Foreign Influence, Xenophobia, and Eroded Oversight Undermine Democracy

Key Quotes

"when you buy business software from lots of vendors the costs add up and it gets complicated and confusing oduu solves this it's a single company that sells a suite of enterprise apps that handles everything from accounting to inventory to sales oduu is all connected on a single platform in a simple and affordable way you can save money without missing out on the features you need check out oduu at odoo com that's odoo com"

This quote introduces Odoo as a solution to the complexity and cost of managing multiple business software vendors. The speaker highlights Odoo's integrated platform as a way to simplify operations and save money while still providing necessary features.

"well david green well president trump seemed to be dozing off throughout a televised cabinet meeting this past week some of the time he was awake he was defending his pentagon chief who is facing war crimes allegations and we are going to get to pete hegseth in a little bit but i want to start with trump's closing statements at the cabinet meeting they ripped off somalis ripped off that state for billions of dollars billions every year billions of dollars and they contribute nothing the welfare is like 88 they contribute nothing i don't want them in our country i'll be honest with you okay some would say 'oh that's not politically correct ' i don't care i don't want them in our country their country's no good for a reason"

The speaker is recounting President Trump's remarks at a cabinet meeting, specifically focusing on his controversial statements about Somali immigrants. This quote captures Trump's assertion that Somali immigrants contribute nothing and his explicit desire not to have them in the country, dismissing political correctness.

"so there is this narrative in the united states for a long time think the ellis island narrative let's call it right that immigrants are the backbone of america have always made america vibrant new they're the entrepreneurs and then their children become you know the next thing and then eventually everyone's this you know american as apple pie i think that that narrative was deeply undermined by the left and the open borders narrative political narrative i mean this idea that we're going to just open the doors let everyone in no matter what we're not doing any merit based and so there was this idea that we're not looking for future americans people who want to contribute in the big version of that term by the way we're not vetting them at all right so they're not necessarily people who want to assimilate to our way of life uh they're not people who are looking to contribute to america maybe they just want to turn america into what it what their country was who knows right because we don't know we're just letting everyone in the door and if you criticize that you're morally bad or racist or whatever else"

Sarah Isgur is presenting a narrative about immigration in the United States, contrasting the traditional "Ellis Island narrative" with what she describes as the "open borders narrative" promoted by the left. She argues that the latter narrative, which she believes lacks merit-based vetting, undermines the idea of immigrants contributing to America and can lead to criticism of those who question it.

"the reality is there has always been a sizable anti immigrant strain in our national dialogue right go back to the beginning the beginning of the 20th century go back you know to the middle of the 19th century and you had very strong anti immigrant strains some of which became organized political movements like the know nothings it has been most acute during times of mass economic transformation when during the the the birth of the industrial age and suddenly immigrants were coming to take advantage of the economic opportunities here you had a lot of other people non immigrants who got their backs up against the wall and started lashing out"

Mo Elleithee is countering Sarah Isgur's point by asserting that anti-immigrant sentiment has always been a significant part of the national dialogue. He traces this sentiment back to the 19th and early 20th centuries, particularly during periods of economic transformation when immigrants were perceived as competition for opportunities.

"i would love to totally redo our immigration system from the ground up i think it should be much much easier to come to this country legally and i think we probably should have something much closer to a merit based system lots of other countries have a pure merit based immigration system i'm actually not sure that i want to get rid of family based immigration i think people building family units here in the united states is also civic and important to community building and that's important to me um but the fact that we don't have a merit based immigration system is kind of insane the fact that it could take someone 10 years to get a visa who has a phd you know from another country um is nuts so i would love to start over on how we would build an immigration system from scratch because i guarantee it's not this one"

Sarah Isgur expresses a desire to completely overhaul the U.S. immigration system, advocating for a more accessible legal immigration process and a stronger emphasis on a merit-based system. While she supports family-based immigration, she finds the current system, which can lead to long visa wait times for highly skilled individuals, to be "insane."

"the military and the defense department have put out contradictory statements over and over and over the secretary of defense saying uh that that you know it was hard to tell what was going on that you know this was part of the fog of war but reporting this week from multiple sources makes it clear very clear that the military commanders knew that there were survivors they could see the survivors in the water if that's the case then there's no question in my mind unless they were floating uh in the water with ak 47s firing at the naval vessels they were no longer able to be combatants if that's what pete hegseth and the defense department wants to call them is combatants which again comes back to sarah's other point which is if in subsequent strikes they are still being deemed as enemy combatants why are you sending them back home that's the equivalent of taking a legitimate prisoner of war during a kinetic armed conflict and sending them back to you know the front lines none of it makes sense it just shows the absolute how absolutely asinine this whole policy is it is ineffective because it is targeting the wrong problem in the wrong place targeting the wrong people and violating us and international law along the way and people are dying as a result"

Mo Elleithee is critiquing the Defense Department's handling of a military strike, pointing out contradictory statements regarding knowledge of survivors. He argues that if commanders were aware of survivors in the water, a second strike would be a violation of the laws of war and highlights the inconsistency of deeming individuals as enemy combatants while subsequently returning them home.