Whistleblower Exposes the Real Puppet Masters Controlling the State Department and Plans for Gaza

So, you were marched out of the State Department  two weeks ago. You left involuntarily. Um, and I want to hear why. But first, what did  you do there? What was your job at the state? I was a press officer in the neareastern affairs  bureau. Uh, started September 2024. Essentially, the main breadandbut role of a press officer  is twofold. One is preparing the spokesperson. before they go on the podium and do their daily  press briefing. Yeah. And second, reporters ask. questions all the time. Uh so a reporter with XYZ  outlet submits a question uh and it's our job to.

use uh cleared lines or cleared meaning approved  lines and send them back to uh the reporter. And if you ever read an article and it says a  sto a a State Department spokesperson said X, those are press off press officers taking those  cleared lines and sharing it with that reporter. [Applause] [Music].

[Music] [Applause] [Music]. who clears the lines? Uh, good question. So, a  press officer will will draft the lines. Um, from. there it will go up a uh ladder essentially. So  there'll be desk officers um uh leadership in the.

NA press office itself and then it goes up to the  seventh floor meaning uh the secretary's policy. planning office the deputy secretary of state's  office but it's not themself like you're not going. to get the deputy secretary of state looking at  this right it's going to just be like a staffer. who represents that equity so uh it becomes a a  a an inclusive process to make sure everyone has. eyes on it and if there are flags uh they'll let  you No, for example, you could be drafting a line. on Israel, but it involves Lebanon, but there's  another press officer and a whole other desk and.

leadership working on Lebanon that might might  have an equity that you may not be aware of that. they'll edit the line. So, describe the bureau  that you work for, Near Eastern Affairs. Yes. What. is that? It's Well, it's an old school name. It  basically means anything involved uh in the Middle. East. Um so, it's Morocco to Iran essentially.  The whole Middle East, not just Levant, like the whole Middle East. Yeah. Near East. Yeah,  it's it's a they need to update the name. I think. people are aware, but yeah, it's it's the entire  uh Middle East. So, it's uh they they use all.

these acronyms. So, um Israeli Palestinian Affairs  is IPA or ISPAL. Um Saudi, Oman, Yemen, Bahrain, that whole grouping is ARP for Arabian Peninsula.  And then North Africa is its own entity as well. From Morocco to Egypt goes under NA. Okay. So,  it's the Levant, the Gulf, Afran. Yeah. You're. on South Africa. Um. Huh. Interesting. And that's  all in the same bureau. So the State Department.

divides the worlds in world into bureaus. Correct.  Which are often called desks. Correct. Correct. So from Canada down to Chile's WHA, Western  Hemisphere Affairs, Asia's EAP, Eastern uh Asia, East Asia Pacific. So we have all these divisions.  Europe, Africa, correct? EUR for Europe. Africa's. AF. Um, I was in NEA. Um, and I was a press  officer there. Originally covering Lebanon, Jordan just for a couple months and I quickly  shifted to uh, Ispal, Israel, Palestine. Israel,

Palestine. Whoa. Um, so that's the the the hottest  of all desks, I would think. Yes. Most scrutiny, most at stake, rhetoric, most closely  supervised. I would I'm just guessing, but Right. Yes, it's true. um the press officer  for Israeli Palestinian Affairs, you're on a. stage constantly because you're getting the  most questions from reporters for good reason.

um the spokesperson is going to deal with the most  questions at the podium about the topic. And so. uh it was a compliment yet difficult for me to  process the fact that I it was requested from. various people in leadership. Uh when the uh uh  administration was changing in January, they said, "Hey, I know you've only been here for a couple  months, but we're going to put you on this in this. position." Which was surprising, but I wanted  to take on the challenge at the time. Really?

So you were asked to do that by the incoming  administration, by the Trump administration. Uh it. was well it was people from uh it was leadership  in NEA which some of them were civil servants. but they were experienced people that were that  recognized um how heavy a topic it was going to. be coming in. Huh. How do you um get current on  that? How do you do your research? So it's it's. multiffold. So we do receive like just in terms  of standard mainstream media, we do get like. uh copies of articles and coverage and it's  not necessarily politically um uh isolated.

At least in the beginning it wasn't. So I would  see everything in my email inbox. Plus personally, right, I'm always absorbing things and you're  only going to be a good press officer if you're. reading Twitter and the standard emails you're  getting um through the inbox. Yeah. Um, so you're. absorbing a lot of information and it's not just  the details. Like of course if I have a question, I want to go to the Israel experts um at the State  Department. So if there's a detail I don't know,

there might be a desk officer or someone um like  that that would know that the those the numbers. or the challenges that that I need for a specific  press line. Um for me though as a press officer, my addition in those conversations is like more uh  uh stylistic. Okay, if we put this line out there, we're going to invite these problems or it's good  if we say it this way because uh this will help us. uh it'll defend us in this other way. So, it was  a a stylistic endeavor um for from day to day. Um.

and you don't have full control cuz obviously the  personality of someone at the podium is going to. say it one way even though I was hoping this line  would deliver this other way, right? You don't you. don't have full control, but you you do have a  who who's the spokesman for the near east? Well, right now it's it's more the spokesperson of the  entire department that I was briefing. Okay. So, it was Tammy Bruce. She left. Um and then  there's uh deputies that are currently. Where did Tammy Bruce go? She's going to  the UN from understanding. Okay. Um so,

were you given parameters like how do you get your  orders? Like we do say this, we don't say that. So, the main day-to-day activity that I think you  people may or may not be aware of but or probably. not aware of uh is that I have these I had these  packets called press guidance called PG. So on. Tuesday and Thursday, which were the days that  um a spokesperson would go on to the podium, I would have all the sample questions and some  of them were tasked from the main press office.

um in at the State Department, but I also would  come up with my own questions like, "Hey, we're. getting this question a lot. We need to have lines  for this. We can't leave this alone." So I would. have I would create a packet, clear it through  through the building like I was saying earlier um. through the seventh floor and then I would present  that brief the spokesperson about 2 hours before. she went on to the podium. How do you know what  the official US position especially on that topic,

Israel Palestine, I mean that's again the most  politicized area there is and it's the stakes. are high. So how do you know what the official US  position is on that conflict? Uh it's a very good. question and especially in the beginning of of  the administration, it's a bit of an art. You're. taking the the the gold for a press officer  are lines from the principles. Essentially, if President Trump says something, if special  envoy Wickoff says something, I take those quotes. and I'm like, "Okay, that's policy." So if he's  talking about, and I think that's literally true,

right? I mean, the president sort of unilaterally  can form our policy. Yeah. And there's no. questioning like a quote that comes from a  principle, especially President Trump. uh or. Secretary Rubio for the State Department uh and is  often the case. So I would take those uh lines and. it would answer certain questions that would  come up. Where are we with the ceasefire? Oh, special envoy Wickoff went on XYZ Sunday show. So  I'm pull that line and I'll brief the spokesperson.

and then she or he can quote special wake up at  the podium again because that's the policy. That's. the easiest way of doing it. You don't always have  quotes. So what would happen instead is it kind of. how would you ever get question on that question  on well I mean if you say you know you should. respond in this way and then cite the president or  Steve Wickoff or Secretary Rubio then that kind of. that kind of ends the conversation right it should  end the conversation uh I what was surprising. and this will go back to why when I ended up  departing and getting fired fired in August.

was that on a specific question one of the three  events I think led up to uh uh my firing uh was on. uh a Monday we received a question about force  displacement which is essentially ethnic cleansing. and what our policy was about Israel intending  to move uh Palestinians in Gaza to South Sudan. So to South Sudan. Yeah. That was every every two  or three months we had a new um reporting would.

