lease of the hostages, not only is not helpful, but it undermines, undermines the efforts to secure their release. it is harmful to these efforts because it gives her mazda is terrorist. it gives us how much terribly to the hope to get a cease fire without releasing the hostages. all members of the council, all members should have voted against this shameful resolution. now this resolution went forward after a previous resolution. uh that had had language that was quite sympathetic to israel. it was v tote and it was blocked by china. now at this point, we do have the us secretary of state putting forward a statement saying that despite the us of staining and allowing this resolution to go ahead and pass the united states still takes the position uh, that hostages need to be released before any ceasefire. should proceed,

but this is an important moment. as were months. there has been debate in the security council about a resolution calling for a cease fire. we now have an official un security council resolution that does indeed call for a ceasefire and, and to the fighting as well as the release of the hostages. all right, we have to leave you here now and see how things play out going forward or take the risk, but then collab mopping in new york. thank you. i oh i see how big this our thing. so once i see you again at the top of the hour by now the power button, just to remind you, once again we're going to soon be one of the most watched news and information shows on the planet why? because we are committed to context and we are committed to truth in this edition.

we're going to take you through the weeks big events. so some surprising ones, like americans most established jewish politician attacking the israeli government . i'd actually say would be that then yahoo, you got to go don't just like that. so i'm not surprising news like when russia is president put me was re elected by. 3 whopping, 87 percent of the vote and the media here and all throughout the west side. yeah. course cheated. other just 2 of the big stories that we're going to be following for you. i'm rick sanchez. this is direct impact the the okay, we're going to start things off with schumer. frankly. i was surprised by this. i didn't see it coming method you know and put in as well. but i wanted to again, by introducing you to our panel political scientists, dr. wilburn leon, political analysts, garland nixon,

both are hosts of the critical our on spot. the big news, if you'd like to i did that with my voice on that were accurate. i crescendo. does i introduce you guys? thank you very much. let's get started with schumer, chuck schumer, the highest ranking, do it american elected official, you know, of the united states of america. and this week he has been going after being isn't yeah. who somewhat, you could say almost what a vengeance. the fact that he's doing it is a vengeance. in fact, when the yahoo asked if he could come this week to speak to congress, the pro schumer wrong and to touch and, and to get close to his friends. schumer said, no, you can, i don't want you and congress you can't come here. you can talk your schumer. as a lifelong supporter, it is really is become clear to me and that's in yahoo coalition no longer fits the needs of israel after october 7th, a scarlet nixon. what do you make of that? well, this is a change in rhetoric, but it's not a change in policy. i think people are, you know,

that are concerned about what's going on in gaza or seeking something that will show them that a policy has changed some concrete. we're not going to send if we're going to do that some announcement by the, by an administration. this is just another rhetorical move to pacify the people that are angry. and i'll add this. i think that i don't that they are prohibiting yahoo from coming here because they know they'll be massive of people in the streets. they'll be angry, people making a lot of noise and they'll suffer as a result. do you think that the schumer was put up to this by the white house and maybe even specifically by the president united states because he did what the president can't do because the president's not jewish. did you follow that? i did, and i don't think that it was the white house that put him up to it. i think there are other is really interest that that put him up to it. and notice he did not call for a cease fire. he did not call for an end to the genocide in gaza. me and i think

chuck schumer has been served. notice that netanyahu is dead man. walking me as it relates to put is really pilot, though the intel says only 14 percent. and this is true. what i'm about to say apparently only 14 percent according to polls in israel, say they want him to remain as the prime minister after the guys and situation he's going to be indicted and he's already been indicted. but he may very well be convicted and sold a bite and then in and ensure they're not going to put their money to. so it's not what you're saying, what you're saying is it, does it, don't you're saying, rick sanchez, don't look at this as a sign that the us agenda or the us policy and as well as changing the throwing this guy under the bus. but it's not like throwing the policy under the bus. oh, absolutely. the girl is asking the right, the policy hasn't changed. it's just the players. the pieces on the chessboard are being, are being because look at it and humor made the point about of netanyahu's colorless coalition. yeah. and what did he have to do to make that coalition move farther to

