Breitbart Editor Pollack: If Trump Tries To Reinvent, Support 'Will Erode'| Velshi & Ruhle

GROUP OF SUPPORTERS WHO WILL SEEMINGLY STING WITH HIM THROUGH
JUST ABOUT ANYTHING. MY NEXT GUEST USED TO WORK WITH
STEVE BANNON AT THE CONSERVATIVE NEWS WEBSITE BREITBART THAT HAS
GENERALLY SUPPORTED PRESIDENT TRUMP AND THE ADMINISTRATION.
FOR MORE I WANT TO BRING IN JOEL POLLACK.
HE'S THE SENIOR EDITOR AT LARGE FOR BREITBART NEWS.
THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US. >> GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.
>> JOEL, ABOUT AN HOUR AGO YOU TWEETED OUT HASHTAG WAR.
WHAT WAS WAS THAT ABOUT? >> HASHTAG WAR HAS BEEN OUR MOET
TOE SINCE THE DAYS OF ANDREW BREITBART, AND WE USE IT
WHENEVER WE GO TO WAR AGAINST OUR THREE MAIN TARGETS, WHICH
ARE IN ORDER, HOLLYWOOD AND THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA, NUMBER ONE,
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND THE INSTITUTIONAL LEFT, NUMBER TWO
AND THE REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT IN WASHINGTON, NUMBER THREE.
AND I TWEETED THAT TO LET OUR READERS KNOW THAT OUR MISSION
REMAINS THE SAME. AS IT HAS BEEN BEFORE TRUMP, AS
IT WAS WHEN TRUMP WAS ELECTED AND AS IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE
THROUGH THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND BEYOND, WE REMAIN TRUE TO
OUR MISSION AND WE ARE HAPPY WARRIORS.
WE FIGHT ONWARD. >> I APPRECIATE SINCE THE
MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS ONE OF THE TARGETS THAT YOU'RE HERE WITH ME
TODAY BECAUSE I WANT TO HAVE A CONSTRUCTIVE DISCUSSION WITH YOU
ABOUT WHAT YOUR CONSTITUENCY, WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR
CONSTITUENCY. LET'S JUST STICK ON THIS FOR A
SECOND. IS THERE AN IMPLICATION HERE
THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE A WAR THAT INVOLVES STEVE BANNON
VERSUS THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION? >> I DON'T KNOW.
IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.
THE KEY TO THE ADMINISTRATION'S SUCCESS HAS BEEN AND WILL
CONTINUE TO BE WHETHER IT STICKS TO THE AGENDA ON WHICH DONALD
TRUMP RAN FOR PRESIDENT. AND IN MANY WAYS HE HAS INDEED
STUCK TO THAT AGENDA SINCE TAKING OFFICE IN JANUARY.
AND THE ISSUES ARE WHAT BIND HIM TO HIS BASE.
IT'S NOT PERMITS. IT'S EVEN EVEN STEVE BANNON.
IT IS HIS PERFORMANCE ON THOSE ISSUES.
AND THOSE ARE ISSUES THAT OUR READERS GENERALLY WANT TO SEE
ACTION ON. THEY INCLUDE OBAMACARE AND TAX
REFORM, BUT THEY ALSO INCLUDE THINGS LIKE THE PARIS CLIMATE
ACCORDS WHICHCH TRUMP DID WITHDW FROM APPARENTLY WITH ADVICE FROM
STEVE BANNON. IT INCLUDES THE RENEGOTIATION OF
NAFTA AND OTHER PRIORITIES THAT TRUMP MADE ESSENTIAL, SUCH AS
THE BORDER WALL. THESE ARE ALL THINGS IF TRUMP
MAKES PROGRESS ON ELCONTINUE TO PROBABLY SEE POSITIVE COVERAGE
FROM BREITBART AND OTHER CONSERVATIVE NEWS WEBSITES AND
FROM TALK RADIO. BUT IF HE VEERS AWAY, IF HE
PULSE AN ARNOLD SHARTS WEIGHINGER AND TRIEGSZ TO
PRESENT HIMSELF AS A LIBERAL ELSEE THAT SUPPORT ERODE VERY,
VERY QUICKLY AND ELSTRUGGLE TO MAKE THE CASE FOR RE-ELECTION IN
2020. >> JOEL, I JUST WANT TO BRING
OUR VIEWERS RESPONSE NOW THAT BREITBART HAS ISSUED.
