragmatism as a weakness, almost as defeatism, and in some cases even as treason. And therefore it works under the assumption that there is a window of opportunity that has to be exhausted. Window of opportunity that was created by divine intervention, of course, not by human beings, but you have to exploit that gift that was given to you. So the whole notion of how to implement the idea that the land of Palestine is the land of Israel and it belongs only to the Jewish people has to be implemented in a revolutionary way, not an evolutionary way. So it's far more extreme, it's far more violent, it's far more explicit in its discourse, as you yourself mentioned when you talked about Smotridge. And it's far more lisal for those who are at the receiving end of the Zionist project right now in 2026, mostly Palestinians, but also people in South Lebanon, in Syria and Iran. And I think what is interesting to follow there is a new group of victims, so to speak. I'm not going to put them on the same pedestal as the Palestinian victims, but quite an important number of what you might call secular Zionists are seen by the neo Zionists as enemies, in fact, in some cases worse than the Palestinians. Because you, the idea is that you can understand the Palestinian position, of course, you have to fight them and destroy them, but you cannot understand the treason of the secular Jews, which is one of these indicators that I mentioned in my book for an impossibility to create a Jewish society in the long term. I think this is leading to a serious implosion from within. But it's still a very slow process and it will accelerate only a bit. Not a bit. It would accelerate later.

[Emma Vigeland]

And another, I think, and we can wrap here shortly, Professor Pape, but another contradiction that I think is important to flesh out here that I know that you've spoken about, is how the construction of international law is also imploding in this current context and how international law as a creation of, you know, coming out of the Holocaust and of World War II in its current form was post colonial, but not post settler colonial. And it had very key carve outs for settler colonial projects like Israel and like ones that the United States would be party to. Can you speak about that and how we're in a moment of reckoning for that very system that has that glaring exclusion.

[Ilan Pape]

So just I said that the genocide in Gaza was acting like an epicenter in an earthquake, sort of exposing what is wrong with international law, what is wrong with the international morality, the kind that was formulated after the Second World War without consultation with the colonized world and it comes to bytows. I think the fact that it's a Western moral project rather than a universal one. And it became clear because Israel is considered to be part of the Western project, part of Western European project. And if international law does not apply to it and it seems very difficult for the west to apply international law to Israel, then there is this exceptionalism puts a big question on the validity of international law as a whole. It doesn't mean that we can do without international law. It just means we have to reformulate it and to rethink about its origins and its lack of application and relevance, confidence in this system. And it seems to be applied only to the enemies of the west, but not to the west itself.

[Emma Vigeland]

Well, Professor Pape, I really appreciate your time today. And look, we only really had a tech glitch right towards the end of our conversation. Professor of history at the University of Exeter, director of the university's European center for Palestine Studies and of course, please read all of Professor Pape's books, including Israel on the Brink and the Eight Revolutions that Could Lead to Decolonization and Coexistence. Thanks so much for your time today. I really appreciate it.

[Ilan Pape]

Thank you very much. Thank you.

[Emma Vigeland]

Thank you.

[Ilan Pape]

Thank you very much.

[Emma Vigeland]

With that, folks, we're going to just take a quick break and when we come back, we'll be joined by Katie Berg of the center on Budget and Policy Priorities to talk about about the Republicans cuts to SNAP and how they're making their effects felt. We'll be right back. We are back. And we are joined now by Katie Berg, senior policy analyst on the Food assistance team at the center on Budget and Policy Priorities, here to Talk about the CBPB's latest analysis, snap Tracker. People are losing food assistance as the harmful 2025 Republican reconciliation law is implemented. Katie, thank you so much for coming on the show today.

[Katie Berg]

Thanks for having me.

[Emma Vigeland]

Of course. So the center on Budget and Policy Priorities, your organization, as I mentioned, has been analyzing the impacts of the 2025 Republican budget, Republican budget reconciliation law, known as the one big beautiful bill, one big ugly bill, whatever you want to call it, but specifically on SNAP food assistance. And now it's been a year since its implementation. What have you found?

[Katie Berg]

Yeah. So the Republican reconciliation law that was enacted last summer included the deepest SNAP cuts in history. And in the wake of those cuts, millions of low income people across the country are losing access to the food assistance that they need to afford groceries. So in the nine months between when that law passed back in July 2025 and April 2026, which is the most recent month that we have data for all states. The number of people receiving SNAP in this country fell by more than four and a half million people. That's a roughly 11% drop in just nine months. And that means that SNAP participation is falling and low income people are losing SNAP at the fastest rate in roughly three decades, going back to the last time that Congress enacted deep snap cuts in 1996. And we know that this is impacting families with children as well. While the data is a little bit more limited because most states don't publish more detailed demographic data on who is receiving SNAP in anything close to real time, we do now have data on the number of kids receiving SNAP each month from 19 states. And extrapolating from that data, it is very likely that at least one and a half million fewer children nationwide are now receiving SNAP benefits in the wake of these cuts.

