General

Matt Goodwin: An explosive new report reveals where the “mainstream” in Britain really lies

/24 Comments/in /by

“Most people reject the anti-British, anti-Western, anti-science, and fanatically pro-diversity woke outlook that unites the increasingly extreme and dogmatic ‘progressive’ class that controls the institutions.”

Still way too many Brits don’t get it.

An explosive new report reveals where the “mainstream” in Britain really lies

And what our readers have known for a very long time!

For years now, rebellious voters who oppose what is being inflicted on Western nations have been written off as cranks, extremists, weirdos, and loons.

Question mass immigration? Complain about broken borders? Wonder whether your country is losing its identity? Or whether the deeper social contract that holds a nation together is starting to collapse?

Ask about any of these things and you’ll soon be viewed by the establishment as not just voicing legitimate concerns but somebody who is flirting with extremism, fuelling division, peddling hate, even moving along a pathway towards terrorism.

Which is why I wanted to write about the findings of a major new report, Britain Under Strain, which not only blows apart these establishment narratives but shows just how widespread these concerns and anxieties have become in modern Britain.

Despite being produced by the ominous sounding UK Extremism and Democratic Resilience Centre and shadowy ‘counter-extremism’ industry, which often appears more interested in trying to control what people think than addressing their actual concerns, the report does draw on a wealth of new polling and data and so is forced to finally acknowledge what millions of ordinary people — including tens of thousands who read this newsletter—have been saying and feeling for many years.

What it finds, in short, is that many of the arguments and views that are held by the silent majority, which we have been tirelessly representing, are not those of some fringe minority but a radicalised majority of people who have simply had enough of what is happening to their country and culture.

The headline finding?

Close to two-thirds of all British people now think the social contract in their country between the people and the state is completely broken — something we’ve been pointing to for a while.

Nearly two-thirds of the entire country, in other words, rising to more than eight in ten Reform party voters, have now concluded that the unwritten bargain between the people and the state — that the people will obey the law and pay taxes so long as the state keeps them safe and secure — is no longer fit for purpose.

Why do so many people feel this way? It’s not because we’ll all suddenly morphed into extremists. Far from it. It’s because, as the report makes clear, millions of people have now reached the entirely logical conclusion that our governments, whether Labour or Tory, do not keep their promises, cannot be trusted, do not represent ordinary people, and, perhaps most crucially, cannot even be bothered to perform their most important duty of all — protecting our borders and keeping us safe.

This is exactly what we’ve been warning for years: the longer hapless politicians in Westminster refuse to do whatever is necessary to fix our broken borders, the more likely it is they will destabilise the entire system, tear up the social contract, and push our society further and further into the abyss. And this is no longer just our view; two-thirds of the entire country now agree with it.

And that’s not the only finding that stands out. A clear majority of British people — some 55 per cent of the entire country — now believe British identity is disappearing because of “diversity”. A view that is also held by an even larger majority of 61 per cent among white British people and 90 per cent of Reform party voters.

Let me say that again: more than half of all people in Britain and more than three-fifths of all white Brits have now concluded that diversity is undermining their distinctive sense of British identity — their sense of who we are as a nation.

While this is routinely dismissed in mainstream media, which wants you to think such views are entirely unacceptable, in reality this deep and profound anxiety about what mass immigration and rapid demographic change are doing to British identity has become a fully mainstream view, endorsed by a large majority. And here’s something else you’ll never hear about on BBC Verify: close to one-quarter of all non-white people in Britain hold this view, too.

This is not about whites versus non-whites; it is about a broad, growing coalition of patriotic people who no longer support the establishment’s insistence that diversity is “making us stronger”. On the contrary, the silent majority openly disagree with the narrative that the likes of Sadiq Khan, Keir Starmer, Zack Polanski, Carol Vorderman, and SW1-BBC Land are constantly jamming down our throats. Diversity is not making us stronger, they think — it is now out of control and eroding who we are.

And there are many other findings hidden away in this report that should likewise make the political, media, and university class sit up and take notice.

Because for years now, all we’ve been told is that the ‘mainstream’ of British politics is a place that happens to reflect the tastes, priorities, political loyalties, and ideological beliefs of liberal progressives — left-learning, urban, financially secure if not affluent university graduates who only represent about 12 per cent of the population yet wield enormous power because they dominate all of the major institutions in society.

But as the report makes clear, this could not be further from the truth. The real mainstream lies elsewhere, among a silent majority of people who hold far more traditional views, who reject the woke takeover of our institutions, who have come to the view that mass immigration and rapid demographic change are weakening British identity, and who can see that unless we change course we are heading for disaster.

A large majority of British people, for instance, believe it is patriotic to fight for Britain (81 per cent), to pledge allegiance to the King (68 per cent), to defend British history (76 per cent), and to protect Christian values (52 per cent).

Large majorities reject the assertion that Britain’s foreign policy is driven by ‘racist and colonial attitudes’, as well as the claim that Britain is somehow organised to mainly benefit white people.

Consistently, in other words, most people reject the anti-British, anti-Western, anti-science, and fanatically pro-diversity woke outlook that unites the increasingly extreme and dogmatic ‘progressive’ class that controls the institutions.

While it is true that younger people, Labour voters, and Green voters are much more likely to hold these views, the key point is that the silent majority — millions of people who are dismissed and stigmatised as laying beyond the pale — do not. Yet too often the establishment acts as though this silent majority does not exist at all.

Belief in the existence of ‘two-tier Britain’ is also becoming far more widespread than the establishment would like us to think. While only one in ten Brits think that white people are more likely than average to get away with breaking the law, close to one in three people now think that migrants and asylum-seekers are able to escape justice.

The establishment routinely suggests that believing in the idea of a two-tier society is a conspiracy theory for cranks, an indicator of far-right extremism. Does this mean that roughly one in every three people in Britain have fallen into the abyss?

Or does it mean they can see something the state refuses to admit — that when you flood our schools, universities, police, health service, and civil service with divisive, race-based ideologies like Critical Race Theory you are indeed setting us up to live in a two-tier society where some identity groups are prioritised over others.

Again, when a large number of people in a society have come to the view that immigrants, asylum-seekers, and newcomers are being treated more favourably by the state than than their own national citizens then I would suggest the social contract is not just coming apart but is at risk of collapsing altogether.

Lastly, these views and how they are being ignored or mocked by the establishment might also explain something else that comes through in this report: how a large swathe of Britain is now willing to endorse far more radical political options.

Such as the fact that some 40 per cent of people — a minority but still a large number of people — saw the recent ‘Unite the Kingdom’ rally in London not as a gathering of racists and extremists but as “a show of patriotism from people with valid concerns about migration, diversity and the future of the country”.

Or that one-third of all British people — rising to four in ten Tories and six in ten Reform voters — now openly say they would support a policy of ‘remigration’ — the idea that migrants, whether illegal or legal, should be encouraged or forced to return to their countries of origin so as to preserve Britain’s distinctive identity and culture.

Whether you agree with these views or not is beside the point. My point is they are now held by millions of ordinary people who, for years now, have held entirely legitimate worries about the direction of their country yet have been consistently and grossly caricatured as ignorant, backward, extremist, fringe, or dangerous.

Instead of asking why these views have become far more widespread in modern Britain and then addressing the grievances, the establishment has simply decided to delegitimise the people expressing them. But this is a profound mistake. You cannot rebuild trust in a society by telling your own citizens their concerns are illegitimate.

That’s perhaps why this newsletter of ours has become one of the largest independent, counter-cultural newsletters in Britain, if not Europe. Not because readers always agree with every word I write. But because — long before politicians, journalists and institutions were prepared to admit it — this community of ours recognised that something fundamental has shifted, even if the governing class failed to spot it.

For years now, we’ve argued that Britain’s crisis is not simply about economics and GDP. It’s about something deeper — a broken social contract, collapsing public trust, and a palpable, overwhelming, and unavoidable belief out there among the people that mass immigration, porous borders, and a distant governing class are not just pushing Western nations in the wrong direction — they are actively destroying them.

This report does not endorse every argument I’ve made. But it does do something that is perhaps more significant. It shows that the underlying concerns that people like us share are no longer confined to the fringe — they are now recognised by even parts of the establishment as representing mainstream views.

And that, if nothing else, should give us cause for cautious optimism. Because once the truth starts to come out, and is even being recognised through gritted teeth by those who have been trying to conceal it, then it can no longer be ignored. And once the truth is acknowledged then political change will inevitably follow.

Haaretz op-ed: Lindsey Graham’s death leaves Israel without a clear voice in Trump’s ear

/15 Comments/in /by

Well, I guess Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro will have to step up their game.
“Graham’s hits on Fox News and his posts on X concerning Israel and the Middle East were often messages effectively lifted from Netanyahu’s mind and aimed at an audience of one.”