WE'LL. BREITBART'S COMMENTS ARE YOU
BLUE IT, MR. TRUMP. WE DIDN'T VOTE FOR GLOBALISTS
AND ELITISTS GOP AND WE DON'T NEED YOUR SON-IN-LAW EITHER.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT.
WELL, TRUMP HAS NOW LOST AN CAUGHTER AND ME.
I DIDN'T VOTE FOR JEB BUSH, BUT APPARENTLY THAT IS WHAT I GOT.
I'M SORRYMENT OF THAT WAS A COMMENT THAT WAS FROM A
BREITBART READER COMMENTING ON THE STORY THAT STEVE BANNON IS
OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE. GABE SHERMAN IS REPORTING THAT A
SOURCE CLOSE TO STEVE BANNON SAYS THAT STEVE BANNON IS
RETURNING TO BREITBART. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN
CONFIRM FOR US? >> I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT
IT AND COULDN'T COMMENT ON IT IF I DID.
>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO
ARE YOUR CONSTITUENCY, YOUR READERS.
STEVE BANNON HAS SAID IN THE PAST THAT BREITBART IS A
PLATFORM -- IN FACT, HIS QUOTE, HE TOLD MOTHER JONES BREITBART
IS A PLATFORM FOR THE ALT-RIGHT. IS THAT TRUE.
>> NO, IT ISN'T 2R50U. CERTAINLY NOT THAT THE WAY
PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE ALT-RIGHT STOWED.
THERE'S AN EXCELLENT ARTICLE IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES" MAGAZINE
THIS WEEKEND THAT TALKS ABOUT BREITBART AND SPECIFICALLY OUR
EDITOR IN CHIEF BUT ALONG THE WAY INTERVIEWS YOHAI BENG HER
WHO IS A RESEARCHER AT HARVARD WHO HAS DONE RESEARCH ABOUT HOW
THE ALT-RIGHT WORKS IN SOCIAL MEDIA AND HE SAYS TO "THE NEW
YORK TIMES" THAT HIS CONCLUSION IS THAT BREITBART IS NOT
ALT-RIGHT. AND THAT'S CERTAINLY HOW WE FEEL
AT BREITBART. WE ARE NOT AN ALT-RIGHT
WEBSITES. WE DON'T HAVE ALT-RIGHT WRITERS
OR HE HAD TORS. BUT I THINK WHAT HAPPENED DURING
THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN WAS THAT THERE WERE SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF
READERS FROM THE ALT-RIGHT WORLD WHO WERE LOOKING FOR POSITIVE
COVERAGE OF DONALD TRUMP, AND WE WERE VIRTUALLY THE ONLY
CONSERVATIVE NEWS WEBSITE THAT DIDN'T TURN INTO A NEVER TRUMP
SITE. SO WE WERE GIVING POSITIVE
COVERAGE. WE ALSO HAD CRITICISM.
I PERSONALLY WROTE SOME ARTICLES.
MUSLIM BAN I SAID AT THE TIME WAS A STUPID IDEA, AEL COUPLE OF
OTHER THINGS AS WELL. SO WE WERE CRITICAL BUT
GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE. AND I THINK THAT'S A REAP THAT
PEOPLE STARTED READING BREITBART.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT STEVE WAS REFERRING TO.
BUT WE ARE NOT A PLATFORM IN THE SENSE AND CERTAINLY NOT THE WAY
PEOPLE ARE USING THE TERM TODAY, WHICH IS TO INCLUDE THESE NAZIS
AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS AND ALL THESE REALLY DPLOSHL PEOPLE --
>> YOU'RE COMFORTABLE -- >> OWEDOUS PEOPLE WHO ARE OUT
THERE IN CHARLOTTESVILLE. >> THAT'S OKAY.
YOU'VE ANSWERED IT, THEN H. YOU'RE COMFORTABLE DISAVOWING
NEO-NAZIS AND KK SKP AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS, THAT GROUP THAT
WE'RE CALLING THE ALT-RIGHT. >> ABSOLUTELY.
THERE'S NO ROOM FOR THEM ON OUR WEBSITE AND NEVER WILL BE.
>> OKAY. SO LET'S THEN UNDERSTAND WHO
YOUR CONSTITUENCY IS. HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THEM?
AND I MEAN THIS VERY SINCERELY, BECAUSE BEFORE WE DESCEND INTO A
RACE WAR, I THINK IMPORTANT DIALOGUE IS USEFUL.
SO WHAT IS THE MESSAGE, WHAT IS THE THING THAT YOUR CONSTITUENTS
AND YOUR READERS WOULD LIKE MY VIEWERS TO UNDERSTAND?
>> MOST OF OUR READERS ARE PEOPLE JUST LIKE YOUR VIEWERS.
THEY'RE AMERICANS WHO ARE TIRED OF THE WAY THE POLITICAL SYSTEM
HAS FAILED NOT JUST FOR THE EIGHT YEARS OF BARAK OBAMA BUT
HAS FAILED FOR DECADES. WE'VE SEEN A POLITICAL SYSTEM
THAT'S INCREASINGLY UNRESPONSIVE TO THE NEEDS OF AMERICANS THAT'S
SPENDING MUCH MORE MONEY THAN IT TAKES ON, THAT IS MAKING RASH
DECISIONS ON GRAND SCALES WHETHER IT'S GOING TO WAR BOUGHT
A PROPER PLAN OR REDESIGNING THE ENTIRE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM WHILE
LYING TO THEM ABOUT HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO COST AND THEIR
DOCTOR AND INSURANCE POLICY. PEOPLE ARE SICK OF HOW IT WORKS.
AND BREITBART ALSO INCLUDES A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE
SELF IDENTIFIED CONSERVATIVES WHO HAVE PARTICULAR BELIEFS
ABOUT THE WAY IN WHICH THAT CRISIS OF GOFRP ANSWER SHOULD BE
ADDRESSED. I'M A CONSTITUTIONAL
CONSERVATIVE MYSELF AND THERE ARE MANY IN OUR AUDIENCE WHO
BELIEVE THAT A RETURN TO THE BASIC VISION OF LIMITED
GOVERNMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION IS THE WAY TO ADDRESS THAT
PROBLEM. WE ALSO HAVE OTHER PEOPLE WHO
HAVE A MORE POPULIST VIEW WHO BELIEVE THAT GOVERNMENT HAS SOME
INTERVENTIONIST ROLL TO PLAY IN PEOPLES LIVES AND THAT'S A VIEW
THAT I THINK STEVE BANNON REPRESENTS THAT CAN FIT WITH THE
CONSTITUTIONAL CONSERVATIVE VIEW.
AND SO WE HAVE SOME TENSION AND INTERPLAY ON OUR WEBSITE AND OUR
AUDIENCE WITH THAT. ESSENTIALLY THERE'S ACTUALLY NOT
THAT MUCH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN READERS OF BREITBART AND READERS
OF THE HUFG TON POST IN TERMS OF THEIR FRUSTRATION WITH THE ELITE
MEDIA. THERE IS, I THINK, A COMMONALITY
ALSO OF INTERESTING OPPOSITION MEDIA.
I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS MSNBC HAS BECOME SO
SUCCESSFUL IN THE LAST FEW POINTS.
>> DO YOU THINK WE'RE OPPOSITION MEDIA OR DO YOU THINK WE'RE
ELITE MEDIA WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT MSNBC.
>> IN YOU HAVE A DO YOU LIVE ROLE BECAUSE YOU'RE CONNECTED TO
NBC WHICH IS OF COURSE ONE OF THE MAINSTREAM INSTITUTIONS.
MSNBC'S BRAND IS TO BE OUT THERE AS A LEFT WING NETS WORK, AND
THAT'S I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS IT'S DOING WELL BECAUSE
IT'S NOT SELLING PEOPLE A FALSE PRODUCT.
WHEN YOU GO ON MSNBC YOU KNOW YOU'RE TALKING TO THE LEFT.
YOU KNOW YOU'RE TALKING TO HOSTS WHO GEM LEAN LEFT.
ON CNN THERE'S THIS IDEA THAT THEY'RE NEUTRAL, THEY INCLUDE
ALL SIDES AND NOBODY LIKES CNN BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT'S A
FRAUD. POLITICAL MESSAGE DRESSED UP AS
NONE PARTISAN SHIP. I'M IN FAVOR OF PEOPLE WEARING
THEIR COLORS ON THEIR VEST, WEARING THE UNIFORM AND MAKING
ACCURACY THE WATCH WORD OF HOW YOU MEASURE JOURNALISM RATHER
THAN IMPARTIALITY. I HAVE SAID THIS BEFORE THAT THE
ELECTION COVERAGE THAT MSNBC WAS DOING IN 2016 WAS FOOR FAR AND
AWAY ON CABLE NEWS. I THINK WE WERE THE BEST OVERALL
BECAUSE WE WERE ON TOP OF THE TRUMP PHENOMENON.
I WOULD SAY MSNBC I WOULD NOT SEE CORRESPONDENTS FROM OTHER
NETWORKS AND I THINK ONCE HAVE YOU FREE YOURSELF OF THE NOTION
THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE IMPARTIAL AND YOU TELL YOUR
VIEWERS, HONESTLY, YES, WE HAVE A POINT OF VIEW, BUT WE'RE GOING
TO BE OBJECTIVE IN TERMS OF OUR APPROACH TO THE FACTS OR WE'RE
GOING TO BE ACCURATE IN OUR APPROACH TO THE FACTS THAT FREES
YOU TO DO BETTER JOURNALISM. MSNBC IS MORE INTERESTING TO
WATCH THAN THE OTHER NETWORKS. >> I TAKE THE COMPLIMENT.
ALTHOUGH I'M GOING TO GET A FEW TWEETS IN A MOMENT WHEN YOU SAY
MOST OF YOUR READERS WHERE THE SAME AS OUR VIEWERS.
TELL ME -- >> OUR READERS HAVE THE SAME
ISSUES AS YOUR VIEWERS. THEY JUST DISAGREE GENERALLY
ABOUT HOW TO SOLVE THEM. >> GOT IT.
WHICH IS NOT A PROBLEM, RIGHT. >> RIGHT.
>> IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT PEOPLE DISAGREE WITH HOW TO SOLVE A
PROBLEM. WHAT WE HAVE IN THIS COUNTRY IS
THAT WE'RE GOING DOWN A DANGEROUS PATH.
AND CHARLOTTESVILLE SORT OF BARD ITS TEETH.
THAT IS WHAT WE SAW. HOW DO WE JOINTLY, TOGETHER,
WITH OUR VIEWERSHIP AND YOUR READER SHIP MAKE SURE WE DON'T
GO FARTHER DOWN A PATH THAT LEADS TO A RACE WAR AND VIOLENCE
AND PEOPLE GETTING KILLED? >> WELL, LOOK, I DON'T THINK
THERE'S ANY RISKY A CAR. I'LL TELL YOU WHAT I THINK THE
REAL PROBLEM IN CHARLOTTESVILLE WAS AND REMAINS, BY THE WAY.
THE REAL PROBLEM IS THAT NOBODY IS STANDING UP FOR THE PRINCIPLE
OF FREE SPEECH. THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
YOU KNOW, I GREW UP IN SKOEKY, ILLINOIS.