[Emma Vigeland]

It's just horrifying. And I want to talk about Alaska and then we can talk about where the impacts are being felt most acutely because your study showed that SNAP participation dropped in every state except for one, Alaska. And that's key because people may forget that she, Lisa Murkowski, I should say the senator from Alaska was the decisive vote for this bill and she held out for a while. And then her explanation for voting for it was that she did what was best for Alaskans and what she essentially secured was a two year delay for these cost sharing penalties under snap. So there's a reason, and you can see it tangibly that Alaska is not being as impacted as the rest of the country because Trump cut this deal with Murkowski to exclude for two years Alaska from some of these penalties. If you could explain what those were.

[Katie Berg]

R. Sure. So I think it's important to look at the There are a number of different ways that the reconciliation law made these unprecedented cuts to snap. So first it changed the eligibility rules so that many people no longer qualify for SNAP at all, most notably by dramatically expanding the number of people who are subject to the program's longstanding and very harsh work requirement, which limits many adults to only three months of benefits unless they can prove that they're working a minimum number of hours or prove that they qualify for an exemption. There are some specific exemptions that are applicable to non contiguous states like Alaska, that is mitigating the impact of that particular cut right now. The reconciliation law also reduced the benefit amount that many households who remain eligible will receive. So even if people are still connected to the program, they may be getting less each month. But most importantly, the reconciliation law also upended how SNAP is funded. So it slashes federal funding for SNAP and shifts those costs onto state budgets. And it's increasingly clear that that last point, these massive cost shifts are driving very significant changes in how states administer SNAP that are causing many families who are in fact still eligible to be denied assistance altogether or to go for long stretches without SNAP benefits because of paperwork backlogs. And that's what we think is causing many eligible families, including families with children, to lose SNAP again. Even though they still qualify, they can't get through what is now a much more difficult process to get and keep the benefits they need. And Alaska is in a little bit of a unique situation because they are very likely to benefit from the special carve out you mentioned where they get up to two additional years before they face some of these very significant, cautious to the state budget.

[Emma Vigeland]

And the. I'm sure there are other Republicans that were like, hey, I wish I could have cut this kind of deal. I wish I could have been the deciding voter, held out to save my state from the worst of these SNAP cuts. And yet that's not what happened. I mean, some of these, these numbers are astonishing in states like Florida, but Arizona, those figures are horrendous. The 55% decline, Louisiana, Florida, Oklahoma, also significant declines. What is behind those states that are experiencing the worst of the participation rate or the worst numbers? They're seeing the worst participation rate numbers because of all of what you just described.

[Katie Berg]

Yeah, so this is not a blue state problem, it's not a red state problem, it's not a purple state problem. These cuts are going to hit states across the political spectrum. And I think that's, it's important to understand the magnitude of the cost shifts from the federal government onto state budgets, because that is driving a lot of the deepest impact. So historically, states and the federal government split the cost of operating SNAP 5050 while the federal government paid the full cost of the benefits themselves. And that ensured that eligible families who were seeking help from SNAP could get it even if they lived in a state that may have had higher rates of poverty and fewer resources. But the reconciliation law actually changes both aspects of SNAP's funding in ways that are really upending program operations and harming eligible families. So federal funding for those administrative costs, which covers the workers making eligibility decisions, the technology the state is using, even the EBT cards themselves, that gets cut in half. So states will be picking up a much larger share of the tab for the day to day operations of the program. And states that don't make up for that lost federal funding will likely see, you know, staffing shortages, overloaded phone lines, processing backlogs that leave people waiting for months without the help that they need. And then starting on October 1, 2027, most states will be required to start paying a portion of the SNAP benefit costs for the first time ever. And that is a much bigger hit to state budgets. We estimate that will add up to a roughly $9 billion hit to state budgets total in just the first year. And almost half of states will face 100 million more in new costs. And that's where the impact on eligible families come in. Because right now, even before that enormous bill comes due for states, they're staring down the barrel of these massive new costs and are racing to reduce their exposure. Exposure to them. And what actually determines how much states will be required to pay towards SNAP benefits is their, their payment error rate. In snap, that's a very technical measure of the extent to which they have mistakenly issued households the wrong amount of SNAP benefits. So we're talking about too much, too little. Largely reflecting unintentional mistakes by state eligibility workers and families in a program with really complicated rules. But the law only gave states a very, very short window of time to lower their error rates before their cost sharing requirement is set, and those massive new costs are locked in. So we're seeing some states taking some pretty extreme steps to try to lower their error rate as quickly as possible, even if it means making it much, much more difficult for eligible families to access the help that they need.