Ben Samuels:

Americans woke up on Sunday to the shocking news of Sen. Lindsey Graham’s unexpected death. They also rose to the universal outpouring of condolences and mourning from Israeli officials across the political spectrum – who typically fail to agree on little else – alongside remembrances from families of October 7 hostages and pro-Israel advocates, who absorbed the news in real time thanks to the overnight announcement of his passing by Graham’s office.

It is fitting that the first iterations of Graham’s obituaries and eulogies were written by the country that came to singularly define his legacy as the primary Republican advocate for Middle East interventionism, who nearly always pushed U.S. policy in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s desired direction.

Graham’s domestic political legacy will undoubtedly be viewed as a case study of our time. He was a man who unequivocally dedicated his life to public service, long considered a maverick alongside his best friends John McCain and Joe Lieberman, all of whom would buck party groupthink in favor of pursuing what they deemed right.

This once extended to Graham’s fierce opposition to U.S. President Donald Trump during his initial political ascendance, only to cross his previously marked lines in the sand with increasing audacity in order to bring himself closer into Trump’s orbit.

Perhaps no leader in the world benefited from this more than Netanyahu. Graham, like no other U.S. lawmaker or adviser, consistently had Trump’s full attention on matters relating to foreign policy. He served as both a private middleman between Trump and Netanyahu, but also as a megaphone for pushing Netanyahu’s party line in public forums.

It was true during Trump’s first term but even more so during his current stint in the White House: Graham’s hits on Fox News and his posts on X concerning Israel and the Middle East were often messages effectively lifted from Netanyahu’s mind and aimed at an audience of one.

Graham’s advocacy clearly made a difference, and he knew how to speak Trump’s language like few others. From the moment he was on Air Force One alongside Trump wearing a “Make Iran Great Again” hat, it was clear that Netanyahu had a voice firmly planted in Trump’s ear.

Even when Graham would publicly urge Israel to pump the brakes, it was clear that it was more about coaching Israel on how to navigate choppy waters in Washington than it was about slapping Israel on the wrist.

Right until his last moments of life, Graham maintained a mile-high view of Israel’s standing in both Washington and the greater Middle East. He continuously pushed for normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia, even when it became abundantly clear that there was no bandwidth for such a paradigm-shifting development, to the point where it almost felt as though he was trying to will the breakthrough into existence.

Graham’s death is a significant blow to Israel’s influence on Trump’s thinking at a time when so much of its regional concerns are on the precipice. His passing, however, represents so much more. There is no logical successor among GOP hawks who possesses his charisma, access, and blatant embrace of ladder-climbing.

His death comes at a time when Republicans are openly disputing like never before about the party’s future, and when Israel has come to play a central role in the GOP’s hostile debates. Israel’s standing in America only stands to continue its downward spiral with both parties and with young people across the political spectrum. Now that Graham is gone, it is unclear who will take up the mantle. It is unclear if anyone even can.

Afghan Asylum Seeker Walks Free After Sexually Assaulting Multiple Young Girls At German Pool

/4 Comments/in /by

Modernity News: Afghan Asylum Seeker Walks Free After Sexually Assaulting Multiple Young Girls At German Pool

A 21-year-old Afghan asylum seeker stands accused of sexually assaulting at least four girls between the ages of 12 and 14 at the Bud Spencer outdoor pool in Schwäbisch Gmünd, southwestern Germany.

According to police accounts detailed in German media coverage, the suspect touched the victims on their buttocks or thighs and attempted to pull down their bikini bottoms. In one instance he reportedly tried to penetrate a girl’s intimate area with his fingers. The girls resisted and fought him off before he stopped.

Police reports confirm the attacks occurred in the adventure pool area, yet an arrest warrant was suspended under limited conditions that do little to shield the public from further risk.

Authorities have indicated they do not rule out additional victims and continue to seek witnesses. The suspect was arrested, but a judge suspended the arrest warrant subject to conditions, including a ban on entering public swimming pools. Incredibly he has walked free pending the outcome of the investigation.

This case fits a recurring pattern of sexual violence and harassment targeting women and children in German public swimming facilities.

Prior investigations have laid bare the scale of the problem through official statistics and internal assessments that reveal stark disparities in perpetrator backgrounds.

Research established that 65 percent of sexual assault suspects in swimming pools were foreigners.

Separate analysis showed foreigners vastly overrepresented in sexual assaults as well as other crimes committed at these locations.

Another examination concluded that German authorities have not been fully honest about the identities of those assaulting children at swimming pools, with patterns of omission in official and media descriptions.

Coverage of the Schwäbisch Gmünd incident itself drew attention to selective reporting practices. Some German outlets described the suspect only as a 21-year-old man without noting his Afghan nationality, consistent with earlier criticisms of incomplete disclosure around perpetrator backgrounds in similar cases.

An internal assessment cited in reporting on the broader trend confirmed a surge in sex crimes at bathing establishments. It stated particular concern over rape and the sexual abuse of children, noting that the perpetrators are for the most part immigrants.

The president of the Federal Association of German Swimming Champions previously warned that he could no longer recommend families visit outdoor pools on weekends, adding that he would be acting irresponsibly if he took his own three grandchildren.

These documented realities have prompted concrete policy adjustments at some facilities.

Certain German swimming pools have begun barring visitors who cannot speak German, citing safety concerns tied to communication failures and behavioral patterns that complicate supervision and intervention in shared spaces.

The conditions imposed in the current case — a pool ban while the suspect otherwise remains free — illustrate the narrow tools available under current practices.

A targeted restriction does nothing to address potential risks in other public settings or to deter future incidents involving the same individual.

Girls who fought off the attacker at the adventure pool now rely on the hope that he complies with the limited order while the investigation proceeds.

Recurring episodes at pools, schools, and other everyday venues have exposed the downstream effects of rapid demographic change without corresponding integration or enforcement standards.

Cultural and language barriers frequently surface in official descriptions of incidents, yet public discourse often treats acknowledgment of these factors as off-limits. The result is a cycle where statistics accumulate, incidents repeat, and responses remain incremental.

Families seeking ordinary recreation at public pools encounter an environment shaped by these accumulated failures. The statistical overrepresentation, the documented reluctance to identify patterns clearly, and the narrow conditions placed on released suspects combine to shift the burden of vigilance onto parents and children themselves.

Official appeals for witnesses after each new case underscore how many incidents may go unreported or unresolved.

The Schwäbisch Gmünd events add to a ledger of cases stretching back years, where similar profiles of suspects and similar gaps in transparency have appeared repeatedly. …

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Mark Wauck: Mearsheimer: Optimist Or Pessimist?

/9 Comments/in /by
Mearsheimer finishes on a pessimistic note. He calls up the example of Vietnam. When Johnson bowed out it was clear that he knew he had lost the war. But Nixon and Kissinger spent years trying to find some clever way to win the war. It didn’t work, but it does look like the same dynamic could be at play with Trump—once a modern state gets into a war it’s well-nigh impossible to simply call it quits. And especially not when that involves a surrender of hegemony.
What’s going on today in Trump’s engagement with Iran? Let’s walk this back a bit.

As soon as Trump submitted to the surrender terms that Iran presented to him in the MOU that he was required to sign, he immediately began trying to wriggle out of the MOU. He began insisting that the US had the right to set up its own route through the Strait of Hormuz; he tried to back out of the requirement to shut down Israel’s war in Lebanon; and he tried to talk the Iranian negotiators into discussing nuclear issues before complying with the MOU—as well as misrepresenting the Iranian position on those issues. Now, it happens that the Iranian negotiators may have contributed to some of that confusion, but the IRGC clarified all that—most recently by striking five ships that had tried, at US instigation, to ignore the Iranian regime in the strait.

What happened next was that Trump began striking at Iran again—violating the MOU and the ceasefire. And Iran retaliated. But the US strikes seem to have come to an end, as of last night. For the time being. The cessation of US strikes was accompanied by the usual childish Trumpian insults directed at Iran and Iranians. Larry Johnson suggested that Trump’s over the top rhetorical reaction was a typical sign from Trump that the Iranian retaliation had been extremely heavy and effective—Trump’s complaint that Iranians are “violent” certainly lends credibllity to that suggestion.

That brings us to this morning. Two things happened. First, Trump claimed that Iran had called him, basically begging for talks. Trump magnanimously stated that he was OK with continuing talks but that the ceasefire was definitely over. Second, the two US aircraft carriers in the region (Bush and Lincoln) sailed into the Gulf of Oman—well within Iranian missile range and without their air defense escort ships.