I'M JEWISH AND SKOEKY IS A JEWISH COMMUNITY FOR THE LARGE
EXTENT S. AT THE TIME IT HAD A LARGE NUMBER OF HOLE CAST
SURVIVORS. >> AND THERE WAS A NAZI MARCH.
>> IT DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAPPEN BECAUSE THEY DECIDED TO MOVE IT
ELSEWHERE. BUT THEY WON IN COURT THE RIGHT
TO MARCH IN SKOEKY. SO THE NAZI PARTY WAS ALLOWED BY
THE COURTS TO MARCH. THEY EVENTUALLY CHANGED THEIR
PLAN FOR OTHER REASONS, BUT THE PRINCIPLE THAT WAS UPHELD BY THE
SUPREME COURT WAS THAT THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS HATEFUL
SPEECH AS WELL. IT PROTECTS SPEECH YOU DON'T
LIKE. AND THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE TO
THAT IS TO RESPOND WITH SPEECH AND NOT WITH VIOLENCE.
YOU KNOW, I CAME DOWN VERY HARD ON MARCO RUBIO, A REPUBLICAN I
CONSIDER MYSELF A REPUBLICAN AS WELL AS A CONSERVATIVE.
AND I CAME DOWN VERY HARD ON MARCO RUBIO FOR SAYING THAT THE
WHITE SUPREMACISTS AND NAZIS AND SO FORTH WERE 100% IN THE WRONG.
AND HE FURTHER SAID THAT BECAUSE THEIR IDEAS OR THEIR IDEOLOGY
WAS IN HIS TERMS VIOLENT THAT VIOLENCE WAS JUSTIFIED IN
RESPONSE. THAT'S COMPLETELY WRONG.
IF YOU START SAYING THAT IDEAS ARE A FORM OF VIOLENCE, THEN IT
DOESN'T JUST APPLY TO IDEAS ON THE EXTREME RIGHT, BUT IT
APPLIES TO IDEAS ON THE LEFT. IT APPLIES TO IDEAS YOU DON'T
LIKE. NOBODY IS STANDING UP FOR
FREEDOM OF SPEECH. AND IRONICALLY THE ONLY PERSON
WHO WAS WAS DONALD TRUMP. BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY LEADERS
-- ALL OF THESE GUYS OR MOST OF THEM, MOST OF THESE MEN AND
WOMEN HAVE LAW DEGREES. THEY ALL STUDIED YID THE SKOEKY
CASE -- >> AND A LOT OF PEOPLE, YOU
KNOW, IT WAS HARD FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE ON THE LEFT TO ACCEPT THE
FACT THAT THE ACLU WAS DEFENDING THE RIGHTS OF THESE PEOPLE TO
MARCH. BUT LET ME JUST GO ONE FURTHER,
BECAUSE YOU SAID IT YOURSELF. YOU'RE JEWISH.
YOU GREW UP IN A JEWISH COMMUNITY.
HOW DO YOU -- WHAT'S YOUR LEVEL OF COMFORT WITH THE FACT THAT
THE EMBRACE OF FREE SPEECH AS REPD BY THE RIGHT DOES TO SOME
DEGREE MEAN AN EMBRACE OF NEO-NAZIS?
>> WELL, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT IT DOES MEAN EMBRACING THEIR
IDEAS. I MEAN IT JUST MEANS EMBRACING
THEIR RIGHT TO DEMONSTRATE. I THINK THAT I WOULD STAND UP
THE SAME WAY FOR THEM AS I WOULD STAND UP FOR RADICAL LEFT
WINGERS AT BERKELEY AS LONG AS THEY'RE NOT BRINGING ROCKS OR
NOT RIOTING AND BURNING THINGS ON THE CAMPUS.
I THINK THAT YOU H YOU HAVE TO UP -- YOU KNOW, BREITBART HAS A
FUNNY RELATIONSHIP WITH BILL MATURE, THE HBO HOST AND
COMEDIAN. AND HE WAS HOSTED AT BERKELEY
AND THEY TRIED TO UNINVITE HIM. HE'S BEEN VERY HARSH TOWARDS US.