come out. In the spring it was they're moving um  Palestinians in Gaza to Libya. There was a rumor. about Somali land even though we don't recognize  Somali land but there was reporting about are we. going to do an exchange where we recognize Somali  land but they have to take on Palestinians and. then we had an Ethiopia round and then the la  last round that I witnessed before I left was. uh South Sudan. So and so that appears in  somewhere in the press appears somewhere.

in the press and we received a question. What's  your response to this reporting? And then um I. in I came up with a line not but it wasn't a line  that like I just came up out of the blue. It was. something that's President Trump and special envoy  WhitF had said in other words in the spring. I. said we do not support force displacement and and  why what did they say about it? So that was your. interpretation of what they said. Do you remember  what they said? What Wickoff and Trump said on. that topic? So specifically special on why Witoff  said something we're not said something along the.

lines of we're not trying to evict anybody. Right.  So from as a press officer, there's an art to it, right? Because you're not you can sometimes do  the exact quote or you can come up with a new line. that reflects that quote. So we've done a lot of  segments over many years attacking college. Most. of them are not worth sending your kids. They're  definitely not worth paying for. In fact, they're. counterproductive. They're the source of a lot  of this country's problems. But that doesn't mean. that all colleges are bad. We've looked far and  wide for good ones. And Grand Canyon University is. near the top of the list. It's a private Christian  university located in the Arizona mountains,

the best part of Arizona. Grand Canyon believes  that every one of us is endowed by God with. inaliable rights. Life, liberty, and the pursuit  of happiness. Rights are not something that. politicians give us. Rights are something they  are sworn to uphold and defend. It's a totally. different way of looking at the world. At GCU,  purpose starts with service equipping students. to affect their families, communities, and the  world for good. Whether you're called to business,

education, ministry, whatever it is, Grand Canyon  University helps you honor that calling while. glorifying God through your work, real purpose in  life. Over 340 academic programs offered online, on campus, in hybrid formats. Take your pick.  GCU makes education accessible and is tailored. to you and your goals. Whether you're starting  fresh, you're going back to school to advance. your career, if you're ready to pursue a degree  and a purpose, Grand Canyon University, GCU is. ready for you. It's private. It's Christian.  It's affordable. Visit gcu.edu today. I think.

forced displacement and eviction are synonyms,  right? Any fair person would say that. Yeah. And keep in mind this had already been cleared.  It was approved for about a couple weeks before. um this particular question popped up because the  Ethiopia rumor was like July 28th. So I put in the. PG, put in the packet, cleared through. I briefed  it multiple times. So when that question came up, I said I actually probably had the right to just  send that line because I cleared so many times,

but to be extra careful, I sent it out to the  uh uh the the spokes person and their staff. and made sure the the most important equities  were pre-claring it. And from my understanding, now I wasn't on the chain, but from my  understanding, they went to the secretary's office. and they cut that line of we do not support force  displacement. The only other bullet that we have, which is um uh pretty standard, is we don't  discuss private diplomatic conversations,

which is a standard line we always say, you know,  the investigation is ongoing. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. Yeah. It's one of those lines like  kind of pretty standard. So I that that line was. there. So that's all we ended up providing. Uh so  there's some sensitivity which I found found very. odd because out of the three events I I can get  into other ones but that was like number two but. when the day the two days before I was uh fired  that Thursday and Friday the only feedback that.

I got cuz cuz my bureau was confused as to why  uh the secretary's office was coming down on me, right? Cuz they don't know me. They don't I don't  interact with a random press officer at NEA, right? Maybe a little bit more because of the  sensitive topic, but chances are generally low. My leadership has said, "Hey, they're asking where  you got that line from from Monday." I'm like, "Today's Thursday. You're 4 days later. They're  asking me where I where I got this line that I. drafted." But they cut it. I went through the  procedure, right? I cut it. They cut it. And I.

The reporter never saw that line. Can you explain  why they cut it? No, they all I got from all I. heard all I all I witnessed was the uh acting  spokesperson saying so you were um paraphrasing. the envoy Steve Wickoff and the president of  the United States Donald Trump when you said. the United States does not support a forced in  forced displacement. Yep. I don't think we do. support that. Do we by the way? I would hope so.  Yeah, one would hope not. Right. And especially.

we're not going to pay for that. Um, and they  cut that out but didn't explain why, right? And. then your supervisors came to you and said, "Hey,  they're complaining about you basically." Right. And they didn't they only specified that line,  just like the act of drafting it. And I was like, I have a track record. Um, they asked me Thursday  afternoon and Friday morning twice in a row, which is very odd for a random bullet. I was  like, I have a I have the evidence from July 28th. of clearing this press guidance with that line,  and here are the relevant quotes. Did anyone say,

"By the way, you may not know this, but the United  States does support force displacement." No one. said that. No one said that. But by the way,  sorry, I got it wrong. We're all about force. displacement. Okay. We want We want We kind of  want to trail a tear situation here cuz we're for. that. It's It's tragic cuz it's such a standard  bonker. Yeah. You That's something you would want. to advertise. You want to put out there that we're  against this like, "Hey, we still have some moral. standing somewhere." Um, and when the Washington  Post piece came out, I like the yesterday,

two days ago, saying we're we're there's some  plan involving the consultations of Tony Blair. of of moving Gazins out and we but we may pay for  something, a piece of it. And I'm like, why? So, is this why I got fired? Is it because I was I  was still sticking through this line and they saw. me as some kind of obstacle, which I wasn't,  cuz I was going through the exact procedures. they wanted. But I knew that when I was fired  as someone who was again close with political.

appointees and was civil servants and was pretty  well established in NEA, again I said earlier, you. don't get this role covering Israeli Palestinian  affairs on a whim. Um, and it was suddenly pushed. out. That means things are going to go into  a very radical direction. Uh, well, yeah. I. should also say because I I know that you will be  attacked and I'll be attacked for speaking to you. uh on the following grounds. This guy's a partisan  Democrat who liked Bernie. He was a sabotur,

a wrecker. Um, I know from our conversations off  camera, at least what you said to me was basically. agreed with Trump's foreign policy instincts. You  know, fewer pointless wars, like get along with. more people. Yeah, that was always that's that's  fair. I've I've always been an advocate the re. like for ending endless war on a personal level.  And so when President Trump is saying, "Hey, we don't want to get into any forever wars."  I'm like, "That's great." And we technically. started with a ceasefire in Gaza and the start  of the administration. That was something to to.

we could have expanded on. We were uh speaking to  the Iranians. So there's so many chances for true. peace, but things went in the wrong direction.  I would say somewhere in the summer, right? Uh, I remember listening to President Trump's  speech in Saudi in May where he was talking about. amazing speech. Love that speech. I remember I was  I was like I was cheering. Exactly. And in my in. my cubicle at the State Department, I was like  this is a great speech. I was too. That was one. of the best speeches ever given. And I was like  this is this is amazing. It was ballsy too speech.