John Mearsheimer, speaking with Danny Davis, addressed these events. First, he reiterated that his long held view was that Trump’s only viable course of action to avoid massive strategic humiliation and economic chaos is to sign the MOU and accept defeat. Trump has signed the MOU, but can’t seem to swallow accepting defeat. Second, Mearsheimer stated that the correct understanding of Trumpspeak is that, when Trump says the Iranians want to talk to him, that means that he wants to talk to them. In other words, Trump has been forced to recognize that the recent events are just one more in a fairly long string of failed attempts to wriggle out of accepting defeat and presenting the appearance of a victory. The moves by the two unprotected carriers were just another bit of theater.

So far, so good. But expecting Trump to follow through on any of his commitments is a fool’s errand, and there aren’t many fools in Tehran. So, for the time being, Trump may actually be toying with the option of withdrawing—despite his talk of going back to his failed blockade strategy. Another possible sign that Trump is seriously considering the opt out is that the Israelis have once again deployed their “Iranian assassination plot” gag to try to bring Trump back in line.

Mearsheimer finishes on a pessimistic note. He calls up the example of Vietnam. When Johnson bowed out it was clear that he knew he had lost the war. But Nixon and Kissinger spent years trying to find some clever way to win the war. It didn’t work, but it does look like the same dynamic could be at play with Trump—once a modern state gets into a war it’s well-nigh impossible to simply call it quits. And especially not when that involves a surrender of hegemony.

So there we are. Trump goosed the markets on Friday—that much is clear. It remains to be seen how the rest works out.

I’ll close with some relevant remarks that Doug Macgregor made today to Glenn Diesen. Excerpts:

I don’t think President Trump has any idea how dangerous his statements are and how foolish he looks in front of the world and how easily he’s being manipulated by the wrong people.

It’s this parent child relationship that Trump attempts to establish everywhere he goes with everyone and the rest of the world, you know. ‘Well, I told them they have a chance and they want a deal. Well, if they want a deal, they’ll have to do what I say.’

‘Oh, the Iranians are desperate. They want a deal.’ Well, guess what? The Iranians are on a full war footing. Are we? No. And if you’re going to fight them in the region where they live on their doorstep, you better think long and hard about what that means because you’re in for a long fight in a real war. And again, we’re not prepared for that. I don’t give a damn what he says publicly. We’re not. You know, the Navy has now admitted that they have more launchers and more tubes for missiles than they have missiles to fire. He’s out in the open.

This is a Jewish war waged against Iran. I say ‘Jewish’ because it’s by no means exclusively Israeli. It involves the Jewish lobby here in the United States and the massive numbers of billionaires that constitute the backbone of it. They effectively own—lock, stock, and barrel—not just Donald Trump, but the Hill. Mr. Netanyahu when he embarked on this war. This was a war to the finish, he was talking in effectively from the very beginning in scorched earth terms.

Or is this again just talk? Well, you remember the operation in Isfahan where we tried to insert special operations forces with considerable air support and expertise from the CIA and so forth on the grounds that they were within range of plutonium that could be I guess acquired and then spirited out of the country. That ended in disaster. It was covered or concealed, if you will, by this supposed officer who had been shot down that had to be recovered. That was kind of a cover story. And what we discovered was that, in a part of Iran where we thought they would be vulnerable, they didn’t turn out to be vulnerable. And so once again, it was a question of have we underestimated the regime? Have we underestimated the military establishment, its various systems, human and remote? Well, I guess we did. And I think a number of people said—in fact, I know they did—they were grateful that this happened because it put an end to Trump’s fantasy that we could replicate what we did in Venezuela.

You do have people that have talked about Chabahar–seizing that port, because it’s outside of the Gulf, on the theory that if you gained control of Chabahar that would give you leverage over Iran. I haven’t quite figured out what that leverage is, strategically. I think the Iranians would probably take the Russian position. ‘Well, if they’re going to seize Chabahar, we’ll defend it if we can, but if we can’t, we’ll make sure they seize nothing.’ So then are you going to use the ruins of Chabahar as your launchpad for penetrating Iranian airspace once again, with helicopters and B2s, to take control of, say, Bandar Abbas? Or are you going to try to fly from the UAE right across the Gulf? I think everybody’s saying, ‘Wait a minute!’ If you’re looking for something clean, decisive, and effective, this may not be a good option. But I don’t know who’s there. You’ve listened to General Kellogg and General Keane. I think they would probably support any of those options. I don’t know. I assume so. They’ll do whatever in order to widen this war in the hopes that by doing so they can bring Iran to its knees. I don’t see that happening.

 

Tucker and Dennis Kucinich: Congress Moves to Commit Treason and Allow Israel to Forever Enslave America’s Military

/25 Comments/in /by

As more and more opposition to arming Israel mounts in Congress, the Israelis come up with the brilliant plan to simply merge the U.S. and Israeli militaries. No more controversial bills to fund Israel. It will be completely on autopilot. And Israel will have a free hand to sell U.S. technology to other countries. Is it possible to sink any lower? And even asking whether Donald “America First” Trump would veto it is absurd. He won’t.

Video: Congress Moves to Commit Treason and Allow Israel to Forever Enslave America’s Military

This month, unless Donald Trump stops it, our treasonous Congress is likely to merge the US military with Israel’s genocidal armed forces. Dennis Kucinich on the end of American sovereignty.

Transcript

Tucker [00:00:04] Dennis Kucinich, thank you for doing this. So a lot of us who’ve been paying half attention keep hearing that there’s an effort in the Congress to in some basic sense, merge the US military with the IDF, with the Israeli military. Same with our intelligence services. It’s hard to believe that could be true. Is it true? What do you know about it?

Dennis Kucinich [00:00:24] Well, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2027, section 219 has a provision that provides for the integration of the IDF and the U.S. Military at the top most sensitive levels of our military operations. And that is a fact. Now, when you have an integration… And you say you’re gonna eliminate duplication, that’s a merger. And so they’re merging. And the…

Tucker [00:01:04] The US military and Israeli military.

Dennis Kucinich [00:01:07] Yeah, in specific areas, like artificial intelligence and autonomous functioning of vehicles, you know, that will increase the kill efficiency, right, in quantum sensing that deals with very sophisticated data and will blur the distinction between offense and defense, okay? Cyber electronic war is another area they want to merge in, which you can’t really – if you take AI and you match it with these sophisticated technologies, you expand the ability to hurt people, really, to kill people. They want to merge missile defense. Space defense, directed energy, it’s a whole range of things, and biological technology, including biological, potential biological warfare. What could go wrong, right? See, and I look at it this way, Tucker. The first issue is American sovereignty. I don’t care Israel or whoever, we need to maintain our sovereignty. We cannot cause another country to be involved in the decision-makings that relate to the national security of the United States of America. We have to be singular and solitary in that regard. Unfortunately, this provision in this bill, all the safeguards go out the window. And essentially it’s a merger and, you know, one step from merger is an acquisition. I am, yeah, really, you think about that. But, and think about this too, in this context, we had kind of a quasi, kind of a practice run of this merger in Iran. Look what happened, you know, the Israel, the United States had to be head of Israel, goes in and attacks Iran. Working with Israel on this, it ended up being a disaster on so many different levels. So that’s what we’ve already found out from that kind of a cooperation, let’s say. Now imagine if you get two parties together and they go forward from there, what, You know, again, what could go wrong? The United States must remain sovereign. We must not in any way cede this idea of Israel being integrated, the militaries of the U.S. And Israel being integrated. The other thing is, it’s unconstitutional. I mean, really, they bypassed the treaty mechanism. We joined NATO as a treaty. Yes. There’s no treaty or it’s just in legislation. This should be going to the Senate, at least. For approval, not so just to put in legislation, make it happen. And also, people, you know, the president is the commander-in-chief of U.S. Armed Forces, each of whom take an oath to defend the Constitution. First of all, Israel doesn’t have a constitution. Secondly, they’re not taking any oath to the United States of America to protect our interests. So what is this about? Why are we becoming more vulnerable to a nation whose whose military values are so distinct from ours.

Tucker [00:04:47] Well, I mean, there’s so many levels here. I mean just to address that, of all the militaries you could merge with, why pick the only one on the planet that’s currently committing genocide? I mean it does seem grotesque of all the militarys on the plan. Right. So, it does seems like this changes the dynamic between the United States and Israel completely were to become law. Because as it presently stands, United States is. Israel’s benefactor. Israel can’t fight seven wars or whatever, or how many fronts they have at any given time without the United States paying for most of it, which we do. And so we can withdraw the support and thereby control, at least theoretically control, Israel’s behavior. We never have, but we could. This would, if it becomes law, integrate the militaries to such an extent that the United states would actually be at the mercy of Israel. So Israel withdraws technology and the United States military is hamstrung. So it would actually put Israel in the driver’s seat.