the right? yeah. and he still said, by the way, if you listen to shoot more speech, which i carefully did because i happen to be on a plane to actually read it. and he says in there that it's a joint state and it has the right to defend itself. and he says, all the other talking points in defense of one, i think you were saying, luckily, i think another thing that's important is that a letter has recently surface from a number of donors that uh, that was complaining basically their complaint is that because of the push back, we're getting from the democratic constituency. it looked like this good move, donald trump, in a position to we in simply as a result, mainly and principally as a result of the policy. so again, so you're saying a pack has a lot of money and value from time to time, influence american elections? is that what you're stuck a little bit, but i think what was the shock there are other donors i got an insurance and i think these donors are concerned that they won't get the return on their, on their investments. and i know that a lot of money to be made. let me now remove my tongue from the side of my mouth as

i continue with the next story. the western media was beside itself after the president's presidential elections and russia put an election as they called it, even though all. busy of even the western balls show that to me is a very popular person. the media treated his when as if it was a personal insult to them that he one. here's a sampling and the outcome was never in doubt. this may have been an election, but it certainly wasn't a contest. it was stage, managed the crime and controls absolutely everything including the elections. so what's the point of them? so what is the point of them? i guess i would point out and you guys might or may not agree with me, that if you go with what they're accusing putting to being and that is somebody who essentially cheated the elect orally, i would add to you. i would remind you that president biden was about 5th when he was elected president. he had bernie in front of me, had elizabeth warren and we had buddha, judging from them, and somehow the party manipulated it. so he would go to the top. so that's

manipulation. and if you want to talk about authoritarianism though, there's not one single person in the republican party who is afraid to take on donald trump because they're afraid it's going to hurt them. who knows? personally, professionally, maybe even physically you say watch? well, i say 1st of all, to those so called commentators are pundents from the west that are talking about the election was rig. where's the evidence of such, please present some evidence? well, they would argue they would argue fairly, that a lot of the people who take them on somehow or either disappear and i don't mean because they're killed or anything like that. of course. and involved is a different case. but i think that they would argue that usually his opposition lose his strength somewhere along the way. and they say that's well in here and i'll have a well argument. let's. so let's look at this. he won is the largest turn out in, in improvements history. uh huh. so voter turnout is an indication of something. yeah. he won with 86 percent of the vote. mm hm. and he had an appraisal rating of

about what's 747580 saying 82. well. okay. so when you're, when you're turn out as high, when your approval rating is 86 percent and you went by 86 percent. the data seems to tell me we call it in statistics. says statistically relevant correlates yes it is. yes it is. and i think that's a fair point and i think it's hard. it's funny, i made this point when i covered this story earlier this week, i said i looked it up. and most of the western posters, not russian, not kremlin posters. preston bolsters. most of them german went in there stats, that this stuff went in there and the other ones you determine that basically he, he went up 9 points in the last year. well, in fact the lovato center, which is a, an organization that is funded, we learn from weekly cables and we bought a center is funded by the national the, the usa id. right. uh, and that's the democracy. yeah. right. so it's, it's,

it's funded by us intelligence operations, if it for fed and you can go check the data right now. as of february, they had it with an 86 percent approval rating. so apparently, whatever shenanigans he used only got them another 1.2 percent and we probably should move on because we have a lot of stuff to talk about. but i will say this, i am mystified by why members of the us media use that i could you could not like put and it's okay if you don't have to like people you don't like that. you don't want to like have to like the, the president of it as well, or the president of the bible. you're the president. anything. but why it is that they follow the talking points that are given to him by the state department and you make a good point. give me some facts. what can you say? like you say he cheated? how did he choose? well i, we don't say how he'd see that we just say he treated because the state department says, so you gotta look at yourself in the mirror at the end of the day and say, why am i just, what am i a puppet? that? yes. okay, we'll leave it at that. i want to show you because i think you're right. i mean,

i think there's no one of us. we're just saying things without being able to bring up. that is fine. i want to show you one of the stuff. busy is that the thanks to julia, massage and wiki legs? we know a lot about this is an attack in 2007. i want you guys to watch this now where you as soldiers, they take out to reuters photographers and you may remember it. and then they laugh about it and when the ambulances come to take these people out, these are reporters, really photographers for reuters. they should have the ambulance acting all the while as if they're playing a video game. and they're joking about it and laughing about it. it's tough to listen to i'm, i'm showing you this because there's weren't this week that they are talks to possibly free julian a song here it is. 1800. 47 by them all up to traffic to safety. right. you too.