Calling out neocons like no one calls out neocons  in DC, right? Like we we brushed that under the. rug. We kept moving, right? We still see him as an  analyst here and there on TV. Here and there they. dominate the biggest cable news channel. Yes, I'm  aware. Yeah. Yeah. So, I was so glad to see that. But then why two weeks later were we sabotaging  our own talks with Iran and then bombing them. Right. So, the events like the idea that I'm some  partisan is is just wrong. I Yes. On a personal.

uh avenue, I don't want any more endless wars.  And but President Trump was in line with that. Uh, and I was going I was doing my job in line with  the procedures that were necessary every single. day. Yeah, but it sounds like you agreed with  them. So, I guess that's my point if you you. like that. I mean, I don't know. You know, a lot  of these some of the labels are real, but some of. them are also created and certainly sustained in  order to keep people from listening to each other. so they don't discover they actually agree on a  lot. Yeah. And if you love the Saudi speech and.

I love the Saudi speech, then we're probably not  too far from each other then. because I thought. that and that was a Donald Trump speech. And  by the way, if you're such a partisan Democrat, you're admitting on camera that you loved a  Donald Trump speech. You're not too partisan, I guess. Uh but anyway, I just want to see because  I'm here. I honesty matters. Yeah, it's like it's. the it's the it's the issues we have in foreign  policy that I matter that I care about. I don't. care about the labels, per se. Well, I don't  either. Well, they're clearly meaningless. Yes. If we're both cheering on the the Riad speech. So,  yes. Okay. I just wanted to establish that. So you.

start hearing from your bosses like, "Hey, what  is this thing that you put in there about opposing. force displacement? We've always four Yeah. four  or five days earlier. Not even like the next day. There was a delay annoyance. It was weird." Uhhuh.  So you said that there were three examples of this. where they found problems with your work. Right.  And some of this like it kind of made sense from. hindsight because I didn't like in the moment I  didn't realize but Sunday um Israel had had uh.

uh struck a tent with several journalists living  inside including an who had who millions of people. had watched cover the events in Gaza. Uh they all  died. I drafted a line a few lines and by the way. there were not soft some softy lines. The only  thing that was there that they didn't like was. I did share condolences, which is pretty standard  uh uh policy. Condolences? What do you mean? So,

I said, "We share condolences for the families  of the killed journalists." That's all. Well, that sounds that sounds like hate speech  to me. Yeah. Condolences to the families. of people who got killed. Non-combatants killed  in war. Yep. Yep. And what's so disappointing, too, was that Wait, wait. So what so what happened  when you put that in there? I was immediately told. um from a senior official that we don't know what  Aness did essentially and I was like that's odd.

and what he did like we don't know what his like  conduct was like we don't know we need like we. need more information he might it was she was she  or he was alluding to the fact that he may have. done something or he's a he's a problematic  actor in some way but it was weird. Okay, I I let me just say I would be totally comfortable  sharing condolences with Osama bin Laden's family. I hate Osama bin Laden. On the other hand, if  somebody dies, it's okay to say I'm sorry to.

his family that he That's what I'm saying. That's  immaterial. I would say that to the family of an. executed murderer in a prison. It doesn't mean  I support the murder or the murderer, but this. is family. Like that's okay. That's called like  human decency. and anyone who's against that. Yeah. And it seemed that we're setting up this  constant this is this is my issue that I noticed. from the get-go, a constant deferring to Israel.  It was like waiting for some statement like let.

them speak first. And then on Monday, Israel  said all Hamas, which is a throwaway line they. they've used. All Hamas, meaning what? They're  journalists. We're all Hamas. Yeah. Or at least. with an US, if I remember correctly. And so they  brushed that away. Were they? Look, my point when. I heard that was what does our intelligence say?  If they were like being super strict and said, "Hey, we're going to we're going to triple  check using our US intelligence of who these.

people are." Maybe, maybe. Right. Uh I still  don't agree with cutting the condolences line, but sure. But why is there Oh, Israel said this.  Done. We don't have intel services. Right. Right. So what what's with the instinct to defer to  Israel when we have this entire apparatus that. could check that and then by Tuesday we got like  17 different intelligence services in this country. that take you know a trillion dollars a year or  whatever the actual budget is and we don't consult.

them at all. We wait for the Israeli spokesman to  tell us what reality is awful. Is that what you're. saying? Yeah. And how is that America first?  Right. this this whole apparatus of like of of. mirroring certain Israeli statements and waiting  for them to comment first w was something that I. found tragic. It was it was odd. Um and that's  what ended up happening by the press briefing. that Tuesday were like we refer you to Israel  which was a line that um popped up in my press.

guidance way too often. People don't generally  brag about their wireless companies, but what. if you have something to brag about? Imagine that  your wireless company was so great that you told. random people about it. That could actually happen  with Pure Talk. Their service is amazing. It comes. from exactly the same cell towers as the other  companies. So, it's just as good, literally, but for a fraction of the price. And maybe more  important, Pure Talk has actual American values. They just forgave $10 million in veteran debt  for giving away a,000 American flags to veterans.

That's not how corporate America tends to act, to  put it mildly. They've also raised almost half a. million dollars to prevent veteran suicide. So,  they're decent people working there and a great. 5G network. You get unlimited talk, tax, plenty  of data, just $25 a month. A month that saves. the average family over $1,000 a year. It's time  to switch your wireless company, Pure Talk. Go to.

puretalk.com/tucker. Save an additional 50% off  your first month. again puretalk.com/tucker to. make the switch today. It is wireless. You might  actually brag about we were so we don't have a. position on it. Right. Right. And that came up  on any any topic that was somewhat sensitive or. waiting for Israel to make a move. Does the State  Department have any position that contradicts the. position of the Israeli government that you're  aware of? No. I think no the closest I think on.

on for US interest we do but in our current policy  and posture we do not so not one the closest we do. you have any siblings I do you love them I love  them do you have any sticking points with them. is there is there something you don't fully agree  on as any siblings do exactly exactly so loving. someone or having an alliance with someone or even  like sharing the same parents as somebody doesn't. mean that you have to agree at every little  point. It would be weird if you did. It would.

be weird. Yeah. Identical twins have disagree.  This is getting a little weird. Why is why is. why is it acting like this? It's very strange.  Um and I the closest we came and there was no. follow through was when uh uh I actually like  the statement. It was a thousand other things. I I had personal issues which was irrelevant.  But a master hakabe when there was like these. these ta attacks against the Christians in West  Bank. He did put out a statement saying these. attacks are unacceptable. We call in Israel  to investigate. But there's no followthrough,

right? What do you mean? He had a statement that  said oh I remember it very well. There's no Yeah, there's no there's no followthrough. And like  you're like, "Oh, that's a good statement. That's I'm like, "Wow, you can't attack Christians  with US tax dollars. Sorry." Yeah. Yep. And not. allowed. Yep. I don't care who you are. And it was  it was just a it was one statement and there was. no like and if we got questions like hey what's  the status of the investigation we referred to. Israel right so so no one at the state department  looked into it not that I saw this is a majority.