[Emma Vigeland]

So, and that's where Arizona, that's why Arizona is so much higher, essentially, because they're trying to head off these eventual cuts, Is that what you're saying?

[Katie Berg]

Yes. I think the really important thing to understand is that under SNAP rules, delaying benefits while you recheck every eligible element of eligibility, or even outright denying SNAP to an eligible family doesn't count as an error. So what families are experiencing in Arizona and many other parts of the country is that the process to get and keep their benefits has suddenly gotten a lot more confusing. It's required them to track down a ton of documentation that they've never been asked for before. It's meant waiting a lot longer for their applications to get approved, and at the same time, it's gotten harder and harder to reach anyone if they need help getting through all of that red tape. So families are losing SNAP when they get stuck in those bureaucratic obstacles and because understaffed states just can't keep up with all of that additional paperwork.

[Emma Vigeland]

And so what, what you're essentially saying here is that once this kind of race to get this calculation in order is done, it's going to be worse, participation is going to be worse. What are you anticipating next year because of this?

[Katie Berg]

So I think this is already having an impact on families experience of trying to get through the process to access the benefits they need. But the impact will get much worse when it comes time to states, for states to actually pay this new cost sharing requirements for benefits. And that's because states have to balance their budgets. So covering those costs means that they will either have to raise taxes or find other programs and services in their state budget to cut. And if they can't fully cover those costs, they'll need to further restrict access to SNAP so that they can fulfill their cost sharing requirement for what is now a much smaller program that reaches far fewer people or they may need to withdraw from the program entirely. So this is something that could actually end Snap's 50 year status as a nationwide program that's available to people in all 50 states.

[Emma Vigeland]

And man.

[RM Brown]

So

[Emma Vigeland]

the impact on children, can you expand a little bit more on that? Because snap, disproportionately, these cuts impact children in particular, you mentioned it earlier. But how are children going to face the brunt of these cuts to food assistance?

[Katie Berg]

Yeah, I'm glad you asked that because at the time that this law passed, what you heard over and over from Republican lawmakers was that these cuts were not about taking benefits away from kids, that kids would not be impacted, that we were just expanding requirements for adults and it wouldn't impact kids. And the data has made very clear that that is not the case because families with children, just like everyone else, lose access to SNAP when they can't get through those added bureaucratic obstacles in that red tape. And in fact, families with children, many of whom are working families, are perhaps the least likely to be able to sit on hold all day trying to get through on an overloaded phone line when they need help with their benefits, or they can't take time off work to travel in person to a social services office to try to get someone to actually help them navigate these additional paperwork hurdles. So in many ways, these types of this red tape, these bureaucratic obstacles fall, can fall most heavily on families with kids. And I think it's hard to overstate the devastating impact of even short periods of food insecurity for children. Right. And that is what we are seeing. We're seeing families who are where the parents are skipping meals because they want to make sure that their kids get enough, where the family is choosing between buying groceries and paying for other essentials like rent and utilities. And when kids lose access to snap, they also lose automatic links to other programs and support. So kids who lose access to SNAP are also losing the automatic eligibility for free meals at school. They may still be eligible if they fill out a household application or they attend a school where all students get free meals without paperwork. But it does increase the risk that that loss of SNAP will compound as they lose access to other supports. Well,

[Emma Vigeland]

really appreciate your time today. Katie Berg explaining some really tough news for us. But it's what we anticipated and we will, I'm sure, have you on at some point, perhaps next year once some of these, you know, looming changes occur. Katie Berg, senior policy analyst on the Food Assistance Team at the center on Budget and Policy Priorities, thanks so much for your time today. I really appreciate it.

[Katie Berg]

Thank you. Take care.

[Emma Vigeland]

Thanks, you too, folks. With that, we're going to wrap up the free part of this program and head into the fun half. We will probably take some calls today. Read your IMs for sure. We'll cover the Michigan debate last night. What else do we got? We got do we have time to

[RM Brown]

cover the debate or should we look into Abdullah said manners behind the scenes about John Fetterman close more closely.