bye bye good. if i come on, let me shoot during the day when a claire claire. oh yeah, like that. right. we just drove over a body a ha, ha ha ha ha funny. if not for julian massage, we don't know that those things happen. we should know that those things happen, not because i want to praise assad's not because i hate the united states, but because we need to be transparent, we need to be truthful and we need to learn from our mistakes. how am i wrong? well, you're absolutely right, and it's the release of this video. that is one of the key elements, which is why julian assigns wound up being held up in the ecuadorian embassy in london. and why he's been in bel march prison up to this time. because those are what are known as war crimes. and that's direct evidence of the united

states being involved in war crime is audited, shouldn't be, it is a lot to embarrass your country. i understand if he's giving out nuclear secrets or something like that. but he didn't do any of the paint basically. and the reason i do believe right now, i don't know what you guys think the reason i believe right now that the white house, the justice department may actually be considering doing a deal where they lower his charges to a misdemeanor. is because there's a lot of pressure on the united states right now. gaza ukraine. they don't need this guy coming over here and hank of some people like rick sanchez showing this video every day. yeah, well yeah, absolutely. i agree. of course there's the, there's the electoral issue, they've have enough problems the, the late, the lease they need to do is to put pressure on their people in the media because their people in the media will be called out as to whether or not they're supporting another publisher, i think another important issue here is that within the call, within this case, there are some actions that the government that have that have taken such as spying

on the spying on the defense team, which let's face it if that gets to the supreme court, they're going to have a difficult time, not throwing this out. do they really want to take a case with this holes? is because this case has to the court are you so why do i hear you saying you say that a sondors lawyers are on to something and they might have a breakthrough in this thing. but i think, i think there are several kind of deal with there. yeah. so i think there are several issues in this case that would make it difficult for the cost for the, for the, for the government, the project that wouldn't be no extradition real quick before we go to break. you agree? oh, i agree, a 100 percent. and the they, the united states government does not want. julian decides to set foot on american soil. they were holding and praying that he died in belmore lies because of to, to a garland articulated the, the optics, the well, the optics of it. and it's gonna force western media to deal with the real. 7 all

of these that donald trump looked into having him assassinated when, when my comp payroll was ahead of the c i a while they spied on his, on his council they, what you're thinking, a lot of stuff is going to come out of a lot is not exactly in defense of the 1st amendment. speaking of the 1st amendment, when we come back, i'm going to tell you what some of the supreme court members are saying about freedom of speech. maybe it's not that big a deal. maybe we ought to move it aside because after all the government's interest come 1st or do that, you're gonna hear it for yourself. do not go away. the the, the,

the the, [000:00:00;00] the,

the, hey, welcome back. i'm rick sanchez, along with carla nixon in wilmer leon. and i wanna thank my of these gentlemen for joining us too, so we can have his illustrious conversation, illustrious, on your part, i'll do the best i can. uh hi. we were talking just a moment to go about the 1st amendment of the united states of america, and something else happened this week happened to the 1st amendment this week. the supreme court, whose job it is, by the way to interpret and in essence, defend the constitution of the united states, actually made some comments that seem to suggest that maybe it doesn't think all that much of the 1st amendment of the constitution. yours just eschatology, brown, jackson, seeming to suggest that maybe we ought to push freedom of speech. you know, maybe it ain't that important in some cases. so my biggest concern is that your view has the 1st amendment ham stringing the government in significant ways. in the most important time periods, i mean what, what,

what would you have the government do? i've heard you say a couple of times that the government can post its own speech, but in my hypothetical, um, you know, kids, this is not safe, don't do it. is not going to get it done. i think i'm a journalist. i was trained as a journalist. it's all i know it's all i've ever done in my job drop. when i listen to this, i want to hear which one of you guys want to want to go on. it wanted to take the 1st crack of this thing. what do you think? well, she's doing the job. she's been sent there to do. huh. the empire is in serious trouble. and well, let me, let me take a step back. the 1st amendment when she's talked about it, hamstrings, the government. yeah. she's saying, well, the government should have a right to supercede the 1st amendment in a case like, for example, with vaccines that people shouldn't have the right to go on on, on, on social media and criticize vaccines for example. because that hurts the government's message. i don't know she's ever read the 1st amendment because it