Christian country but nobody felt like that would  be a good use of American tax dollars to find. out what this was or ask anybody any questions  and that's the thing each time there's a call. for investigation a very rare opportunity that  that's in front of us there's no follow through. strong statement. We did the thing and you don't  hear about it for for weeks and months. So there's. no one at the State Department who cared. Look, I  don't want to speak for the entire I think there. there were people that cared. I think there are  Christians and look there are a lot there are.

civil servants or political appointees foreign  service officers that see see all of this and. they're and they're concerned and but it's a  it's it's this style of constantly deferring. to Israel that's at the forefront. So, we can  criticize up to a certain point. And it's awful. because if we want uh Israel to investigate,  then we should be following up and ask, "Hey,

what happened to the investigation? I thought you  were going to investigate. Where's the where are. the prosecutions? Who who did all the uh who did  this?" And then why? Yeah. Yeah. But we never hear. we never hear the follow-up. So there's no as far  as you're aware mechanism in the State Department. to because you've described a a relationship  that's unique. There's no other country in the. world that has this relationship with the United  States and a lot of resources go into supporting. that country. But there's no mechanism in the  United in the US State Department to like follow.

up on this look on in the public realm because I  was working I I work as a press officer, right? So, I'm always working with reporters and how like  this the the presentation those things matter. So, if there was a system of following up, I didn't  see it. It's possible. Personally, I kind of. doubt it. Um, but on the public, if they followed  up, you would have known about it because what if. somebody asks you, right? And you would think that  if there was followup, you'd want to advertise it.

too, like, hey, we followed up. But they were they  were uh the preference was to defer and deflect. and give nobody gives a [ __ ] You persecute you  know Christians with American tax dollars. Nobody. cares. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry you're making me mad. Um  no it's just a frust it's frustrating. I know it. is frustrating to see people get sh cuz it's  not a it's not a neutral situation like some. people are winning and some people are losing  and if the losers are people that you you know.

didn't do anything wrong the Christians aren't in  Hamas like what what's what's their crime look the. scenes the scenes are horrific so on a human level  it shouldn't matter but if that's the whole thing. of having ambassador could be there it's like at  least maybe you'll care about this and then yeah. you put a strong statement out but don't follow up  yeah they don't care what's the point yeah right. the The self-described Christians don't care  at all about the Christians. And by the way, the whole justification for all this, you just  said it. These journalists get blown up. They.

were Hamas. Okay, end of conversation. No one  can plausibly claim that a Christian family. are in Hamas. Okay, so like what? Tell me if  you can't claim that they're in Hamas while. simultaneously claiming that Hamas is uh you know  group of jihadis. They're Islamic extremists, which they also claim constantly, which I don't I  don't know if that's true, by the way. Seems more. like a political organization, but whatever it is,  they're telling us constantly they're al-Qaeda. So, it can't also be true that Christians are  member of al-Qaeda. Sorry. Yeah. Yeah. So,

then we know they're not in Hamas. So, why did  they get killed? Why was their church blown up? Why were they killed in that hospital? Like, what  is this? And there's not one person in the State. Department who cares enough to get to the bottom  of that question. Yeah. And all you saw, I mean, all I saw, President Trump did call Prime Minister  Netanyahu. Netanyahu gives gave an apology for. the the church that was attacked in in in Gaza,  one of many. But there's there's never followup. There's never like, hey, we this this is the  prosecution. This is where our investigation. landed. It's this quick twohour brush on the  rug, put a statement out, and then you don't.

hear anything ever again. Yeah. Um, wow. Okay. Uh  the third example of work that you produced that. your superiors were unhappy with and that led  ultimately to your firing was what? So it was. a Tuesday. So that's a press guidance day. All  the sample questions. It was actually arguably. um we we said OBBE which meant overcome by events  which means that we're like beyond its relevancy.

but like it was still could come up so I put it  I left it in there. was a reaction to Speaker. Johnson visiting the settlements in the West Bank.  And um I had a line pretty standard and kind of. not the not really specific but it said we support  stability in the West Bank. Stability. Yeah, we support stability. That's all. So and  the the last well the last piece was comma.

um which helps secure Israel, right? But the I  think the stable comment was I don't know too. much because if we say we want a stable West Bank,  are we accidentally being critical of something. Speaker Johnson or Israel is doing? Right. So what  is that? I flesh that out if you don't mind. Sure. I mean I know I know what you're saying but I'm  not sure everyone knows. I I Yeah, it's a good. question. So So why would the US government So the  US government is against extending condolences to. the families of non-combatants killed. Okay.  Correct. And the US government is also now in.

favor of the forced movement of large populations  outside their borders. Right. Okay. And now you're. saying the US government is against stability,  right? How are we against stability? Why is. stability a bad thing? Now, stability is a word  that's used a lot and we are on paper saying we. support stability in the region all the time.  Uh but in this specific context when discussing. settlements it will sound like we're critiquing  Israel indirectly by saying we support stability.

in reaction to a question about settlements.  Right? So that was how I interpreted the the. issue. So in other words that would you might  be suggesting that the US government opposes. radical demographic change in the West Bank.  Right now I have this line again just like the. force displacement. It had cleared previously, but  this is where what was discussed when this first. broke of my firing in the in the Washington Post  was that senior officials from Embassy Jerusalem,

David Milstein specifically, would occasionally  pop into my docs. Now, it didn't happen every. single day. Pop into your docs like at a Google  doc, right? Or or a it wasn't a Google doc, it was a it was like I don't know, the brand  doesn't matter, but some internal system. Yeah, an internal system. I would share it with um in  the morning the equities I was mentioning one of. the equities is embassy Jerusalem. Okay. So an  equity just for state department speak people.

haven't heard it tell us what an equity is. It's  like someone has some stake in those lines and. embassy Jerusalem does obviously cuz they're the  ones they're the US embassy in Jerusalem. the. US embassy in Jerusalem, American diplomats  posted Israel on those press briefing days, I would share it with them for them to review  the document and be like, "Okay, these are our. press lines for these sample questions. Are you  okay with them?" Now, it was interesting because. they often did not clear. They didn't reject  it and they just was a non-response because.

the press officers there would defer up the chain  to David Milstein and Ambassador Huckabe because. they didn't want to put their name on it because  if this is something they didn't like, no one. wants their name on a press guidance that wasn't  approved by these influential people. Who is David. Milstein? He is the senior adviser to Ambassador  Akabe. And what's his how old is he? What's his. background? Is he a career diplomat or uh he's a  from my understanding he's a political I believe. he worked on the hill. Um Oh, did he work for Ted  Cruz? Yes. Yes, he worked for Ted Cruz. Okay. And.

he is uh uh the stepson of your best friend Mark  Levin. He's Mark Leven's stepson. Yeah. Is working. at the State Department. Correct. Interesting. So,  every head of household wants to keep the family. safe. It's your chief duty. Simply Safe makes it  easy to do that. Now, conventional wisdom suggests. that a standard alarm that goes off during a  break-in is enough. Just have an alarm. Well, it's not enough. It's not even close to enough.  Think about it for a second. You don't want people.

in your house in the first place. True security  means preventing that before it begins. And that's. why you need Simply Safe. The system is designed  to be proactive, not reactive. And here's how it. works. They use smart cameras to identify anything  lurking outside your home. If there is something. lurking outside your home, they immediately alert  professional monitoring agents who intervene in. real time through two-way audio, confronting the  intruder, triggering sirens and spotlights and.

requesting rapid police dispatch. All helping to  stop the intruder while he's outside your home, not when he's already in your home. Does that  make sense? Yes, it does. It's real security. And that's why 4 million Americans use it every  day. With a 60-day money back guarantee and no. long-term contract, Simplysafe earns your business  by keeping you safe and satisfied every day. Visit. simplysafe.com/tucker to claim 50% off a new  system. simplysafe.com/tucker. There's no safe. like simply. So, David Milstein is a political  guy working now for Mike Huckabe in Jerusalem.