HAS SAID SOME VERY NASTY THINGS ABOUT US, WE STOOD UP FOR HIM HE
HAD EDITORIAL WHEN HE FEELS GOING TO BE UNINVITED FROM
BERKELEY. WE BELIEVE IN FREE SPEECH.
OUR MOTTO HAS ALWAYS BEEN MORE VOICES NOT FEWER VOICES AND I
THINK THAT'S SOMETHING AMERICANS WITH TURN TO.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BRINGING PEOPLE BACK TOGETHER AND
AVOIDING THE VIOLENCE AND CONFLICT, I THINK GETTING BACK
TO THE CONSTITUTION AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS THE FIRST
STEP. >> SO I WOULD SAY THIS, MY
VIEWERS, I THINK, AND THEY'LL PROBABLY TWEET ME AND YOU IN A
FEW MINUTES IF THIS IS INCORRECT.
I THINK THEY EMBRACE FREE SPEECH TOO.
SO IF WE HAVE THIS COMMON GROUND THAT IT'S ABOUT FREE SPEECH, WE
HAVE BIGGER PROBLEMS TO SOLVE ONCE WE'VE PASSED THAT BY.
DO YOU TRULY BELIEVE THAT THOSE WHO ARE LEFT OF CENTER IN THIS
COUNTRY DON'T BELIEVE IN FREE SPEECH?
>> NO. I THINK MOST DO, BUT I THINK OUR
LEADERS HAVE NOT ARTICULATED THAT PRINCIPLE.
INSTEAD OF WHICH I THINK LARGELY FOR POLITICAL REASONS THEY'VE
SAID THESE NAZIS AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS DON'T HAVE THE
RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH OR IT'S A FORM OF VIOLENCE.
THERE WAS A SERIES OF ESSAYS IN THE BERKELEY STUDENT NEWSPAPER
CALLING VIOLENCE A FORM OF SELF-DEFENSE AGAINST HATE
SPEECH. WE DON'T ACCEPT THAT IN THIS
COUNTRY. THE FIRST AMENDMENT DOES NOT
EXCLUDE HATE SPEECH. IT EXCLUDES VERY FEW THINGS.
AND I THINK THE POLITICS OF THE MOMENT I THINK PEOPLE ON THE
LEFT HAVE BEEN CAUGHT UP IN THIS AND THEY ARE AFRAID THAT IF THEY
ENDORSE FREE SPEECH, THEY'RE ENDORSING THE VIEWS OF THESE
NAZIS. BUT THERE NEED TO BE MORE
LEADERS COMING OUT AND SAYING WE DON'T LIKE THE SPEECH BUT THEY
HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY THIS STUFF.
IF WE JUST GAVE THEM THE RIGHT TO SAY WHAT WE WANT TO SAY AND
WE LET THEM DO IT, NOBODY WOULD LISTEN.
THIS IS HOW THEY RECRUIT MORE FOLLOWERS.
>> I'M GOING TO PULL UP A GROUP OF BREITBART HEADLINES THAT
WE'VE SEEN RECENTLY. YOUNG MUSLIMS IN THE WEST ARE A
TICKING TIME BOMB INCREASINGLY SIM PA THIGHSING.
CRIMINAL KRISTOL REPUBLICAN SPOILER, RENEGADENEGADE JEW.
NO, NO ONE IS CHALLENGING THAT YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO PUBLISH
THAT ON BREITBART. BUT AS A PUBLISHER, AS A
JOURNALIST, TELL ME -- EXPLAIN THOSE HEADLINES.
>> SO THREE OUT OF THOSE FOUR HEADLINES ARE WRITTEN BY MEMBERS
OF AN ETHNIC OR DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP THEMSELVES AS A FORM OF
CRITICISM OR SELF CRITICISM. SO TO TAKE THE MUSLIM HEADLINE
YOU PUT UP, THAT WAS WRITTEN BY RA HEEM KA SAM WHO IS OUR MUSLIM
EDITOR OF BREITBART LONDON. RENEGADE JEW THAT WAS WRITTEN BY
DAVID WHO OH WITS, A WELL-KNOWN JEWISH JOURNALIST.