starts by saying the government shall make no, that is hands during the i've read the constitution and destroyed are much, especially when i was the no law the it's called the negative. right? yeah. because it starts with the government shall make no law in fritz, it is pretty, the close of right is protecting us against the government. right? that's why it was written that was the same johnny, this but act son, which is seems to be saying is just as jackson about it, though i have to be some cases where the government has to come in and make a law against the 1st amendment. hans, i think he says you cannot falsely cry. fire in a crowded theater. yeah, that issue was debated in my 10 and you can publish the, the, the, the manuscript on how to make an atomic bomb. there are things but not just because the government has an opinion that's different from the other people were taking up way too much of your time. go garland. well,

i think what we find out from her speech is who she represents. right? that's the point would be because the clearly she's supposed to represent the people here, the court is supposed to mean on behalf of the people not on behalf of the government. she makes it clear that she's saying we've got to make sure that the government isn't home, can strong as the intent of the 1st of it. in other words, tough luck. government. yes, there will be times when people will say things that are awful and stupid and maybe even wrong. but in our system, the way we created this country that high as the stand. sorry. yeah, but the right to be so right. but you have a right to be wrong, right? but as well as if she represents the ruling lead, she represents the government. and so she's speaking for the people who put her in power in the same part of the empire is on the wayne. and yeah, hands, that's what the whole trip talk thing is about. look, the by the way, this thing we're talking about here, but i didn't mean interrupt you, but it is the legacy media, social media, same thing, right?

you don't see any difference between the 2. she doesn't have a point that we've got to keep an eye on social media or the but, but it's social media that's really bringing us to this point, which is the hands wikileaks, the, the, the atrocities being committed by the government in the fallacies. yeah. they are being exposed, and now the supreme court is turning to defend the empire as a, as opposed to defending the i like the way you put those 2 together. if i take a vacation where you sit here and do this for me to the manufacture another, one of the things i like to do on this show, especially given i have plenty of experience in this area, is to put the us media in place, reminding them from time to time, just heather failing us really. but if you think i get relentless with this topic, wait to hear, there's do name jose vega. this guy is running for congress in new york. his name is jose vega and when he found out that the distinguished executive directors and editors of the new york times and the la times and, and the washington post were going to be given a,

a conference there about journalism and how they cover story. this guy shows up and he just throws, he lets them have it here. watch. is there anything you've gotten right in the last 20 years or am i mistaken about that? i mean, it's just kind of funny because i racked wrong serious, wrong rush. i get really wrong. okay. and the list goes on and on. so the last thing you could do to try and actually fix your reputation is acknowledge that through leaks, we had to wind out that so lensky was going to bomb moscow on the anniversary. i mean, if you saw him parcel students, you at least say, right, that's a wednesday. we're going to bring us on the verge of world war 3. the main screen presence now the dying. nobody is ever going to listen to you again. you have no credibility with the board, the only people who are leaving or not being productive to the more

edit site. so where are you at least some thing either about north stream or ukraine or the fact that the landscape brought us to the verge of world war 3. and the only reason we knew about that was that leaks. i gotta tell you, i've never seen anything quite like it out. and by the way, when he asked them to respond, they didn't, they ignore them. garland picking up well, you know, one of the things that he says is that it's dying will know that the mainstream media is dying on the vine. and we've seen lately, massive layoffs all over the mainstream media. the bottom line is this, people are transferring their attention to alternative media to shows because this to youtube shows, etc, because they don't get the truth from that. but people want, even if they don't, and we've had 4, correct, right? absolutely. always things you mentioned were true. i noticed an alternative media people will listen to shows where they don't even ideologically agree with or align with the hosts. but at least they feel that the person's trying to be honest with

them. yeah. they're had trying to have that conversation. you agree? i agree, a 100 percent and main stream made a huge mistake when they turn their news rooms into profit centers. yeah. and when they turn their news programs away from true journalism to live style in entertainment, and they're not providing substance. and the minimal substance that they provide has no context. so, you know, we still some people who are still think that china said a spybot loan over to this country when it was in fact a wayward weather balloon district. you know, china, something happened this week as well, but i thought it was interesting. one we found out that us has troops now on an island that's just 3 miles from the coast of china. apparently there to protect and train the taiwan military. also in cuba, the us at teams. and there is one media account of the president of cuba, where he's saying you guys have been interfering with our country now for the past