Dennis Kucinich [00:05:50] That’s right 100% correct. And as such, it’s adverse to the national security interests of the United States of America. We cannot be in a situation where there’s no oversight. Congress is out of the picture once this thing passes. What does that mean? How? What it means is that this is run in the Defense Department with a coordinator and that just like the daily business of the Department of Defense moves on, this becomes part of the daily businesses. Integration is coordination. So no more votes? No, not on these matters. No, and even more important is this. The National Defense Authorization Act authorizes $1.5 trillion annually, 80% of the discretionary budget of the United States of America is now going for military. I mean, that’s horrific.

Tucker [00:06:56] To begin 80% of America’s discretionary budget total discretionary budget is

Dennis Kucinich [00:07:01] The discretionary budget of the United States of America is about $1.9 trillion. We can spend money on education, we can spend on health care, we could spend money on food nutrition programs.

Tucker [00:07:14] Infrastructure.

Dennis Kucinich [00:07:15] Infrastructure, yes, or we can choose to spend money on a military. And President Trump has made his own case that, well, you know, we’ve got to protect our country, but there’s questions as to whether this is in our national security interests. And $1.5 trillion annually, that is a 67% increase over the previous year. The budget was nine. 100 billion, now it’s 1.5 trillion. Think of that increase of 600 billion in one year, plus we now have a department of war, plus Israel would then have access, not just to the 4 billion that we give them in military assistance, they have access to the whole of Magellan, to everything. We will be opening up the possibility of Israel having influence over a 1.500 billion trillion dollar annual budget. I feel sick.

Tucker [00:08:16] Carrying this. First of all, we just lost a war with Iran, which has an economy, you know, the size of an American state. Okay. So you would think at that point, someone would say, let’s not continue feeding a system that is failing. Let’s stop and assess where the money went the first time before we, you know, up the budget, right? I mean, clearly what we’re doing is not working. Right. What do you think? Okay, and this would give Israel influence over that entire.

Dennis Kucinich [00:08:51] Over 80% of Again, let’s look at counter drones, anti-tunneling, directed energy, AI, autonomous weapons, cyber technology, electronic warfare, the national security architecture of the future. The future. Here it is, you know, we’re going to share it. Really? And also… You have to remember that Israel was a conduit for taking technology from America and sending it to China. There’s no guarantees in this agreement that they can’t. And the Soviet Union.

Tucker [00:09:34] I mean, Jonathan Pollard’s secrets, which he stole from the United States military, from the Navy, wound up in the hands of our arch-rivals, the Soviets, because they’re David’s people.

Dennis Kucinich [00:09:41] Well, you don’t have to spy or steal if everything’s open and you’re right at the, you have a seat at the table, do you? And you know, this is, and then as you pointed out earlier, Tucker, ethic cleansing, genocide, these are partners. Because we’re not just, you know taking in their IDF let’s say, we’re taking the values. That we’ve seen demonstrated or lack of values on moral law, international law. How do we, what does it say about us as a country if we want this kind of a partnership in the largest expenditures of U.S. Tax dollars of any single area in terms of, especially with respect to our defense?

Tucker [00:10:39] I think the majority of Americans agree with you. I think that polling shows that attitudes on Israel are changing dramatically because of Israeli, because of the fact they’re committing genocide, that tends to lower your approval rating. But this vote would, as you said, be the last vote. So Congress wouldn’t have to be on the record supporting Israel after this vote, because it would all be handled by the Pentagon procurement office. That’s right.

Dennis Kucinich [00:11:06] And the procurement, I mean, it’s very significant. So that’s why I’m saying there’s a limited amount of oversight that occurs then. You have to remember, when I first got to Congress, the Inspector General of the Department of Defense said that there was over $1 trillion in accounts that could not be reconciled. That was in 1997. They couldn’t keep track of over $trillion. Today, it is multiple trillions. You know, it… They had like 1100 different accounting systems in the Pentagon. They’re, it’s engineered to where money might just disappear. You get engineered to evade.

Tucker [00:11:44] Oversight. There’s no way to even know what’s happening.

Dennis Kucinich [00:11:49] So this time, if we bring Israel into the picture and create this merger at the top of the most sensitive aspects of our national security, our national defense, where’s that going to go? So you’re merging, you’re integrating, you are eliminating duplication in the context of a country that’s involved in genocide and ethnic cleansing, so what do they gain from this? They gain weapons endurance, okay, because they get these weapons systems which they may not have access to right now, they’ll have intelligence depth that they don’t have right now. They’ll have AI targeting capacity that they may or may not have right now. There’s no diplomatic deterrent, right? I mean, because the game’s going to be led by the Department of Defense, but the Department of State is going to further be diminished by this, for sure. You have, you know, the…

Tucker [00:12:56] Wait, can I just ask, what about the Secretary of War, the Secretary Of State, cabinet secretaries, house and senate leaders, everyone in the White House, like they’re all on board with giving a foreign country control over our military?

Dennis Kucinich [00:13:13] Who knows who’s on board? It’s in the legislation now, and they vote for it. It’s law. This entangles our military in whatever Israel chooses to do. They want to go to war against Egypt. They want go to go war against Turkey as part of this Zionist expansion. Hey, we’re pulled right along. Our country then becomes a target. Our country, then, becomes vulnerable based on anything Israel chooses to do because we are partners then. And we have no control over that. We don’t have any control over what they’ll do. That’s like a fantastic thinking that we can bring them into the military and all of a sudden we’re gonna control them. No, the way you control them is to keep the IDF at bay and try to work out some kind of diplomatic relations which really aren’t working out right now because otherwise why would you have so many dead people in Palestine and in Lebanon? There’s no diplomacy going on. It’s basically a license to kill that Israel has.

Tucker [00:14:11] Paid for by us. Yeah, absolutely. Can I just go back, I have too many questions, to your description of the U.S. Defense budget as 80% of discretionary spending, which I didn’t know, which is like hard to believe. The United States is prosperous, largely because it’s isolated from threats by the Pacific and the Atlantic oceans. Basically the United States, the threats that it faces were gonna come from Canada or Mexico, really. And those are you know, not existential at the moment. So why would the United States spend 80% of its discretionary budget on defense?

Dennis Kucinich [00:14:52] That’s crazy. Well, it undermines, I think the. Constitutional imperative of the United States, we the people of the united states, you know, it laid out certain purposes of governance, provide for the common defense, but that wasn’t the only thing, okay? Promote the general welfare, ensure the blessings of liberty. We’re moving away from that. If it all becomes about defense, what happens? And what is happening now? There’s specific things that have happened. Uh… We’ve seen health care test

Tucker [00:15:32] correct you and say it’s not defense anymore, it’s war. It’s not the Department of Defense, it’s the Department.

Dennis Kucinich [00:15:37] Thank you, because I mean, that’s right.

Tucker [00:15:41] Because if it’s about defense, the United States is defended by geography mostly. It’s defended by oceans, by its lack of physical proximity to people who hate it. So like we’re pretty safe, always have been, probably the safest country in the world. But that’s it. But it’s not about defense. It’s about war.

Dennis Kucinich [00:15:58] And because it’s more about war than ever, how do you measure that? You measure that by how much money you allocate. Again, $900 billion were allocated for the 2026 Department of Defense, now war. This year, $1.5 trillion. It constitutes 80% of discretionary spending. So what’s happened? We’ve seen cuts in healthcare, they’ve cut back administration of the Affordable Care Act, they’ve got back the CDC lost about three and a half billion dollars. The education has just been wrecked, the kind of benefits that were out there. In the education department, we saw the work-study program. I took a work- study program when I was. Just starting my college career, I worked as a plane dealer in Cleveland for a while and worked and went to Cleveland State. They cut this funding 90 percent, so all these young people who want to get educational experience and work at the same time, they’re not going to be able to do that. There’s programs that affect the poor that would enable young people to reach up and an education that they’ve cut. Uh… Their specialized education funds they cut out the whole divisions it there’s a lot of uh… Uh… Programs have been cut in education they could job prone training programs tucker and all this uh… Goes you know by i think it was job training is about three point seven billion they’ve cut from that they cut nutrition program you know feeding people feeding the food stamp program which you know largely has kept a lot of americans fed they’ve got that by about six point three billion and And with that… There’s reductions in the women’s and infant children’s nutrition programs. What are we becoming as a nation when we arm ourselves to the teeth, inevitably benefiting all these defense contractors, and leave the American people defenseless at home, defenseless against poverty, defenseless against ill health, defensless against being ill-educated? That’s the real strength of our country. We’re letting that go. And so my, my sense is that. It’s bad enough that 1.5 trillion is going to go primarily to these arms manufacturers, okay, because those are capital intensive expenditures. And at the same time, here comes Israel right inside the Department of Defense at the most sensitive technological areas, most sensitive security issues. And they’re right there helping to direct what America does.