AN OPINION PIECE BY A PERSON WRITING THIS IS IN THE WAKE OF
THE CHARL STON SHOOTING A COUPLE YEARS AGO WRITING ABOUT HOW
DEFENDING THE CONFEDERATE FLAG, IN HIS VIEW, IS DIFFERENT FROM
DEFENDING SOME OF THE BELIEFS AND VIEWS THAT ARE CURRENTLY
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT FLAG. HE DEFENDED IT AS A SYMBOL OF
HERITAGE AND A SYMBOL OF HISTORY WHICH IS THE ARGUMENT -- THAT'S
AN OPINION. >> RIGHT.HT.
SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS IS THE ACT OF WANTING TO ENSURE THE
DEFENSE OF FREE SPEECH, DOES IT CAUSE YOU TO HAVE TO WRITE
THINGS THAT ARE INSULTING AND MEAN AND DEMEANING TO PARTICULAR
GROUPS THAT ARE IDENTIFIABLE. >> NO.
I THINK IF YOU WRITE INSULTING THINGS JUST TO BE INSULTING IS
NOBODY WOULD READ THEM ANY WAY. WE WOULDN'T PUBLISH STUFF THAT
WASN'T ON ITS OWN THOUGHT PROVOKING, INSIGHTFUL, FACT
BASED, INCISIVE. JUST TO TAKE THE RENEGADE JEW
ARTICLE THAT HAS COME UP A LOT. THAT WAS WRITTEN BY DAVID WHO OH
WITS BILL KRISTOL AND WHO WITS WAS SAYING, LOOK, IF YOU SIDE
WITH HILLARY CLINTON, HILLARY CLINTON IS NOT GOOD FOR REALLY'S
SECURITY AND IN DAVID WHO WITS'S VIEW SO YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY GOING
AGAINST THE JEWISH COMMUNITY. SO HE WAS CRITICIZING BILL
KRISTOL FOR NOT BEING JEWISH ENOUGH.
THERE WAS SOME THOUGHT BEHIND THAT.
HE WASN'T POINTING TO HIS JUDAISM.
THE ARTICLE IF YOU READ IT AND MOST PEOPLE DIDN'T.
THEY JUST TWEETED THE HEADLINE. IF YOU READ THE ARTICLE IT'S AN
ARGUMENT AGAINST BILL KRISTOL'S POLITICAL POSITION WHICH WAS A
POSITION SHARED BY A LARGE NUMBER OF INTELLECTUAL JEWISH
CONSERVATIVES IN THE BELT WAY. NOW, I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT
ARGUMENT. I WOULDN'T MAKE THAT ARGUMENT,
BUT THAT'S HIS OPINION PIECE AND THERE'S NOTHING ANTI-SEMITIC
ABOUT IT AND AFTERWARDS HE WROTE HOW SHOCK HE WAS AT THE REACTION
HIS HEADLINE RECEIVED BECAUSE HE DIDN'T INTEND IT THAT WAY AT
ALL. >> JOEL, I HAVE SO MUCH MORE I
WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT. WE'VE GOT TO GET TO SOME OTHER
NEWS. I THANK YOU.
I DO THINK WE HAVE MORE TO
DISCUSS. I'M ON TV TONIGHT ON THE
10:00 P.M. >> AS A GOOD BREITBART EDITOR,
IT'S THE JEWISH SABBATH ON SATURDAY NIGHT SO I'M OFF LINE.
SO I WISH YOU AND -- >> SHALL BE AT SHA LEGITIMATE
OBJECTS OF MATRIMONY TO YOU AS WELL.
SENIOR SED TORE AT LARGE

Breitbart Editor Pollack: If Trump Tries To Reinvent, Support 'Will Erode'| Velshi & Ruhle | MSNBC

Latest Posts