[Emma Vigeland]

Why not both? Why not both? That might come up within that context.

[RM Brown]

Called Fetterman a what I know. And what if he said that about a woman?

[Emma Vigeland]

Yes. Well, they tried to like I guess get that story out there and tyranny Fetterman to Stevens and like he was like I was referring to John Fetterman as an ogre, which is that that news story probably helped him in the Democratic primary. I think Democratic primary voters in Michigan love John Fetterman.

[Ilan Pape]

I could see how they got confused

[Katie Berg]

though, that he was talking about.

[Emma Vigeland]

I understand. I mean I think her vibe is more gremlin.

[RM Brown]

But we can go with ogre, a category error here. Katie Porter, if she had great politics, I wouldn't care a lot less about actually I don't really care about more than like her personal conduct like this. This conduct policing like Platner was a problem because he was accused of a crime. Yeah, the personal conduct sort of policing by Democratic Party establishment that by the way put a philanderer into the White house in the 90s and it caught up with them like also accused rapists. I would say like more than just a philander. But Confirmed philander. Like, this is not what anyone's in politics for. This is not what people like. I don't care if you called Haley Stevens an ogre behind closed doors. I don't care what Talarico said to a supporter behind closed doors. This behind closed doors, people's manners is worse than you think. Attack coming from moderates, no one gives a shit.

[Emma Vigeland]

Even less so honestly, grow up then then than before.

[Ilan Pape]

Also, there's nothing more Midwestern than being polite in public and then very rude about people.

[RM Brown]

This, this is a political gander.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah.

[RM Brown]

This is a political class that is arming and ethnic cleansing and genocide.

[Emma Vigeland]

Well, when you can't talk about the substance of policies, you can talk about manners. I mean, that's exactly why they lean into that is because they'd rather it be about anything except what each of these candidates stand for.

[RM Brown]

This whole that we just talked about, these SNAP benefits getting cut and the rise in childhood hunger that we've seen in the past few years from that. And yes, I will blame Manchin for that sort of stuff, but also how many of the Jan6 Republicans that AIPAC supported supported the Republicans that were also down for cutting that stuff? And we still have Democrats that say, like, yeah, I'm going to accept AIPAC money because that's just money from Jewish Americans. No, it's money from fascist Jewish Americans

[Emma Vigeland]

and also fascist Christian Americans.

[RM Brown]

Well, that's Kufi. Yeah.

[Emma Vigeland]

Oh, yeah. Well, I mean, aipac, look, I imagine that they're uniting a little bit, but. Yes, very true. By the way, are you talking about that on Left Reckoning and Jacobin Show? What's going on?

[RM Brown]

Oh, actually we got a very fun show coming up after the program today. I got my hands on this full 80 minute sit down Elon Musk did with Editor in Chief of the economy.

[Emma Vigeland]

Oh, nice.

[RM Brown]

And we talk about a number of things, including him getting very upset about being told how unpopular he is. And he says, I don't care about how unpopular I am. Actually, I am popular because I have so many Twitter followers and you're the one that's unpopular. Which was a brilliant response. He also, we didn't talk about it, but he said zero people were killed by the USAID cuts. And I thought like, okay, we're gonna have to really, like hit the books to counter his argument there. But his argument was because if there would have been, then the Gates foundation and other NGOs could have stepped in to fill the void. And it's like. Well, to the extent that like antiviral Medicines and that sort of stuff could be filled. The United States government's gonna be the best at doing that than your stupid, like, fellow friends of Jeffrey Epstein doing NGO work.

[Emma Vigeland]

But yeah.

[RM Brown]

So that's coming up right after the show today. Patreon.com left reckoning with RM Brown.

[Emma Vigeland]

Whoa. Very fun show. All right, folks. Hey, like this stream. How about that? Maybe once we get popular enough, we can get off the 480p train, which is a little distracting for me in interviews sometimes, but I'm working on it. Working on not getting distracted.

[RM Brown]

Hopeless.

[Ilan Pape]

Because both the other guests Internet was shaky too. I'm like, is there even good Internet out there?

[Emma Vigeland]

I mean, there has to be.

[RM Brown]

I mean, we can have. We don't need to rely on the Internet for the local cameras anymore.

[Emma Vigeland]

Okay, we're working on it. But, you know, you could accelerate some of our technological improvements. No promises, but maybe if you go to jointhemajorityreport.com you can help the show survive and thrive. And just like the stream, get it into people's feeds. That helps. Comment if you'd like, but only if you have something nice to say. Okay, I'm too fragile here. I'm too fragile. Join themjorityreport.com all right, guys, see you in the fun half.