Tucker [00:18:54] At exactly the moment when the American public has made it very clear we don’t want this. Right. So it’s like, it’s hard to imagine a less democratic, more authoritarian response to public opinion polling. It’s like your job, you served in Congress, your job is to represent the people who put you there. Right. So you look at the opinion polling and you say, you see people don’t want this, right? And so that’s the first thing you do, something they don’t want? Like, how is that a real system? How is that representative government?

Dennis Kucinich [00:19:24] It’s an ad. It reflects a level of control that already exists. I mean, let’s be clear, you know, this objection that is being raised here is cognizant of the fact that we’ve had a relationship that goes back at least to 1948, you now, to 1948 and then going forward from there, and more recently, you know Israel saw to their advantage to encourage the United States to go to war against Iraq. I mean, Benjamin Netanyahu sat in front of me, you know. Government Oversight Committee and articulated reasons in September of 2002 why the United States should go to war against Iraq. And he also said, I asked him, who else would you attack? And he said, Iran and Libya in committee. You can go to the internet and find that. There’s a different imperative that Netanyahu has than what our aspirations are for country. The people of Israel have to make their own decisions, but they cannot decide for us. We have to have autonomy here. We have have sovereignty. And I fear for the future of our country. If we bring in these genocidal group that has shown no compunction about murdering children, shooting them in the head and the chest, laughing about it, celebrating their dominance over defenseless people. It It goes beyond being heartbreaking, it’s insane, and we need to push back. People should be calling their congressmen and saying, do not vote for this bill. Force an amendment to be made to take it out, take that provision out of the bill, and if they won’t do it, vote against the bill. I mean, I would vote against a bill anyway. I voted against almost every single expenditure for these kinds of things when I was in Congress, Tucker, because I knew it was a scam. I knew the people of the United States for getting hosed. By these defense contractors, and it became a racket, you know, it’s a Smetley Butler said it years ago, war’s a racket. So this is a racket! We got pulled in one war after another, we didn’t have to be in, and Israel was coaxing it all along. And the Middle East region is going to end up in a worse conflagration if they come inside, because they’ll be leading the dance when it comes to making strategic decisions in that region. That’s just, it is happening right now, they have that kind of influence, but this locks it in! This is formal! This is the law. And what happens to our country. My concerns about America, I don’t, you know. I consider myself a citizen of the world, but I am an American, and I don’t want anybody trying to influence our country to do one thing or another. We make our own decisions here. Not anymore, though. Israel has too much influence already. And through AIPAC and other groups, they have engaged in a kind of subterfuge over what the interests of the American people are. And it’s not in our interest to be merging a military with a military that presents a clear and present danger to our own country. I don’t want to hold hands with somebody who has blood on their hands.

Tucker [00:22:39] No, I think all people are capable of evil. I certainly am and I think all of us are capable of genocide. I believe that because I know what human nature is. But there’s only one country committing it right now. I mean, we don’t need to guess. Is the Israeli government evil? Yes, I mean obviously. Murdering children is evil no matter who does it period. They don’t get a pass. It’s a universal standard. So the idea that we would merge with that of all militaries

Dennis Kucinich [00:23:09] Well, again, I agree with that, Tucker, and I wouldn’t want to merge with any military. I don’t even like NATO for that matter. I totally agree. Because I don t want anybody acting and trying to drag us into conflicts. Our founders warned, beware of foreign entanglements. We were warned about that. And they had the vision to understand that the United States needed to protect It’s independent. Protected sovereignty by not getting drawn into conflicts in other countries on behalf of other nations, not on behalf of ourselves. You know, I’m for defending our country, but now where we’re at is that we’re on the threshold of forever wars. I don’t think Donald Trump went into office with the idea that, you know, we’re going to have more wars. He promised we don’t, you don’t know more wars, he made that I promise. But he couldn’t keep that promise because of the influence of this particular group, and that’s really sad. It’s really sad.

Tucker [00:24:17] I saw it firsthand. It’s the saddest thing I’ve ever seen in public life, for sure.

Dennis Kucinich [00:24:24] Who are the people pushing this? Well, you know, it’s very interesting. There was an iteration of this bill that was introduced into Congress by two members. Didn’t get much attention. But this was folded into the bill. Nobody knows who put it in. That’s number one. Number two. No hearings on this part alone, there’s been no hearings and no real discussions about it. I mean, you and I could talk for an hour or so easy on this. Between us, there’s more discussion that’s occurred on this bill than any place in D.C. By far. They don’t want to talk about it. They just want to quietly slip this provision into a bill without debate. Remember, they shut off any hope in the rules committee of a debate over an amendment by Tom Massey and Ro Khanna. They had an amendment up. They didn’t even include it in the list of amendments that would be made in order when they go to the floor. There was No debate in the committee over this. And so, you know, when it gets to the floor, then there can’t be, there won’t be any debate over this provision, you, know, unless somebody gets up and says, well, this provision. But there won’t t be an effort, an amendment to strike it is not in order. So it stays in the bill. People have to understand this is being engineered quietly, but no more, hello, to try to just slip it in, make an accomplished thing, and then all of a sudden here we are. And the thing that- We don’t know who pushed it. Well, we know whose idea it was, Benjamin Netanyahu. He’s taking credit for this. He has? Oh yeah, he says it’s his idea. Yeah, this, and why would Netanyahu want this? Because Israel is gonna have every possible advantage they could possibly have in terms of weapons enhancement and AI targeting and lower operating costs, right? You get to offload your operating costs down to the US. They can entangle the U.S. Into things. All of a sudden, you want to fight me, buddy? Here’s me, body, you know, and you’re off to the next war.

Tucker [00:26:44] Without the Congress ever debating it, no one going on the record to support it, it would just all of a sudden become part of the system. It’s embedded in the way the U.S. Government operates. They just can effectively control 80% of our discretion.

Dennis Kucinich [00:26:59] No committee hearings, no debate in the bill, there you have it. One of the most serious changes in American sovereignty in the history of our country would occur without any debate at all. It just folded into a bill that’s probably close to a thousand pages. Could this happen soon? Well, here’s what’s going to happen. Congress comes back on July the 13th. The rules committee will try to meet again. The reason why it didn’t get voted on this last time is there was a dispute. The White House wanted the SAVE Act that deals with curtailing certain voter registration privileges. They wanted the save act folded into the National Defense Act. And so they pushed the House leadership to combine that and in order to make that happen the House has to first pass a rule. Every bill can have its own rule. It’s like, what are the rules of debate for this particular bill, this piece of paper? So they create the rule. And the rule said, you know, it did not include that amendment that would amend out this Section 219. And, but what it did do, it’s combined the SAVE Act and the NDAA, so it gets.

Tucker [00:28:25] You don’t get voter ID unless you hand the military to Israel.

Dennis Kucinich [00:28:30] No, that’s an interesting reduction.

Tucker [00:28:33] Well, everything’s a reduction in politics, right?

Dennis Kucinich [00:28:35] But they can make that case. That’s interesting. But let me just say that it didn’t, the rule was voted against because 14 Republican members didn’t like the way the thing was set up. So the rule went down, which meant they couldn’t get to the bill. So there was no vote, you know, a week or so ago. But so they go back to the drawing board, they’ll go back the rules committee and come up with a rule. Will they include an amendment that could be voted on to determine whether or not Israel and the U.S. Military should merge? I doubt it. It’ll go to the floor again. So people are gonna be faced with an up or down vote. That would be my guess, it’s a guess. An up or a down vote on the bill itself. I mean, you know, I’d recommend voting against it and keep voting against until they take that provision out.

Tucker [00:29:28] But that could pass this month.

Dennis Kucinich [00:29:30] Yeah, absolutely. How do you stop it? Well, votes. But if you’re not in Congress? People have to call. This is where we’re not helpless. People or voters who are watching this from across the country call your congressmen or congresswomen and say, look, we don’t want to merge the military. Vote against the bill. Or take it out of the bill! That’s it. I mean, it’s, you know, as I said, I wouldn’t vote for this bill anyway because of how it

Tucker [00:30:07] But it’s treason. It’s literally treason, you’re handing your government to a foreign government against the will of your own people who pay for everything. I mean, my view is if there was ever a justification for shutting down Washington, it’s this. And yet, it doesn’t seem like there’s any way to stop it. Call your congressman, does that matter?

Dennis Kucinich [00:30:29] Sometimes, yeah, sure. I mean, if the people get enough calls, they get nervous. And when they start getting nervous and there’s a slippage and votes. Yeah. I mean it can make a difference. Absolutely. Sure. It can make the difference. Now, uh, you know, given APEC’s influence, will it make a difference? I don’t know, but I’ll But you won’t need APEc after this. No, I mean well, I mean,

Tucker [00:30:54] Dehumiliating control and all that I get it but like as a practical matter you it’s done

Dennis Kucinich [00:30:59] Well, wait a minute. This is interesting. There are people who are now talking about, well, you know, we’re going to cut, we won’t give Israel any military funding. They don’t need any military fund. They’re in the inside now. They can direct the expenditures of over a trillion dollars. What do they need a tip of $4 billion for when they can have It’s over 1.5. Trillian, watch that. You’ll encounter people who will tell you, oh, we’re going to eliminate the military spending to Israel. Really? And you’re going bring them into the decision-making position in the Department of Defense for the most sophisticated spending that exists for the future national security and future defense of the United States of America. Whoa. So that’s why.

Tucker [00:31:51] You see these Israelis and their agents in the United States saying on television, you know, maybe we should stop taking military aid from the United Sates. There you are, there you have it. The lying is just a…

Dennis Kucinich [00:32:07] It’s like every word is a lie. It’s called Hasbra, right? Yeah. You know, I mean, it’s, yeah, you know. What does the poet say? Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. And there’s deception everywhere here. And they’re trying to deceive the American people as to where their interests lie. But when we keep seeing more and more of the resource of the United States going for wars, and then we get the countries that’s committing genocide and ethnic cleansing, Bring them in to the top echelons. Of decision-making in the Department of Defense on a formal agreement, Tucker, that would affect a merger. Now, people are saying, it’s not a merger, well, okay, integration, eliminate duplication, it is a merger you can call it what you want, but they’re going to be sitting there making decisions. And another thing is it’s going to affect defense, not just production, where things are made. But Israel, you know, we’ve had Buy America. Provisions in our contracting. This legislation, I think, would enable Israel to preempt those buy-America provisions. Oh, yeah, yeah. It’s just going to cost the U.S. Jobs, too. I mean, that’s another thing. That’s another argument.

Tucker [00:33:22] So typically, when the US government buys equipment for the US military, it is generally from American suppliers. Generally, not always. Right. But the idea is, the concept is, you should buy American.

Dennis Kucinich [00:33:35] Yeah, you buy from your own. Yeah, yeah.

Tucker [00:33:37] But this would allow. Purchases from israel basically to count as purchases from america because they’re

Dennis Kucinich [00:33:46] Right. It’s a procurement thing. The procurement becomes a fact of life that we’ll be procuring more and more from Israel, and Israel will be able to set up production in the U.S. This is really crazy. This is such a giveaway on so many different things. You use the word treason. It is treason!

Tucker [00:34:09] And everyone involved in it should be charged.

Dennis Kucinich [00:34:12] That won’t happen, but it’s true. So it’s not lost on any of us. A day doesn’t go by where I don’t think about the people and guys in the West Bank and South Lebanon and what they’re living through, their children being killed right in front of them, their whole families being blown up in some cases, journalists killed, Health care workers murdered. Ambulance drivers murdered. Double-triple tap to cynically just kill everything and everybody, drones flying everywhere. How in the world can anybody with a heart look at this and say, well, you know, it’s okay, that’s happening over there? No, no. If you’re a witness, you have to take some responsibility for that morally.

Tucker [00:35:02] And we’re the funder of it, which we are.

Dennis Kucinich [00:35:04] We are the funders, but we, the American people, are witnesses, and it’s time to say, look… We cannot support this. We should really be standing up and defending the people of Palestine against these attacks. That’s my feeling. We cannot be in a position where we’re seeing hundreds of thousands of people killed. For what? For some fake interpretation of the Bible that somebody says, well, this is my land. This is my home. This is in my property. Really, really? Somebody knocks on your door and says, give me your house. In America, we’d go bonkers over that. We’d say, you can’t do that. Get out of here. That’s what’s happening every day. And it’s happening in South Lebanon now. Settlers are coming in and are protected by the IDF. The IDF has demonstrated itself to be just a group of psychopathic killers. I mean, you cant call it anything else. No, you cannot. And so… The question, though, isn’t who they are, it’s who are we as Americans? What do we stand for? We just celebrated our 250th anniversary of our independence, and we need to regain our independence. We need to gain what it really means to be an American. We’ll help anybody around the world. We’ve got big hearts as Americans, but we also need to stand up for the abuse. Of of the resources that we give to another country that are being used to kill people and and kill them in mass well it’s just been so corrupt

Tucker [00:36:44] It’s been so corrupting of the United States, corrupting Christianity to see, you know, good people ministers get up and defend genocide as if Jesus is in favor of killing kids. It’s being corrupting politics, the conservative movement, which doesn’t obviously exist anymore, but I’ve been a part of it for 40 years. And one of the basic foundational ideas was property rights, property rights. They lecture you for hours. I’ve given those lectures, property rights, it’s the basis of liberty and of a functioning economic system. And then all of a sudden they’re supporting us stealing people’s lands because stealing actually, and then killing anyone who gets in the way. What about property rights? I thought we were for property rights. Free speech, the foundational freedom of this country, all of a sudden you’re not allowed to criticize a foreign country. You can’t boycott a foreign. Country. It’s illegal. It’s like, it totally corrupting of who we are. That’s my problem with it. I don’t think Israel’s uniquely evil. I think everybody is evil in his heart. Of course, I’m a Christian. Of course I believe that. But this, what they’re doing is evil, completely. There’s no euphemism that describes it more precisely than that. And we become evil when we participate in it. Like, what the hell? Yeah, it’s exactly what the Hell. So what is the motive? So you served in the Congress, you got there 30 years ago, you know a lot about the Congress. What would inspire a lawmaker to get on board with this? I, you know, look,

Dennis Kucinich [00:38:19] You have to go back to the Holocaust, you really do. I mean, in order to understand the thinking about Israel. The Jewish people suffered horribly in the Holocaust. It is a level of cruelty that the world could not have imagined prior to that. Yes. And so Israel began with a great deal of sympathy that people had. But then as you start on more

Tucker [00:38:48] including from me.

Dennis Kucinich [00:38:49] Yeah, of course, and for myself. But as you unwind the history and you see that where the Balfour Declaration went and how in 1948 that the founding of the State of Israel was not supposed to mean the subjugation of the Arabs or the Palestinians, there was somehow supposed to be an agreement worked out. It was, you know, airy-fairy in some ways. But what’s happened is that there’s been a murderous oppression of Palestinians that goes back generations now. And so Israel evolved into something Dad. That was, that no one I think counted on, at least, except the Zionists maybe, who believed that we have a greater destiny and it’s not just this land, but as the chosen people, we are going further and beyond it. And that’s unfortunate because what they’ve done, Zionism is hijacked Judaism. My life has been guided by people who happen to have been Jewish. And I think that’s true of a lot of people. Yeah. I mean, greatly influenced. And when you understand the meaning of charity, of caring, of giving, throughout my life, I’ve always associated that with people who happened to be Jewish. You know, I’ve seen that. I’ve experienced it. I have experienced it also. But then, but then when you, when you take Zionism, and a particular virulent strain of Zionism as is practiced by people like Minister Smotrich and Venkavir, as well as Netanyahu. It it has created such a source, if you could call it that, for people who happen to be Jewish in this country and worldwide. And that’s not what many of us understood Judaism to be about, and it still isn’t, but Zionism has hijacked that. And in service of a political agenda, they’ve basically jettisoned spiritual principles that And in my view, we’re always about what’s called Tikkun Olam, the healing of the world. That’s a principle that comes from Judaism, Tikkun olam, heal the world, so it’s not destroy the world but heal the word. And so it is heartbreaking, really. And we’re looking at an immense human tragedy here, Tucker.

