Glenn Greenwald
Politics • Writing • Culture
How Endless War Bankrupted the US While Inflicting Mass Suffering at Home. Plus: Macron Threatens Internet Shutdown & Update on US Govt’s Private Data Purchases
Video Transcript
July 10, 2023
post photo preview

Watch the full episode here:

placeholder

 

Good evening. It's Thursday, July 6th.  Welcome to a new episode of System Update, our live nightly show that airs every Monday through Friday, at 7:00 pm Eastern, exclusively here on Rumble, the free speech alternative to YouTube.

Tonight: Is there any connection between the U.S. posture of Endless war and the declining quality of life for Americans at home? Put another way, if the U.S. Government every year transfers hundreds of billions of dollars to the arms industry, the CIA, and the Pentagon to fight and fuel wars – as the U.S. is now doing in Ukraine and has been doing non-stop for the last 25 years – will that have any negative effect on the ability and willingness of the U.S. Government to provide more opportunities and better living conditions for its citizens?

Until recently, those questions need not even be asked. Its truth was glaringly obvious. That Americans had to choose between "guns and butter" became such conventional wisdom that its original authorship is not certain; it's typically attributed to Secretary of State William Bryan, who resigned as Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of State in 1915, in protest of Wilson's obvious desire to involve the U.S. in the European War that became known as World War I, and in particular to the exploding costs of military spending, which he argued would destroy the American way of life at home. 

Yet somewhere along the way, it became controversial, almost taboo, in establishment discourse to recognize this connection. And it seems deliberate.

Last week, a pro-war outlet that alternates between neoliberalism and its close cousin neoconservatism – called the New Republic – attacked Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the podcast host Jimmy Dore and myself for arguing that one reason to cease spending so much money on the proxy war in Ukraine – aside from the great danger of escalation between nuclear powers – is that that massive amount of money could find much better uses to improve the lives of American citizens – instead of fight over who will rule certain provinces in eastern Ukraine 

According to that article, our attempt to connect massive war spending in Ukraine and elsewhere with Americans' quality of life made us Kremlin propagandists – what doesn't do that these days? – but it reflects the growing refusal to acknowledge that massive, endless spending on the American war machine drowns the country in debt, which in turn limits the government's ability to attend to the needs of American citizens and improve the conditions of their lives.

Just today, the New York Times – a newspaper that has steadfastly supported Biden's proxy war spending in Ukraine – published an editorial warning, as the headline announced, that "America is Living on Borrowed Money." As a result, said the Paper of Record, Americans must brace for what the billionaire-owned paper called "painful choices" – namely, sharp cuts in the benefits most important to them: 

 

Democrats must recognize that changes to Social Security and Medicare, the major drivers of expected federal spending growth, should be on the table. Anything less will prove fiscally unsustainable. (The New York Times. July 6, 2023)

 

The one question not mentioned in the editorial: whether the U.S. Government might want to consider taking a break from endless warfare and spending more than the next 14 countries combined on weapons acquisition. The idea that there is a connection between the wars cheered by the NYT and its comrades and the liberal establishment, and the quality of life of ordinary Americans of the kind rarely seen by the paper's editors is not only ignored but rendered taboo. We'll explore this question further.

Then: French President Emmanuel Macron is responding to unrest and protests in his country the way Western governments these days do: by plotting to roll back basic freedoms and civil liberties. Yesterday he warned that France would shut down all social media in the event of similar protests of the kind that swept the country last week after a 17-year-old boy was shot and killed by police while driving without a license, and today French lawmakers authorized its domestic spying agencies to start using cell phone data to track the population  - specifically, reports Le Monde, "by remotely activating the camera, microphone and GPS of their phones and other devices." We'll examine these developments and the dynamic they raise.

Finally: several weeks ago, we reported that the U.S. intelligence community – the CIA, FBI, DHS and the rest – are purchasing what it calls "commercially available data" about Americans that is deeply invasive, enabling the collection of dossiers about our lives that are remarkably intimate and comprehensive. There's an update to that story: there's now a bipartisan bill pending that would ban the U.S. Security State from doing this. We'll tell you all about that.