[RM Brown]

Okay?

[Sam Cedar]

Emma, please.

[Emma Vigeland]

Well, I just. I feel that my voice is sorely lacking on the majority report.

[Sam Cedar]

Wait, look, Sam is unpopular. I do deserve a vacation at Disney World World. So, ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to welcome Emma to the show.

[Katie Berg]

It is Thursday.

[RM Brown]

I think you need to take over for Sam.

[Sam Cedar]

Yes, please. No, no, no. I'm gonna pause you right there.

[RM Brown]

Wait, what?

[Sam Cedar]

You can't encourage Emma to live like this.

[Ilan Pape]

And I'll tell you why.

[Sam Cedar]

Someone's offered a tour. Sushi and poker with boys. Tour, sushi and poker with boys. Who was offered a tour?

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah.

[Sam Cedar]

Sushi and poker. Boys. Boys. What? Twerk, sushi and poker.

[Katie Berg]

Tim's upset.

[Sam Cedar]

Twerk, sushi and poker with boys. It was offered twerk sushi, and that's what we call biz. Twerk, sushi and bulker with three boys.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right.

[Sam Cedar]

Twerk sushi.

[Emma Vigeland]

We're gonna get demonetized.

[Sam Cedar]

I just think that what you did to Tim pool was mean free speech. That's not what we're about here. Look at how sad he's become now. You shouldn't even talk about him. I think you're responsible.

[Emma Vigeland]

I probably am in a certain way. But let's get to the meltdown here.

[Sam Cedar]

Sushi and poker with the boys. Oh, my God.

[Ilan Pape]

Wow.

[Sam Cedar]

Sushi. I'm sorry. I'm losing my mind. Someone's offered a tour. Sushi and poker with boys Logic. Sushi and poker. I think I'm like a little kid. I think I'm like a little kid. I think I'm like a kid. I think I'm like a little kid. I think I'm like a little Kid. Add this debate 7,000 in time. I'm losing my mind. So I'm not trying to be a dip right now, but, like, I absolutely think the US should be providing me with a wife and kids.

[Emma Vigeland]

That's not what we're talking about here, all right?

[Sam Cedar]

It's not a fun job.

[Stephen Miller]

Twerk.

[Sam Cedar]

That's a real thing. That's real thing. Real thing. Willy wonk. That's a real thing. That's got thing. That's a real thing. That's real thing. That's a real thing. That's offered to twerk. Ladies and gentlemen, Joe Rogan has done it again. That's a real thing. I think he might be blowing it out of proportion. Real thing. That's boy offered. That's a real thing. That's. Let's go, Joey. Twerk, sushi and poke Boy. Take it easy. Twerk, sushi and poker. Things have really gotten out of hand. Sushi and poker with delusional twerk sushi. You don't have a clue as to what's going on live YouTube.

[Emma Vigeland]

Sam has twi the weight of the

[Sam Cedar]

world on his shoulders.

[Emma Vigeland]

Sam doesn't want to do this show anymore.

[Sam Cedar]

Anymore.

[Emma Vigeland]

It was so much easier when the majority report was just you.

[Sam Cedar]

Let's change the subject.

[Ilan Pape]

Rangers and Nixon grand.

[Emma Vigeland]

Now shut up. Don't want people saying reckless things on your program.

[Ilan Pape]

That's one of the most difficult parts about this show.

[Emma Vigeland]

This is the pro killing podcast.

[Sam Cedar]

I'm thinking maybe it's time to bury the hatchet.

[Emma Vigeland]

Left his best trump. Pilot twerk.

[Sam Cedar]

Don't be foolish and don't tweet at me. And don't.

[Ilan Pape]

The way Emma has cucked all of these people.

[Sam Cedar]

Love it.

[Emma Vigeland]

That's where my heart is. So I wrote my honors thesis about it.

[Sam Cedar]

She wrote an honest thesis.

[RM Brown]

Is.

[Sam Cedar]

I guess I should hand the main

[Ilan Pape]

mic to you now.

[Sam Cedar]

You are to the right of me on foreign policy.

[Emma Vigeland]

We already formed Israel. Dude. Are you against us?

[Sam Cedar]

That's a tougher question.

[Katie Berg]

I have an answer to.

[Sam Cedar]

Incredible theme song.

[Emma Vigeland]

Hi, bumbler.

[Ilan Pape]

Emma Viland. Absolutely one of my favorite people.

[RM Brown]

Actually.

[Ilan Pape]

Not just in the game like period.