All right. And let's bring in Bill Mcgurn,
Fox News contributor and Main St.
columnist for the Wall Street Journal.
You know, Bill, every once in a while we like
to get into the wayback machine when it comes to
President Biden and show what he said then versus what
he's saying now. Listen to this 2019 interview that he
did with
PBS's Judy Woodruff about the dangers of withholding aid from
Israel.
That'd be a tragic mistake.
I strongly oppose Israel's settlement policy on the West Bank.
I've made that clear to
Bibi when we were I was vice president,
I made it crystal clear to the Israelis.
But the idea that we would cut off
military aid to an ally,
our only true, true ally in the entire region,
is absolutely preposterous. It's just beyond my comprehension.
Anyone would do that. Well,
clearly it's within his comprehension now,
Bill.
Yes, it is. I mean,
unfortunately with President Biden, we see that he has kind
of an Alice in Wonderland approach to words.
They mean whatever he wants them to mean at the
moment,
and they're not meant to last beyond that moment.
He can change them like ironclad,
his ironclad commitment to Israel.
And unfortunately, he's not usually called on
Bill. You know, this issue has really divided Democrats across
the board,
especially on Capitol Hill. And we just heard from John
Fetterman.
But I want to play a different bite from him
because I want to really play close attention to the
first two lines of what he says here.
Let's listen.
I didn't agree with that.
You know, it was, it was disappointed.
That doesn't change my support for the president of the
situation.
But I do believe that given in that situation,
when you have the kind of enemy
that has no conditions or,
you know, morals or decency or or any kind of
a a bottom,
and I don't think we should have any kind of
conditions.
And I haven't seen anything with
Israel's conduct that would ever justify
conditions. So Bill John Vedderman saying that,
you know, he's obviously condemning what the president is doing,
but he says it doesn't change my support for the
president.
Shouldn't it change his support for the president?
I mean, how do you take these Democrats seriously and
their criticism
if they just continue to stand by these policies?
Yeah, that's I think what we're seeing playing out.
There's concerns about the election and especially swing states like
Michigan where there's a lot of Muslim voters and Joe
Biden is afraid of alienating them.
As a result, he's alienated both sides.
The idea that the people carrying genocide Joe signs are
going to be persuaded to vote for him,
I think is ridiculous. All he's doing is alienating
both sides in this. So he's been a very uncertain
trumpet.
But I think the background to all this,
there's a tectonic shift in American politics,
with the Republicans becoming the allies of Israel and the
Democrats becoming
hostile. Remember back when Obama was running for president again
at the convention? They booed Israel.
Can you imagine what they would do today?
And the the Republicans, until my farmer boss,
George W Bush, were largely Erebus.
They weren't hostile to Israel,
but they were not. They were considered more friendly to
our regime.
That's all switching now, and the politics is all jumbled
because of it.
Yeah, obviously there's going to be a lot of protests
at the DNC so
we could see them out in force.
Let me ask you this question,
though, because like me, Bill,
you've been around long enough to remember the Reagan administration.
How is what Biden is threatening to do now different
in any way
than what Reagan did a couple of times back in
the 1980s?
Well, first of all, I think Joe Biden's actions comes
after the greatest attack that Israel has endured since World
War Two,
since the Holocaust, this outrageous attack on October 7th,
which Senator Federman was alluding to.
You know, when you attack grandmas,
like you go out looking for them
and slit throats and stuff,
there's no moral bottom. So a serious attack and they're
right there.
They're right inside Israel and I don't think anyone would
leave them false.
So I think the seriousness of the threat then coming
on top of Joe
Biden's,
you know, purported ironclad agreement,
he goes over and makes a speech it too often
this is Joe Biden words that turn out not to
mean anything.
And I think it's a really dangerous position.
And so let me just follow up with with this
quick question.
Reagan did call Menachem Begin when they were shelling the
Palestinians and said cut it out and and they did.
And this is really hypothetical,
but what do you think Reagan would do in this
particular instance?
I think Reagan would back them.
This is comes after, again,
as I say, a terrorist attack that was,
you know, unparalleled in his barbarity.
So I don't, you know,
I I think the fact that another president
40 years ago threatened some weapons.
Israel's had a lot of disagreements with American presidents,
all of them pretty much over the last 40 years.
It's a sovereign nation. It has to do what it's
going to do that it decides for itself.
I think if America ever had an ally
that undermined us at a similar point,
people would rightly be outraged after 9-11.
If they said don't go after al Qaeda or or
stop or we're not going to help you,
I think American people will be outraged.
I think the situation is that Hamas has to be
defeated.
I don't think there's a middle ground.
They're either defeated or they're going to gather and there'll
be another attack.
Maybe it's not now, maybe it's 10 years from now.
I don't know anyone else who had put up with
that.
Well, And Bill, I think we crossed the Rubicon,
too. A few weeks ago,
when Iran sent those drones
at Israel, everything changed. Bill Mcgurn,
thank you for joining us live.
We appreciate it. Thanks, Bill.
Have a great weekend. Thank you.