As we do every Tuesday and Thursday, as soon as we’re done with our one-hour show here on Rumble, we will move to Locals for our interactive after-show to take your questions and comment on your feedback.

To obtain access to our after-show, simply sign up as a member to our Locals community – the red button is right below the video player here on the Rumble page. 

As a reminder, System Update is available in podcast form as well. We’re available on Spotify, Apple and all other major podcasting platforms where you can listen to the show in podcast version 12 hours after we first aired live here on Rumble. You can also rate and review each episode, which will help us spread the visibility of the program.

For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update, starting right now.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
17
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Watch Tonight's Monologue

Due to a connection issue, our stream was cut short tonight.
You can find the entire episode below.

We apologize for this technical difficulty - thank you so much for your continued support.

00:43:24
Listen to this Article: Reflecting New U.S. Control of TikTok's Censorship, Our Report Criticizing Zelensky Was Deleted

For years, U.S. officials and their media allies accused Russia, China and Iran of tyranny for demanding censorship as a condition for Big Tech access. Now, the U.S. is doing the same to TikTok. Listen below.

Listen to this Article: Reflecting New U.S. Control of TikTok's Censorship, Our Report Criticizing Zelensky Was Deleted
WEEKLY WEIGH-IN: Another Week Another News Cycle

What’s happening in politics that you want to talk about? Are there any burning topics you think Glenn needs to cover? Any thoughts you’d like to share?

This post will be pinned to our profile for the remainder of this week, so comment below anytime with your questions, insights, future topic ideas/guest recommendations, etc. Let’s get a conversation going!

Glenn will respond to a few comments here—and may even address some on our next supporters-only After Show.

Thank you so much for your continued support through another week of SYSTEM UPDATE with Glenn Greenwald!

Let's have a great week everyone!

🏆Dog-of-the-Week:

Dog-of-the-Week goes to TOBY. Our well-groomed cohost kept Victor company as Glenn responded to the Locals community questions.

post photo preview
As the Daily Wire Publicly Negotiated a Debate with Candace Owens, it Secretly Sought -- and Obtained -- a Gag Order Against Her
Due to a prior restraint order against Owens, the much-anticipated Israel debate with Ben Shapiro appears to be off.

On April 5, Candace Owens publicly invited her former Daily Wire colleague Ben Shapiro to a debate about "Israel and the current definition of antisemitism." It was Owens' criticisms of U.S. financing of Israel, and her criticisms of Israel's war in Gaza, that caused her departure from the Daily Wire two weeks earlier.

Both Shapiro and Daily Wire CEO Jeremy Boreing responded by saying they would like to arrange the debate requested by Owens. That night, Shapiro appeared to accept her offer, writing on X: "Sure, Candace. I texted you on February 29th offering this very thing." The Daily Wire co-founder added: "Let's do it on my show this Monday at 5pm at our studios in Nashville; 90 minutes, live-streamed."

After Owens objected to the format and timing, she and Boreing exchanged several tweets in which they appeared to be negotiating, and then agreeing to, the terms and format for the debate. Owens had suggested the debate be moderated by Joe Rogan or Lex Fridman. Shaprio said he wanted no moderator. They ultimately agreed to the terms, with Boreing offering a series of conditions, including a no-moderator debate, and with Owens publicly accepting

Two weeks later, many readers of both Shapiro and Owens noticed, and complained, that the debate had not yet happened. On April 24, Owens addressed those inquiries by explaining that the Daily Wire had yet to propose dates, while reiterating her strong desire to ensure the debate happened.

But the debate was never going to happen. That is because the Daily Wire -- in secret and unbeknownst to its readers -- sought a gag order to be placed on Owens after she had called for a debate. They did this under the cover of secrecy, before a private arbitrator, at exactly the same time that they were claiming in public that they wanted this debate and were even negotiating the terms with her. To this date, the Daily Wire has not informed its readers, seeking to understand why the much-anticipated debate had not yet happened, that they had sought and obtained a gag order against Owens.