and he was going through your lines. Correct.  Okay. Uh now on paper uh he could be but the. the way that he would edit my docs as aggressively  as he would and we can get into this but the other. uh statements and pieces that were reported in the  Washington Post um he would push certain agenda. that was very aligned with Israel that I found  very problematic. Now, in this specific example,

because we're discussing the third example of why  I was fired, was that he changed the stability. line to uh we commend Speaker Johnson for visiting  Judea and Samaria. So, we as a government, what's. Judea and Samaria? It's a I it's a term that is b  it's like religious. It's it's it's about Israel's. land grab of the West Bank. It's are Judea  and Samaria like administrative districts? No,

there it's not. Is there a mayor of Samaria?  Nope. Doesn't exist. U because there's no actual. place called Judea and Samaria. Like the civil  authorities don't recognize Judea or Samaria. Nope. Okay. Nope. It's the more extreme wing of  the uh elements of the Israeli government and. David Milstein was in line with that language and  is designed to erase any Palestinian legitimacy.

that this is this is was supposed to be. So the  point is by using those terms, they're biblical. terms, they refer to regions described in  what Christians call the Old Testament. And the point is to remind everybody that this  land was promised by God to the Jewish peoples, the Hebrew people, and that, you know, anyone  who's lived there subsequently for the last. 3,000 years has no right to it. Right? That's the  that's that's the point. But I but from a sort of. government perspective, Judea and Samaria are not  real places in that they're not not recognized,

not nation states. They're not provinces. They're  not and and do they have clearly defined borders? Not from my understanding. I think they do. They  do not. And that would incre that would give you. uh that opens the door. It opens the door to  more land grabs. You know, it's it's okay. But. if a place doesn't have a clearly defined border,  then how can the US government refer to it in any.

kind of official capacity? They can. They can't.  And it's scary, too, because if you look at the. air strikes that Israel are doing, like Israel  is doing in like Syria, and they're building. settlements even outside the Golden Heights, it's  all part of this this uh I don't know what it is. This this idea of a greater Israel that people are  discussing that was beyond these borders. So it's. scary and it's and it's against the stability  of the region that we've been calling for as a. government for decades. So certainly in the modern  era definitely since the fall of the Ottoman.

Empire in 1918, you know, you've had clear borders  between countries and in fact we're fighting a war. against Russia right now on the on the premise  that they violated those borders by moving into. eastern Ukraine. So like the US government takes  borders very seriously obviously not including. our own but as a matter of like statecraftraft  and diplomacy that really really matters. So. you would never use a phrase in an official  communication that referred to a place whose. territory you couldn't define. That would be 100%  [ __ ] crazy to do something like that 100%. Okay.

So you think this Milstein guy who is Mark Leven's  stepson you say it's almost like it's almost like. you're making this up. It's like a joke who worked  for Ted Cruz in the Senate. He added this to the. statement. Correct. And then did it go out? So  from that point, I cut it because I accepted most. of his edits in the in the document because going  to battle with him was a whole headache because.

he'll call he'll push certain things. He was he  was known for doing that. Like he he'll David. Milstein phone call was not the a favorite thing  uh for what was it like? Tell tell us for those of. us who don't work with Mark Living Stepson at the  at the state. Sure. Sure. So he would call and he. he would just push like why is why why was that  removed or why was XYZ done very often and if you. said no there was a tendency to go up the chain in  order for him to push the agenda of any given day.

and this is something that I dealt with since very  early where's his okay so is he the DCM or what's. he's just a senior adviser to ambassador Huckabe  he's like an assistant to the US ambassador to. Israel correct and he I to sticking with the  public reporting from the Washington Post, like he would push in one in one occasion uh  statements that were in the voice of Secretary. Rubio, not even the spokesperson, and he drafted  them. He would push them through and be like, I.

want this statement out. And I want this statement  out. Yeah. Like he would go through and be like, I I drafted this. This is the statement I want.  I would go through the process of clearing it, but he would fight for it. like he'd be in the  document getting in arguments with people one by. one in order to kind of overwhelm the process  and get certain um his agenda out there the. way he wanted and it's very difficult you on what  authority I mean that's pretty cheeky behavior for.

a guy who's an aid to Mike Huckabe former cable  news host call around the building and and and. it it it was very consistent um and persistent  but he lives in Jerusalem. He does. What do you. mean call around? And policy and policy comes  from DC. Like this is obviously have influence. and they have discussions, but the policy comes  from DC. So if what do you mean call around? How. he would go up he would go either laterally or  up the chain and call various people and say hey.

ambassador Huckabe will site Huckabe usually and  say u wants this done or and for XYZ reason and. um if that person didn't pick up it would go  to the next person. And so he would so even. if I I we're discussing equities earlier if one  particular equity said we can't do this then he. would go up well I don't care cuz this guy above  you may clear it what does he have everyone's. number he's that was that's what I was wondering  I don't know but David Milstein in an assistant.

in the US embassy in Jerusalem that's I just want  to restate I mean grown up around this that's not. a high level post. He has like zero authority to  do anything and is drafting a statement on behalf, this is very audacious, to draft a statement  on behalf of Secretary Rubio, the Secretary of. State. Yes. In one occasion, um again referring  just to the public reporting was the uh statement. uh to cons to condemn Ireland for considering a a  bill that would put economic sanctions on Israel.

condemn Ireland, as you can imagine, folks. So,  David Milstein was demanding in effect that the. Secretary of State condemn Ireland because Ireland  defended the government of Israel. Yeah, actually, if I remember correctly, strongly condemn,  which isn't really in diplomatic speak, you. don't have strongly, but yeah, strongly condemn  Ireland and as a nation. Well, the government,

I guess. I don't I for I don't remember the  language, but did Rubio read it? That was a. rare occasion where it went up the ladder and it  was eventually uh uh killed, but it required the. European Affairs Bureau and NEA and everyone  to it took a lot of effort because he was so. um laser focused on getting that through. And  who is would that be good for the United States. condemning Ireland? It would be good for Israel  could use our political and diplomatic capital.

on the statement that uh would punish Ireland for  considering something. The official story on 9/11. is a complete lie. The 9/11 report is a joke. You  have the CIA following two men all over the planet. and then eventually even to America, right? And  you don't tell the FBI 911 commission to cover.

So what did happen? What did the government  know? What did foreign governments know? There was a cover up. Why? It's been nearly  25 years. It is time Americans learned what. actually happened. We're going to tell  you. We're releasing one episode per. week. You're not going to want to wait. If you  remember, you don't have to. You get all five. episodes the day it drops. Right? Then add  free. Our first episode airs Thursday 911, September 11th. You will not want to miss  it. Join us now at tuckercarlson.com.

Did you ever see it sounds like you had a lot of  contact or could see David Milstein at work a lot. It sounds like he was a pretty big figure in your  office in DC though he's an assistant to It was. very sudden. It was like, "Oh, you don't hear from  him for 3 days. All of a sudden, you're getting. a phone call and a bunch of edits on something  and they disappear again." Did he have your cell. the work cell? Yeah, he did. How do you get your  number? Well, at that point, early on, I think uh.

someone asked that I share it with him. So, that  was that was on my end. Wow. But um did you ever. see David Milstein like thinking about what's good  for the United States or getting aggressive on. behalf of what our interests might be as distinct  from Israel's interests? I perceived a lot of his. actions as very Israel first from my point of  view because that statement didn't make sense. Those edits to the press lines didn't make sense.  And in particular with Juda and Samaria, that not.

only would not make sense for how dangerous it  is, for what that means, cuz as you discussed, uh there's no land barrier to that, but it hurts  our relationships to the region. For example, we rely on Jordan on on for so many things.  But if we start calling it Judea and Samaria, it that undermines our military relationship,  our relationship dealing with refugees in Jordan. Also, some of that land is in Jordan. Exactly.  Right. So I mean you can't I mean if yeah that.

would cause problems and that's one example  like the whole reason so these are not this. is diplomacy this is the state department of the  United States of America which is still a global. superpower even now and so Jordanian economy  relies on US aid. Yep. We profer that aid at. the request of Israel because Jordan is filled  with refugees from the 1948 war that created. Israel and subsequent refugees 67 and filled with  refugees including from Syria a war that we fought.

on behalf of Israel. So we pay Jordan, we also pay  Egypt to keep them calm. And now you're saying he. wanted to issue a statement saying to Jordan,  by the way, part of your territory and your. what you thought was a sovereign nation actually  doesn't belong to you. Yeah. And just for so to. terrible and so we can we can go back to that day  three because I cut that line. And by the way,

this isn't a unilateral action by me. There  are others who agree with me. So I'm not doing. it with the backing of of my own thoughts. Well,  that's not a hard one. Jude and Samaria. I mean, isn't there I mean, it's been a long time since  around the State Department, but I mean, I always. thought there was like a like there's a protocol  to things, which in some cases is silly, but some. cases is real. Like, do we refer to that region  as Judea and Samaria, or don't we? Like, this is. something that's been gone over before. Correct.  Mhm. Yeah. No, we we don't. And we don't we never.

have. Secretary Rubio did not use it. President  Trump did not use it. Ambassador Huckabe has. Now that was that's different. Did anyone ever  ask Ambassador Okabe, "What what land specifically. are you referring to when you say that?" Not from  what I've seen. Because the reporters are morons. That's why. But someone asked like an obvious  question like Judan, "Where's that? Can you draw. it for me on a map? Show me the boundaries of  this place you're talking about." Well, even if. they did ask, the lines wouldn't even answer the  question directly. Right. Cuz he would in person.

they should have asked him, "Yes, I agree." Yeah.  What? What? What are you talking about? Where is. that? Yeah. No one will ever ask that question.  And Ambassador Huckabe always had extreme comments. either in person on or on his Twitter account.  But for most of my time at the State Department, the response would be, "Well, those are Ambassador  Huckabe's words. We do this dance." But now, now that I especially after firing me, you're  getting an unleashed embassy Jerusalem because.

who's gonna uh do anything to stop them? Because  they already had so much influence to begin with. But when I'm used as an example, they fire  me as someone who did the very basic thing. of cutting a line that did not make sense. It's  also inconsistent with long-standing US policy, right? And if you want to keep your job, who in  the future is going to want to I'm Here's where. you're confusing me. Now, I know that you say he's  Mark Leven's stepson, but I mean, nobody takes. Mark Leven seriously and no one watches his show  and like he's just not a real not a real person.

He's like an angry old man on Twitter. Who cares  who stepson is? Like, why doesn't anyone say, "Hey, tell that Milstein kid to shut the [ __ ]  up." Like, that's not hard. Why doesn't someone. do that? Honestly, that was that was my question.  I did not know why people would like people would. would acknowledge the pushiness, but that's all I  really got at this. No one ever told him to stop.

It was difficult to say no to him on a lot of  occasions. So people did say no, but it took a lot. of effort. So from my vantage point, I'm wondering  why would someone have so much influence and why. are people almost tiptoeing around it, right? It  sounds like they were right. And you would have to. it take a like a group effort of okay, this bureau  and this bureau don't want to put this statement. out and then it would go away, but that was it.  So is really a lot of this you think based on your.

experience was coming from this one guy. Correct.  Now, it was him, although you're right that he. does have limitations over his title, right? He  can't an adviser to Master Huckabe can't fire me, but he does have particular people on the  seventh floor. And what I mean by seventh floor. is people around Secretary Rubio that from my  perspective, he uh looped in the neocons that were. uh influential and they had the power to do so. So  he would rile them up on Israel or me or whatever.

issue there was and they would come down. So my  firing didn't come from Milstein. It came from. uh Si Rubio staff and these are like a couple of  heritage foundation guys who want foreign policy. You can say oh President Trump, you know, he's  going to have heritage guys there. That's his uh. his right as someone who won the election. But if  you listen to President Trump on foreign policy, it doesn't make sense to have bunch of heritage  guys around you. So you said that um Milstein,

who is a nobody on the org chart, um had sort  of amazing power, including making personnel. decisions effectively because he would just  go everyone's up over everyone's head along. the chain up to and including the seventh floor  management level at the State Department and had. influence with people on Secretary Rubio's staff.  Do you know who? My understanding was that it.

was his deputy chief of staff that came down in  order to uh uh essentially fire me. Now I think. that'd be Dan Holler, formerly of Heritage.  Possible. Possible. Okay. Um so you'd heard. that. I heard that. But it was pretty clear to  you that it was David Milstein, this assistant. to the US ambassador to a foreign country who um  was basically line editing statements out of State.

Department HQ. Yeah. And was another hint too was  that um I had flagged for the spokesperson's staff. the intention to add Judea Samaria. just like  FYI if this happened, right? And the next day, which was Wednesday, um instead of uh like moving  along, the staff asked uh actually the acting. spokesperson asked to speak with David Milstein  about the West Bank lines, but without me. And.

then the next day is when Thursday is when people  started coming down on me. So the way I pieced it. together was that that conversation about West  Bank lines and Milstein being aware that I cut. the Judeans Mary line led to the Thursday Friday  crackdown from the secretary. Just to be clear. again, putting Judea and Samaria in an official US  government communication. It's like using the term.

Narnia or something. It's not a real place, right?  This is fantasy land and it's beneath a great. power to even have dumb conversations like this.  It opens the door to instability. It opens door to. uh hurting our relationship significantly with  our partners. Uh it doesn't serve us interests. to at all. At all. Um okay. Did anyone else at  the State Department share these views? Like. that that crosses just as someone from DC, I just  like know that that crosses like a bright bright.

line. Yeah. Look, there there are uh folks  who might be close to that worldview. Uh but. from my personal interactions, um Milstein was the  farthest out there. Did uh I have to ask you this, but but I just want to be clear. I don't think  you should punish people for their relatives. So, I'm not mad at David Milstein because  his stepfather is a douche. I mean, that's certainly not his fault at all. And neither  is David Milstein. Mark Leavven's fault. So I just.

want to be clear about that. I don't believe  in collective punishment unlike some other. countries like Israel which is big on collective  punishment. I oppose it completely as a Christian. So I'm not engaging in it here. But did do you  ever see Mark Leven over there? Did he have any. role in the State Department? I never came across  anything. I think there was a lot happening above. my head regardless. just even my firing it's like  embassy Jerusalem was contacting this guy who's.

then trying to crack down on me and then it's a  mystery for a day or two why that's happening and. then it becomes clear. So those conversations are  concerning and it and it makes me question like. if we're talking about the Saudi speech in May of  President Trump, how do we go from that kind of. statement to these kind of policies? And so that  is my biggest question out of all of this is why. did this pivot happen and what does this mean for  Israel policy moving forward? It's already extreme. to begin with. Is it going to become even more  radical? It already has. Does anybody else I mean.

are there other people at State Department? So you  know you came in not as a former Trump staffer but. as someone who as you've said agreed with his  basic impulse on foreign policy which is like. hey let's let's have more peace less war. There  must have been other people there who were like. full-blown America first people, I would think,  would hope. Did any of them ever say to you, "This isn't really America first." It's true. It's  Look, people were happy after Trump won when like,

"Okay, we're doing we're getting Trump too, but we  don't have John Bolton and Michael and Nikki Haley. back again." Right. The issue is a lot of the  personnel problems are still there but at a more. it's like it's it's more subtle like an ambassador  Huckabe to me is still part of that same grouping. in terms of the damage it can do in our foreign  policy right and uh well so give me an example of. the damage you think Huckabe has done to American  foreign policy since you paid close attention to.