Tucker [00:41:44] That’s just beginning because everyone who committed genocide or supported or excused it or denied it, the genocide deniers, and there are many in the United States, they’re all going to suffer. And I feel bad for them. Some of them I like personally, but they’re all going suffer because there’s justice. And if you got behind the genocide in Gaza, you’re going to suffer for that. So I feel, I feel sorry for them

Dennis Kucinich [00:42:06] You know, again, I call it a great human tragedy, but here we are just after we celebrated our independence, 250 years. How do we remain independent? And this proposal to merge, integrate the U.S. And the Israeli military is a direct attack on American independence. A direct attack on American sovereignty, a direct attack on the United States Constitution, which keeps us sovereign. I’m concerned, you know, how drones are hunting people in Gaza and West Bank and even South Lebanon now. That’s going to come home. Does anyone think that if we If we enrich this partnership with Israel formally, that we’re not gonna be seeing these drones that are patrolling the United States. Of course we are. That’s, I mean. Soon. Well, this is, you know, we’re looking at dystopia here. We’re looking a minority report, another version. Who are we? Again, ask the question, who are we as a nation? I wanna reclaim what it means to be an American. I wanna claim what it mean to be free, to be independent, to be sovereign, to be able to make our decisions without… Any undue influence from any other country in the world. And certainly not to be holding hands with people that are genocidal, with genocidal intent. So, you know, this is ultimately about freedom, our whole experience, our constitutional experience about freedom. We’ve seen our freedom of speech undermined in the last few years. College campuses, notably, okay, you can’t criticize a certain group because if you do, you could lose your scholarship, you get expelled. You can’t protest and college campuses. Which were the cradle of the rebellion against the war in Vietnam, okay? The Fourth Amendment, the idea that Americans can be free in their homes from unreasonable search and seizure. The idea that you look at ICE and how they’ve moved in to just knock down doors. We’re seeing our basic constitutional liberties undermined here in this country right now. We’re celebrating the 4th of July, but, you know. Our liberties can’t go up like in the smoke of a disappearing firework. We really have to look at each and every area where our liberty is under attack and our freedom is under attacks and it is under an attack with this proposal to merge the U.S. And the Israeli military. But if you’re a member of Congress, what are you thinking? Why would you sign on to this? What’s a constitution among friends?

Tucker [00:45:06] But you know that every public appearance that you have, every town hall that you do, you’re gonna get asked about this. People are getting pretty radically anti-Israel, way more than I am. I feel like I’m pretty moderate compared to the public on this question all of a sudden. And you’re going to have to live with that, but you’re doing it anyway.

Dennis Kucinich [00:45:27] Well, look, politically, it’s hard to figure out. One does not need to be anti-Israel. We need to pro-human. I agree. Pro-peace. Pro-America. Pro-American, yeah. Really, I mean, this thing about America first, that’s OK with me. That doesn’t mean we’re not citizens of the world, but we have an obligation to take care of our own people. Tucker, you know, I’m in Cleveland. I see people begging for food at freeway exits.

Tucker [00:45:50] Yeah, I do too.

Dennis Kucinich [00:45:52] Some of them are veterans. What are we doing with our country here? So this debate over this section in the National Defense Authorization Act really provides an opportunity for a deeper reflection about who we are as Americans. What do we stand for? Where are we going as a country? Where do we want to go as a county? How do we avoid future wars? How do we avoid? Wars that could end it all. You know, it wasn’t too long ago that Joe Biden was rattling sabers against Russia. And now we’re seeing, you know, more attacks on Russia. We, we could see another war, but if we’re not easily easily.

Tucker [00:46:35] We can see a real war with Russia.

Dennis Kucinich [00:46:38] But we need, so we need to pay attention to what our government’s doing and demand that we stop these wars and demand, that we not bring in the one country that’s hell bent on war everywhere they turn in order to feel protected. I mean, what a paradox that you’re protected by killing more people.

Tucker [00:47:02] Netanyahu is destroying Israel and, if allowed, I think, and not just Netanyah, his coalition of religious extremists. He was on Fox today on Fox News, which shamefully gives him a platform at every opportunity saying we need to go fight Turkey, our NATO ally, to whom we’re bound by a treaty. We have to have a war with Turkey now because- He said.

Dennis Kucinich [00:47:27] That this morning, I didn’t. Well see, that’s why when I look at this agreement, it is about war with Turkey, it’s about war with Egypt, it about war, war, and our dime, their policy, no, stop it. America, remember who you are. We are supposed to be that shining city on a hill. We’re supposed to be the unfolding of a patriotic dream. We’re supposed to be the country that is the beacon for the entire world, you know, the huddled masses yearning to breathe free. We need to reconnect with what it means, the deeper meaning of what it mean to be an American, that this journey that began 250 years ago that gave America this ability to adapt to and dream to a future. We need reconnect with this, with this advancing tide of creativity and freedom and democracy and really let freedom ring, really let it ring. But we’re not there right now, we’re in a different space and we need to begin anew to challenge any effort that would attack our sovereignty, undermine our independence.

Tucker [00:48:49] You just saw a number of Democrats lose in primaries on the question of support for Israel. So it’s such a cliche, I hate even to use the word, but it’s toxic among democratic voters. It’s true. Toxic. And good for them, by the way, it should be toxic. It’s totally unacceptable. You’re pro-Nazi? No, you’re not allowed to be pro-nazi. Well, you can’t be for the genocide in Gaza. I mean, I don’t see the difference, but how can Democrats vote for this?

Dennis Kucinich [00:49:20] I think a number of them will vote against it, but some of them with some difficulty. And the this that we were talking about is this proposal to merge the militaries of Israel and the United States. Yeah, it should be an easy vote for many members of Congress. But they’re not gonna get a chance to vote on just that because it’s folded into a thousand page bill. So what you have is a circumstance where, you know, most members will know this is in the bill. There’s been enough commotion about it. How can they vote for it? Because they’ll say, well, you know I voted so that our district could get X number of dollars for this. Defense contractor, which is providing hundreds of jobs in our district. That’s the logic, okay? Yeah. There’s a logic there. Yeah. You need to understand, and people need to understand, your many viewers need to understand that every single member of Congress has a defense contractor in the district, and these contractors, in order to pass the bill, they go and visit the of Congress and they say, look… You know, we make this material for the Department of Defense, and we need you to vote for this so that our area can have these jobs. And some of them may have been around a while, some of these, you know, businesses. So the member is moved by people from the district who want them to support this program, which may be millions of dollars, including in a $1.5 trillion bill. So members have a motivation to vote for it. Now, I didn’t vote for because I knew it was going to go for war, and I’m opposed to that. But members have jobs at stake, so they want to vote for the bill. That’s how that happens. Lobbyists are there from the district. So then you put this provision in the bill, which is really a poison pill, if you want to call it that, and members then have to look, well, how am I going to vote? Because they’ll be attacked if they vote against something for their district, right? This is a diabolical construction that’s occurring here legislatively. You put a bill to defend the country, which is excessive to the nth degree, and you fold into it this proposal for a merger. Members are going to be hard pressed with a vote on this. But the ultimate issue is if you give up sovereignty, if you That is the overarching concern, not where does this money go? Because once you give up what it means to be an American and to be able to make your own decisions, everything else doesn’t matter.

Tucker [00:52:21] Who thought up this system where you don’t vote on specific legislation or issues but you wrap all these different notions into one thousand page bill and vote up or down on it? What?

Dennis Kucinich [00:52:36] Yeah, yeah, that’s it. Well, you know, from that came the aphorism, never ask how laws are sausage.

Tucker [00:52:43] Yeah. Are made. But that seems designed to hurt the country and to make a mockery of the legislative process.

Dennis Kucinich [00:52:51] Well, the way the bill is crafted, groups of people get together, various interest groups, they go to the committee, they give their ideas of what they want, and a bill is produced. And somebody came in with this thing, ah, let’s put this merger in.

Tucker [00:53:09] But why not just vote on that? Why not just on changes to voter registration or ID requirements or what weapon system we should fund.

Dennis Kucinich [00:53:18] And they’re supposed to, except the rule permits them to do it. They change the rules. The rules are always there to be changed. There’s a rule against legislating on an appropriation. Doesn’t matter. You can have a rule that says all points of order are waived. So nobody can get up. Mr. Chairman, point of order. No, it’s not happening. This system, people are going to start to pay a little bit more attention to a system which is serving. A very small group of people at the expense of everyone else. And right now it’s not working for the people of the United States of America. And it hasn’t, it doesn’t matter if someone’s a Democrat, Republican, who’s in the White House, that system has a specific gravity and a specific momentum that keeps moving forward inexorably to replicate itself. Yes. Okay, it just keeps going. Nicely put, that’s right. And that’s what happened, and that’s why once something like this merger is in the bill, forget about it, it’s just going to keep going and going, they’ll develop data integration, that’s another big thing, that’s a merger, data integration. So we’re going to be operating out of the same fundamental math of what it means to operate the nation’s defense. Wow. And that’s how dangerous this is, Tucker.

Tucker [00:54:51] So there’s kind of no disentangling at that point without hurting the US military.

Dennis Kucinich [00:54:55] That’s exactly right. It is the ultimate entanglement that we’ve been warned against. It’s an entangling and the most granular details in every sophisticated area of defense of our country, of the future, national security policies of the United States of America. We are becoming entangled to the nth degree, and as a result, our nation and our sovereignty is at risk. Have you seen anyone defend this explicitly? No, that’s interesting. That’s an interesting question. If you find somebody, it’d be great to have that person on your show so that you could ask them about the benefits. They’ll just scream.

Tucker [00:55:38] They’ll just scream about anti-Semitism and refuse to come on, I’ve tried.

Dennis Kucinich [00:55:41] Well, you know, we understand that anti-Semitism has become a canard. It lacks meaning anymore where it’s just being used to try to deflect attention to something that’s going on that’s beneath the dignity of human beings. I’ve noticed.

Tucker [00:55:58] Yeah, I’ve noticed. Do you think there’s any chance the president would veto this?

Dennis Kucinich [00:56:04] It’s an interesting question because Netanyahu has basically discounted the authority of the President of the United States. He’s done that when President Trump was trying to end this war against Iran that was started had to be hashed of Netanyahu. And what did he need? One of the things he needed was for Israel to stop attacking South Lebanon. That was one of the conditions that Iran asked for. Didn’t happen. And Netanyahu publicly defied the President of the United States, as if he, as head of a nation of nine, 10 million people, is superior to a man who’s head of nation of 340 million people. I mean, this is. You know, you have to look at this. This is so weird that Israel could be actually jeopardizing an agreement that would end a war that has resulted in not just 168 children being killed and the leader of Iran, whose funeral is still ongoing right now as we speak, but also had a devastating effect and the, and our economy. You know, that war’s going to cost, just that war is going to cost about a trillion dollars, tax fares. You know most of it will go to national debt, which is, you know, a whole other story because the more debt we’re in, the more vulnerable we are because we’ve got to make the interest payments and that means we have less money to take care of things we need right now. You know America’s in a trap right now, You know, we’ve dug ourselves a hole. And the only difference between a hole and a grave is in the dimensions. And I don’t want to have this merger lead America to its own destruction. And we’re not in good shape right now. When the president of the United States can be told by some guy who’s just a hustler who is trying to finagle his way to another election, you know, through another election to survive so he doesn’t go to jail. I mean, let’s be real about this. Netanyahu’s facing jail. And so his policies are aimed at keeping himself out of jail. He didn’t care about the United States. He sure didn’t about what President Trump wants. All he cares about is staying out of jail and staying in power if he can. And, you know, so what does that mean? Tack South Lebanon, forget whatever America wants to do in ending the war in Iran. And everyone’s going to pay for it. The people are going to pay for in South Lebanon with their lives. And people around the world are going pay for it with damage to the world economy. Lives are superior to every other concern, but the fact is we all know about the knock-on effects of the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz or Bab-O-Mandab or anything that interferes with the flow of energy is going to cause the price to go up. Americans have experienced that and we’re going to keep experiencing that because the opportunity for peace keeps ebbing away. And we’ve learned recently that Israel was planning to kill Iran’s peace negotiators, right? There was an assassination plot to kill the principal representatives of Iran because it’s not in Israel’s interest to have peace. They don’t know what peace looks like. They think peace is a threat to their existence. And so when you get that kind of an equation, you’re gonna have forever war. And we bring them into the Department of Defense, we have forever a war. This is, you know, what about America? Why aren’t we having discussions about what America’s interests are here? Because that’s anti-Semitic.

Tucker [00:59:56] Nationalism is is uh… A moral crime No, we’ve been hearing that for 10 years and I thought Trump would be strong enough to stand up to it, but he turned out to be weak. But it’s not just Trump, it’s the system itself is just not working in any way. How would you fix it?

Dennis Kucinich [01:00:18] Well, we know that if someone becomes president and he is determined to fix the system, drain the swamp, he’s going to run into problems no matter what his politics are.

Tucker [01:00:29] Yeah, real problem.

Dennis Kucinich [01:00:30] Yeah, real problems, or he could get assassinated. Yeah. I mean that, you know, but we have to look at, you know, follow the policy back to whose interests are threatened and would want to kill our leaders. How do you cure it? First of all, it starts with America’s international policy, we have to stop these forever wars. We have to start protecting our economy and rebuild relationships with people so they still use the dollar because the elasticity in our economy depends on the petrodollar. Of course. The more people that jettison it, whether we’re talking about Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa. Iran and others, the less trade that happens in dollars, that is a compounding economic problem for the United States of America. People are getting rid of our treasuries, they’re dumping our treassuries, okay? So higher interest rates, more burden on the U.S. Economy. Hey, that relates to our ability to make our own decisions so that we don’t become a vassal of a future IMF or something. A president and has to have a congress that closes ranks on these issues of sovereignty, on the issues of expenditure. We really are in need of, you know, I come from a discipline of the old FDR, New Deal, rebuild America, rebuild the infrastructure, keep building, building, build and create, teach entrepreneurship, teach people how to create things and make things. We have that capacity, we’re not doing it. So how do we get out of it? Is to stop the wars, first of all. Stop the wars. Stop holding hands with a country who’s forever on a war path. Must stop that. And then we start to rebuild diplomatic relations with countries knowing that we can be friends, but don’t try us. But let’s try to find a way to work together and use our resources to build, to build. To show. You know, America can be a friend again, not just a feared foe. We need to go back to the basics, which are education. Public education has fallen apart. We need to give people a chance to have a way of learning so that they can make a contribution to our society. Now, personally, I’m for healthcare for all. We shouldn’t have these big corporations cashing in on the health misery of the American people. We should have jobs for all, we should have an opportunity for every person who’s able-bodied to be able to make a living, Make a contribution to society. We need to protect our air and our water. Our water right now ends up being a bargaining chip for these new data centers. Why should we be sacrificing the water that people need to survive just to say, well, we’re going to be smarter because we use more AI? See, we have, and you know where it all goes back to, here we are in Maine. New England had those town hall meetings some years ago. Norman Rockwell, you know, that painting of the man standing up, freedom of speech, okay? It’s, you go back to the town hall, literally, not just figuratively on the internet, you go to the back to town hall where people are meeting each other and they talk about what they want out of a country. And then you require people want to be a representative to meet with those groups and to hear what people have to say about what are their aspirations? What are their dreams for America? You get, it’s a rebuilding that has to happen. It has to happened from a neighborhood all the way up, Tucker. We have to, we have to. Re-excite our civic soul. We have to learn what it means to be a citizen again, in a democracy that we can, or a republic, as I would like to refer to it as. We need to refresh that republic with our own civic involvement. And if we fail to do that, then America gradually fades away into the pages of history. You know, we’re not guaranteed this country. Eternal vigilance truly is the price of liberty. And this discussion today is about being vigilant. It’s about understanding at every turn where America’s interests might be harmed.

Tucker [01:05:12] I think the first expression of civic engagement might be national protests against this bill.

Dennis Kucinich [01:05:20] I agree. I agree, people should be going to their town halls. And first of all, you can type in section 219 NDAA and get a copy of the bill, you understand what it means. But You know, this discussion today, we’ve given, you know, I’ve given you some content of what the specifics are because there’ll be people arguing specifics and and what the cost is and what what israel has to gain and what america has to lose and you know when you’re talking about merging the most sensitive areas uh and you’re taking about giving away american jobs you’re talking about America plus Israeli technology equals genocide now? Well, wait a minute, with no serious discussion about it and no legislative review, this is just going to happen? Sure, people need to go to their town halls and start saying stop, but this is happening. This thing is an express train. It’s coming down the tracks, Tucker. Congress comes back on the 13th of July and they’re going to try to grease the wheels to make sure this thing moves through. Who are they? They are the people that are running the government internally and externally to push legislation not just for 1.5 trillion for more wars, but to make we bring Israel into the decision-making process formally in the Department of Defense through this Section 219, which merges. Uh… The defense capabilities and integrates defense capabilities and eliminates duplication you’re talking about eliminating duplication you’re together your one year you’re single unit then

Tucker [01:07:12] At some point we’re going to get, because nothing is hidden forever, we’re going to find out exactly how many women and children, non-combatants Israel murdered in Gaza and Lebanon and the West Bank and public opinion in this country will join the rest of the world in revulsion and horror and Israel will suffer the same fate that Germany has suffered for 80 years, which is, you know, having to public to confront what you did. Cause all countries have to confront what they do. And I just think anyone who’s on board with something like this now, these are like the last moments where you could vote for this with a straight face after this, every person who votes for this is going to have to answer for it in this life and the next.

Dennis Kucinich [01:07:59] I think not only are you correct, Tucker, but… The consequences of this are going to be felt for the foreseeable future. And this is really a moment of truth for America.

Tucker [01:08:23] You’ve really added so much to this, Dennis Kucinich. Thank you very much, and I hope this makes some small difference.

Dennis Kucinich [01:08:29] Thank you Tucker, appreciate it.