When seeking a gag order to be imposed on Owens, the Daily Wire accused her of violating the non-disparagement clause of her agreement with the company. To substantiate this accusation, the company specifically cited Owens' initial tweet requesting a debate with Shapiro as proof of this disparagement, along with concerns she voiced that Shapiro appeared to be violating the confidentiality agreement between them by publicly maligning Owens's views to explain her departure from the company. While the company claimed before the arbitrator that it did not object in principle to a "healthy debate," it urged the imposition of a gag order on Owens by claiming that the way she requested the debate constituted disparagement of Shapiro and the site.

To justify the gag order it wanted, the company also cited various criticisms of the Daily Wire and Shapiro on X that Owens had "liked." This proceeding took place as part of an exchange of legal threats between the parties after the public agreement to debate about Israel was solidified. Those threats arose from the fact that various Daily Wire executives and hosts, in both public and private, were castigating Owens as an anti-Semite. On March 22, Daily Wire host Andrew Klaven published a one-hour video that hurled multiple accusations, including anti-Semitism, at Owens. The Daily Wire cited Owens' response to that video -- her defense of herself from those multiple accusations -- as further proof that she needed to be gagged.

The initial tweet from Owens not only requested a debate, but also included a video from the popular comedian Andrew Schulz, who had mocked the Daily Wire for firing Owens over disagreements regarding Israel, and specifically mocked Shapiro for his willingness to debate only undergraduate students. The tweet underneath Owens's original debate request included a summary of Schulz's mockery of Shapiro which stated: Schulz now "realizes Ben Shapiro is only good at debating college liberals & can’t win debates against serious competition." 

After the prior restraint hearing sought by the Daily Wire and Shapiro, the arbitrator sided with them and against Owens. The arbitrator agreed with the Daily Wire that Owens' call to debate Shapiro, and her follow-up negotiations of the debate, constituted "disparagement" of the company and Shapiro. The company argued that any further attempt by Owens to debate, as well her suggesting that the debate would expose the Daily Wire's real "priorities," constituted criticisms of the site and of Shapiro, criticisms that the arbitrator concluded Owens was barred from expressing under her contract with the company.

The arbitrator thus imposed a gag order of prior restraint on Owens. Among other things, the order banned Owens from saying or doing anything in the future which could tarnish or harm the reputation of the Daily Wire and/or Ben Shapiro. Given that the Daily Wire had argued, and the arbitrator agreed, that Owens' offers to debate Shapiro about Israel and anti-semitism were themselves "disparaging," the Daily Wire has ensured that the debate with Owens that they publicly claimed to want could not, in fact, take place. Any such debate would be in conflict with the gag order they obtained on Owens from expressing any criticisms of the site or of Shapiro.

When asked for comment to be included this story, Owens replied: I "wish I could comment on this but I can’t." She added: "can neither confirm nor deny."

Boreing said: "your story is inaccurate to the point of being false," though he did not specify a single inaccuracy, nor did he deny that the Daily Wire had sought and obtained a gag order on Owens at the same time they were publicly posturing as wanting a debate with her. The confirmation we obtained of all these facts is indisputable. Boreing added: "I’m sure you can appreciate how fraught a high profile break-up like this is. For that reason, we are trying to resolve our issues with Candace privately."

It certainly seems true that the Daily Wire is attempting to achieve all of this "privately." Nonetheless, Ben Shapiro has constructed his very lucrative media brand and persona based on his supposed superiority in debating, a reputation cultivated largely as a result of numerous appearances at undergraduate schools around the country where he intrepidly engages with students who are often in their teens or early twenties. Both Shapiro and the Daily Wire have also predicated their collective media brand on an eagerness to engage in free and open debate with anyone, and to vehemently oppose any efforts to silence people, especially those in media, from expressing their political views.