60 years. here is the president of cuba diaz canal. you see on the, on the yes, he says look, the bottom line is, the only reason we've got this situation in cuba is because you've had to is that a bar go on has never 60 years. i never thought i would put china and cuba in the same sentence with taiwan in the middle, but that seemed to be the story this week. us interference us interference you as interference, right? and add, make an argument. you can add them as well. you can add per room, you can add bread zoo uh the, the, the ed, haiti, you, you gotta put haiti. and this, uh, because again, the, the, the folks that have been victimized by american imperialism have now been throwing out the neo liberal american public governments that were in place. and they've been installing their own socialist leaning governments. and the united states,

under no circumstances is going to tolerate that shift in the global dynamic. well, i don't, i don't know, china is going to tolerate us soldiers as we learned this week in off the 3 miles off of their cost. that's what i mean. i have to ask, are we trying to start working through? yeah, well, you know, i think that we have an on hinge the group of the neo cons in the, by the administration. and they're setting fires all over the world. and right now, any time there's a provocative act that they can take against china, they're doing it. i personally think that the bottom administration sees the prob, occasions towards china as a way to try to attract, you know, what they're always doing. they're trying to attract conservative votes, which they won't attract and they're taking just unreasonable chances. but i will say this, i do believe that the leaders in the global majority, the leader of china, the, the leaders of russia are wise enough to usher in a new multi puller world. yeah. and keep the hot heads at bay in washington delta dental. they're smart enough to do the global south is certainly a gate,

the strength and momentum. and i think that's going to create a little bit of a power balance. and they might, that may not be such a bad thing by the way. the service is, is basically doing it to itself because the actions it's taking are forcing these countries to scan relationships. yeah, they otherwise might not have a stab. that's actually a very good point, dr. wilmer leon calling next. and my thanks to both of you for being with us. and that's the end of this once again before we go, i want to remind you of our mission is simple as you can probably tell. we try not to live in boxes around here, not just in a place where people all agree with me. truths don't live in boxes, in the way the truth is everywhere. i'm or to interest. i'll be looking for you again right here, where i hope to provide

a direct impact the by the middle of the 19th century. practically the whole of india had been under the rule of the british empire, the colonial authorities that imposed that heavy death bringing the people into poverty exporting natural resources. and moreover, these authorities absolutely had no consideration for the physicians of the local population, treating them like 2nd class citizens. the british were showing signs of disrespect to even to those who operated with them. the fact of ignoring the religious beliefs of the hindus led them. you may have, as the voice mercenaries, older serving under the british ground. 3000000000 began on the 10th of may 1857 in the garrison town of may river, north of india, the form of abuse. the rebels quickly took over daily that he rode res. distance of

the indian people lasted for one and a half years. however, the forces were not equal. the colonial authorities dealt with a rebels, cruel, late fee and slaves. the boys were tied to the mouth of the cannon and were shot right through their bodies for the amusement of the public. this type of execution was called the devil's with the obliteration of them, you may result the death of 800000 inhabitants of the indians. however, the british empire never broke. the free spirit of the indians and their will, will resist the water is part of the valuable postcard isn't the deepest you of us and that in the word part is it something deeper,

more complex might be present there? let's stop without collision. is that stuff out of the, as the russian president vladimir putting salons the western reaction to fridays terrorist attack in moscow say that the us is trying to wipe, watch the green and lanes to the massacre. we know by whose hands this atrocity was committed. we are interested for to describe this may be an event in a series of attempts by those who have been fighting russia since 2014 at the hands of the neo nazi t as a terrorist sweat detained while making their dash for the korean border. washington immediately made it a priority to absolve key of 80 guild trying to shift the blame with blamed the eyes this kay was responsible and watch it and look forward to say that they has