his statements and I and I really haven't. Well,  that's a it's it's the lack of accountability for. uh uh well having Milstein around adding Judea  Samaria, you know, right? Like these are your. trusted senior adviserss, right? And so there's  that. There's the no follow through on what. happened in Taibbe in the west in in the West Bank  and what happened to the church in Gaza. It's our. entire Israel policy. His he goes out there. There  were tweets from several weeks ago where he was.

uh attacking the UK prime minister ambassador was  he he started calling the prime minister out for. um questioning Israel's conduct in Gaza and he he  said if you something along the lines of um if it. wasn't for Dresden you'd all be speaking German.  So greenlighting the slaughter of Palestinians. essentially saying it's okay which was horrific  language endorsed Dresden. It's on Twitter. It.

was it was horrific. The bombing of Dresden. I  the way Yeah. He was comparing he was comparing. Dresden to what was happening in Gaza and saying  I don't think there's anybody this it's hardly. a pro- Hitler I'm anti- Hitler for whatever it's  worth. Just to be clear it's it's hardly pro-Nazi. to say that what the Allies did to the British  really mostly at Dresden was a war crime. I mean. nobody nobody would say otherwise. He endorsed Dre  the Dresden bombing. who gives an ambassador the. green light to poke at a a allies prime minister  the UK a true ally um and two um like the the the.

nonchalant attitude towards like the slaughter  of people both in Dresden or in comparing it. to what's happened in Gaza is it's that's not um  of course not that's not the Christian view you. know murdering innocence is always wrong period  That is who does it and I despise the UK and its.

prime minister and I'm totally happy to urinate  on both. But it should be from the perspective. of what's good for the United States, not what's  good for another country. Like that's bonkers. That's really Yeah. Does anybody say anything  about that? Like internally? Is there any All. the time you're like, "Oh, cringe." People cringe  at it when they see saw those tweets. But well, so typically in an administration um you know the  ambassador serves the president as his diplom you.

know the chief diplomat in the country to which  he's posted and you know there are a million. examples all the time of the ambassador getting  called back to Washington or getting a cable. from DC. Whoa, that's not our policy. You know  pull it in line with what the president's view. is because that's who you work for. Right. So if  and did anyone do that with Huckabe? never you. have he's representing Secretary Rubio. Secretary  Secretary Rubio is representing the president and. no one is stopping Ambassador Alab from going  fully unleashed. And that's why my very basic.

edits and suggestions from the from that week  was such a red flag they had to get rid of me. immediately. What that means is that if we're not  stopping Ambassador Huckabe at that level, that. becomes policy. And yes, yes, that's right. Right.  So that's it. And and if I'm going to be fired for. for lines of what were or should be and I think  are President Trump's views, then things are.

moving in a more radical direction and they will.  Yeah. I mean, I guess I am for moving in a bunch. of different radical directions, like banning  high interest loans, you know, I'm strongly. for that. What I'm not in favor of is moving  in radical directions on behalf of a foreign. country whose interests are not the same as ours  that are aligned on some things and diverge at. other points but are not the same. Why would you  want to be radical on behalf of another country?

Right. It makes no sense. Well, it's unpatriotic.  It's totally wrong and it's America last. It's. also a form of treachery. I think subverting our  foreign policy on behalf of another country that I. wasn't not a citizen of that country. this my tax  dollars. What are you doing? Mhm. Right. Right. And we did all of this. We're burning diplomatic  capital left and right. Australia, the UK, Canada, uh we have all these US allies considering  recognizing the Palestinian state and we're going.

out there attacking them one by one um on behalf  of Israel. Those are our partners. like is it. worth but we're also not I mean they've all those  countries have basically eliminated human rights. in their own countries eliminated freedom of  speech freedom of movement freedom of association. they've got political prisoners it's it's crazy  what those countries are doing to their own. citizens we don't say a word but if they criticize  a foreign another country then we attack them yeah. we have a other issues we could discuss with them  but instead we choose to make Israel this odd red.

line and It it takes a lot of diplomatic capital  to attack your allies. We need them for so many. things. Uh it doesn't matter if it's if it's  trade or war or it's a resolution of the UN. This is terrific. So I just I want to ask you  a couple just policy questions. I mean and just. if you don't mind. Sure. Cuz they're speculative,  but I I just want to draw on information that you.

gleaned in your job at the State Department. What  is as as non-emotional and clinical as you can be, what is the plan here with Gaza in the West Bank?  What do you think? I keep wondering like, okay, you know, every day it's a no, we killed them,  but it was a mistake or we thought they were. Hamas. Okay, got it. But like what what is the  plan? Are they really going to move 2 million. people out of Gaza? Do you think that's actually  going to happen? That's this is what I'm afraid.

about. Um I from the on the West Bank I think we  were setting up uh uh annexation and I think the. news from the past couple days shows that that's  true. What does annexation mean? There's going. to be an Israeli takeover of the West Bank and  basically area C is was supposed to be where the. Palestinians had full control. the Israelis want  to take over that and call the entire West Bank. um and call it is say it's part of Israel and then  do the the Palestinians who live there get voting.

rights? These are all questions that they have not  answered and I don't don't believe anyone wants to. answer why it's such an obvious question. I know  what's your plan? Why do why does no one ask that. question? And people even even the IDF in some  occa in some occasions asks like, "Hey, this is. a military takeover. What are we going to do?"  Like, and the ministers don't care. For whatever. it's worth, it's not my country and I'm not  that interested. But I just notice that the IDF,

for all the grief that it takes, has actually been  a voice of restraint in Gaza and the West Bank, at least publicly. They're like, "Wait a second.  You're asking us. They're just a mil flag going. into Gaza City." They're like, "Hey, this is  going to be exactly the same thing. They're. just a military with a bunch of reserveists, you  know, some professionals, but lots of reserveists. And like every military, they kind of want to know  why they're putting their lives at risk. That's at. least that's my read on it. Yeah, it's it's it's  true. And and that's a whole another discussion,

but I am worried about the like political and and  direction of Israel. It's going be more and more. extreme and the those uh uh guard rails are are  gone. But they're taking over the West Bank. We. don't know what that looks like and it's extremely  dangerous and it but um what's the pretext cuz. like the residents of the West Bank had nothing  to do with the attacks on southern Israel, right? But it it opens the door cuz you're so  focused on on Gaza and and this is But is there. a justification for it? Is it like they don't  have any hostages in the West Bank, do they? No.

No. There there is no justification. It's what's  awful is that instead of focusing on securing the. release of the hostages or uh just securing  their own country, they've used this entire. uh war, was nearly 2 years now, to uh pursue  opportunities. We're going to bomb Beirut and kill. all these civilians. We're going to um bomb Syria,  kill the civilians on on too many occasions there.

uh the bombing raids on Yemen, start a potential  war with Iran that if President Trump had ended, it could have gone into a spiraled. Uh and so  it's very dangerous that we're letting Israel. take the front seat of our US foreign policy  when we have the power to end these wars for. them. We're paying for them and we paid for  the, you know, the Israeli strikes on Iran. And um I and I've said this to you know anyone who  will listen. I think this will end the Republican.

party. I don't think they're going to get elected  to anything anytime soon after this if they don't. pull back and establish independence from  this Israel or any other foreign power. It's not about Israel. It's about any letting  any other foreign country run your country. That's you can't have that. Everyone hates it.  It's super unpopular and it's very obvious. And if you want more Republicans in office, you  can't act like this. Like I think they're blowing.

up the party over this. That's my feeling. I'm  saying this with love. I'm unlike you. I'm I've. been a pretty I don't vote that much, but when I  vote, it's Republican. You know, it's true. They. voted for America first. I wouldn't vote for this.  No way. Absolutely. And think about the there's. on one end it's the America first aspect that's  very disappointing because this is America last in. every possible way. And on the on the endless war  front, every campaign, every winning presidential. uh candidate said, "We're not going to get we're  trying to avoid these wars and they don't follow.

through." And yet we're now funding this this  this disaster um in Gaza. But so do you think. that those So there I mean estimates fair, we  don't know people have been killed in Gaza. No. one's allowed to find out. It's like Yeah, the 60K  is definitely what do you think the real number is. in Gaza? I I've read other uh folks who like give  their estimates and it's always uh 100,000 up to. 200,000 even more. So the numbers that I've seen  on on the the estimate scale of are are horrific.

Do our intel agencies have good estimates on this?  I would imagine, but those haven't percolated down. to the State Department at your level anyway.  Yeah. No, absolutely not. And and I wish we we. could be discussing this. And I'm also horrified  not just from the just the sheer numbers of. killed, it's the lingering psychological effect of  these of these poor civilians like children who've. lost limbs, children who lost parents who the the  damage is going to be decades and decades long for.

sure. And uh and there will be radicalism,  you know, and probably including violence. And I I just pray it's not directed against the  United States, but I fear that it will be. Um, but that leaves what, 2 million people still  in Gaza, Palestinians, mostly Muslim, but also. Christians. What happens to them? I just keep  wondering what happens to them there. The policy, the the comments, the policies have always shown  a certain disdain, like, oh, we'll pay them off.

for them to move out. We um they're not actually  starving. It's all these they're not only are they. getting bombed and and uh and lose their homes and  their family members, they're being like thrown. around like this this annoyance. Um and it's  it's horrible. But just based on the reporting, it looks like we are trying to push them out to a  different country. Um every two months there's a. new rumor. Seems like we're talking to these other  countries um in Africa. Maybe the US government is.

well though depends on each specific uh case.  There has been reporting that Israel is trying. to do this on their own and if we're involved and  there's also been uh uh some reporting on whether. our own uh government officials have spoken  with like the Libyan government as well. So. So do you think it's possible that US government  officials have talked to foreign governments about. accepting the population of Gaza as refugees?  Do you think that's possible? Yes. Do you think.

it's that happened? I I it's probable. That's  disgusting. I mean, that's just like shocking. to me. I don't want to believe that could be true.  Yeah. And why are we doing that? What do we have. to do with this? Right. And it's always about  our diplomatic power. Like Israel's diplomatic. power is limited. But who can get these objectives  done? We can. So that's why in our last act is a. superpower. Yeah. That's why these officials from  MC Jerusalem are are dangerous because they're.

they're that connection is being made right  on on like you commit a Well, first of all, Mike Huckabe endorsing Dresden, you know, I  just refer you to the New Testament. That is. not that is not permitted for Christians to be in  favor of that. Just it's just not even close. So, I don't know what I know Huckabe. I've always  liked him. I don't know what in the world if he. actually said that. I don't know what he was  thinking. I'm going to look it up the second. we get off this interview. Um, but that's really  shocking to me that he would say something like.

that. But in general, there's been a coarsening,  I think, of people watching this stuff celebrating. pager attacks and people getting their dicks blown  off stuff. I mean, like, why would we celebrate. that? Yeah. But Ben Shapiro was on there jumping  up and down with glee when that happened. No, it's it's it's a it's a an indictment of like our  our soul. Why are why did we lose this ability. to empathize with other people? You think it's  thrilling that a country would indiscriminately.

detonate explosives in people's pockets where they  don't know who's holding those things. Actually, they don't know who's standing next to them. If  you think that's great, you know, um children. died. Oh, I know. Uh you know, anyway, I I've  I'm really sickened by it and I'm infuriated by. the requirement to celebrate it. Right. No. Why  are we in this in this era of of like celebrating. these violent attacks and celebrating a new weapon  that comes out, but each time there's a diplomatic.

endeavor to end a war, it's so controversial  and so heavy and people um it's sold to people. in such a negative way. So that that dichotomy  is is is a true problem where as empires die, people go crazy. This is one of the things that's  pretty consistent through history. They lose their. sense of reality and they become violent violence  worshippers. And I just hate to see it happening. to this country that I love so much and that I'm  never leaving. But like this is really dark. Yeah. So dark. It is dark. So what um so you don't know  bottom line what the plan is for the population of.

Gaza or the West Bank. Yeah, I do know they cut  my line on force displacement and now there's. new reporting on them moving them out of Gaza. So  it's not headed in the right direction. So America. is for forced displacement. And I think this  country was founded by people we so bonkers. Okay, last question. What was your firing like? Um, did  they explain to you why you were being let go? No, never explained anything to me. Um, I and  technically I heard the NEA, my bureau near.

affairs technically never heard either. So really  came from up top. So very odd. Um, I they did ask. me about that line. That's the only hint that we  have. Um, look, the State Department with all the. issues that it has has does have amazing patriotic  patriotic Americans working there every day. I. worked with them. Um, they're they're trying  their best. They're they're doing their work.

They're smart and I I I miss working with them. I  do uh uh I was someone that was well established. in the building with political appointees and  civil servants and and it they just pulled the. rug out of from under me out of the blue over what  I explained to you earlier which was pretty basic. stuff and uh on the Sunday I believe it was August  17th lost access and then I got a text um from my. contractor letting me know. Did you call have you  called David Milstein to ask what happened? I have.

not. I have not. Um maybe we should call him after  this. Could we could look this whole situation was. so unexpected. Like I was just living my life. Uh  going to work every single day five days a week. I was doing a lot of overtime. Uh I drafted tweets  that Secretary Rubio put out including I was up at. 11 p.m. 12 a.m. U the horrific killing of those  two Israeli diplomats. I was the one who was up.

in the middle of the night drafting a tweet for  that to come out. The ones who are murdered in. the US. Correct. Yeah. Awful. And so I was there  for all these these moments and working alongside. people with different political backgrounds and  uh to know that these these folks just without. discussing with me, without getting to know me,  without talking to me, uh saw all those lines and. they were like gone. Um, and uh, it's it's it's  awful and and just in in the office itself, it.

just puts this chilling effect for everybody, you  know. So, I I will I will miss those colleagues, but they're good people and they're going to I  mean, the interest of the United States should. be the beginning of the end of the concern of the  State Department. Yep. Period. Absolutely. So, I appreciate you're taking the time to do  this. Thank you for talking to me. Thank. you. [Music] So, it turns out that YouTube is  suppressing this show. Oh, on one level that's not. surprising. That's what they do. But on another  level, it's shocking. With everything that's.

going on in the world right now, all the change  taking place in our economy and our politics, with the wars we're on the cusp of fighting  right now, Google has decided you should have. less information rather than more. And that is  totally wrong. It's immoral. What can you do. about it? Well, we could whine about it. That's a  waste of time. We're not in charge of Google. Or. we could find a way around it. a way that you  could actually get information that is true, not intentionally deceptive. The way to do that on  YouTube, we think, is to subscribe to our channel.

Subscribe, hit the little bell icon to be notified  when we upload and share this video. That way, you'll have a much higher chance of hearing actual  news and information. So, we hope that you'll do.