It was the imperatives of this media branding that presumably led the Daily Wire and Shapiro to publicly agree to a debate with Owens over Israel and anti-semitism in the first place. Indeed, when it became apparent early after the start of Israel's war in Gaza that Owens had major differences with Shapiro, Boering responded to calls from Israel supporters for Owens to be fired by proclaiming in November: 

[E]ven if we could, we would not fire Candace because of another thing we have in common - a desire not to regulate the speech of our hosts, even when we disagree with them. Candace is paid to give her opinion, not mine or Ben’s. Unless those opinions run afoul of the law or she violates the terms of her contract in some way, her job is secure and she is welcome at Daily Wire.

But a mere four months later, Owens, despite being of one of the company's most popular hosts, was out. The company had concluded that her increasingly vocal criticisms of Israel, opposition to U.S. financing of it, and her views on anti-semitism were incompatible with the Daily Wire's policies.

All of those issues would likely have been the subject of the public debate that Owens sought, and that the Daily Wire claimed to want. Instead, the Daily Wire has succeeded in obtaining a gag order that, on its face, prevents Owens, in advance, from questioning or criticizing both the Daily Wire or Shapiro in any way.

 

 

Read full Article
post photo preview
Jen Psaki's Lies Expose the Fraud of "Disinformation"; Israelis Endanger Americans and Block Humanitarian Aid
Video Transcript

Watch the full episode here: 

placeholder
 

Podcast: Apple - Spotify 

Rumble App: Apple - Google


Good evening. It's Monday, May 13. 

Tonight: The term "disinformation" gained widespread usage after the 2016 election and since then has become one of the most consequential—and deceitful—terms in our political lexicon. Most of the liberal sector of the press—meaning the dominant strain devoted to the victory of Joe Biden and the Democratic Party—continuously herald themselves as the Guardians of Truth and our Protectors against the evils of disinformation. 

And yet it is hard not to notice something quite odd about our courageous and noble combatants against disinformation: namely, they lie more frequently, more casually, and with far greater impact than any other societal faction. When they get caught in these lies, they never correct them, never explain them, and certainly never retract them – they instead simply move on to the next set of partisan lies because they genuinely believe that their cause of defeating Trump is so just and so righteous that anything and everything they invoke to further that aim, including overtly lying, is inherently justified.

As most of you likely know, Jen Psaki is the former Biden White House press secretary and current MSNBC host. The ultimate redundancy and she perfectly illustrates this twisted dynamic as much as anyone. She is constantly hectoring and sermonizing about the grave harms of disinformation from her cable perch and yet she is also, at the same time, one of the most prolific and egregious spreaders of disinformation. 

Just as South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem was forced to do, Psaki just announced that she would recall her new book to remove a blatant lie that she inserted in it to defend Joe Biden, an act she was forced into only because her fellow corporate media employees denounced her for it. This is, to put it mildly, not the first time that Jen Psaki has been caught spreading blatant lies—though it may be the first time she was forced to admit it—and her test case vividly illustrates the utter fraud of this newfound anti-"disinformation" industry.

Then: the U.S.-backed Israeli war in Gaza is now grinding into its 8th month. Back in March, President Biden said that Israel must not enter the refugee camp in Rafah, proclaiming it a "red line." Netanyahu promptly announced that he would ignore Biden— why wouldn't he? —and would proceed to do exactly that. While Biden has symbolically "suspended" the transfer of a few weapons to Israel—ones that Israel is already fully stocked with thanks to Biden—his administration continues to fund the Israeli war and promises to continue to send arms.

All of this comes in the face of a new report about 20 American healthcare workers who are trapped in Gaza, unable to leave. Despite having just arrived there, they are already documenting how malnourished they are and unable to access basic health care. Earlier today, Israeli militants blocked the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza via the West Bank by ransacking trucks filled with food and medicine destined for the starving population in Gaza. So many new pieces of conclusive evidence of the famine and horrors in Gaza have emerged over the past several days that we believe it is vital to examine them to get an even fuller picture of the horrors and atrocities the U.S. Government is enabling.

For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update, starting now.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
THE WEEKLY UPDATE: MAY 6-10
Weekly Newsletter

We are pleased to send you a summary of the key stories we covered last week on SYSTEM UPDATE. 

—Glenn Greenwald

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals