legitimized sovereignty over occupied sahara lands. it shows agreement between the occupiers policies and their complicity in violating international law and encroaches upon the legitimate rights of the palestinian people to establish their independent states with jerusalem as its capital. and of the, sorry people to self determination of un doesn't consider western sahara to the parts of morocco. the region, also known as the survey republic, declared independence 5 decades ago with crosses breaking out between local forces, unbroken troops. over the years lead to all the peace sides and movements, please, isabel only recognized morocco's territorial claim, the logic of occupation, a mazda 3 most of the other. the logic behind this recognition is the logic of unoccupied, unoccupied, who allows himself to occupied palestinian land. vie like the sanctity of palestine . establish settlements and carry out the displacement, utilization and killing of palestinians in various forms such as prisoners and

others. the logic of occupation itself anyway, does not allow one occupied to oppose another. and we've found that this logic prevails in this matter. there is no surprise or stony spent the zionist entity through the voice of netanyahu claims to have recognized morocco. a morocco finds it difficult to convince the american people and the free individuals they morocco, that this normalization has any positive. among the things that the kingdom of morocco used to promote is that the normalization with the zionist entity of israel would be for national benefit. which is national sovereignty is an attempt to gain support from morocco, sovereignty overland, that does not belong to it. as if one who does not possess something has the right to give it away. the occupied does not own the land of kinda sign. so he has no right to give land to another, occupying when we observe the recent developments and follow the events since the normalization and agreements between the rocket and the zionist entity. we notice the manifestations of normalization. taking the form of intelligent security,

military and economic aspects from the side to design this entity. most of the visits conducted within the framework as normalization and agreements are related to security and military cooperation with his rating military delegations, visiting the rock and attempt to explore observatories and platforms affiliated with the as ray the on the inside, the rock i the latest was the presence of the so called military delegation that participated in the recent military exercises known as african lion, which took place inside the rock. at approximately 12 is ready, ministry. personnel participated in these maneuvers indicating further military security and intelligence prospect in return is route has moved is the morocco and is normalization. oral care is a gains and not evidence and it seems that only rucker ones from this normalization is recognition of its sovereignty over the southern region known as west and so far apart from this going on with them on there are no other clear and specific demands from iraq, i regarding this new organization,

it appears that this normalization is one sided and not a 2 way price. that's. that's a rep for the seller. i hope your weekends off to a great stop, whatever you want to speak to scott, and i'll be back with more instead of to do stay tuned for direct impacts, which is coming up the the fabric. sanchez. i've been doing this for 30 years and 2 languages around the world. i'm here in the united states interviewed for president's work and for a u. s. has major television networks. i believe there should be honest, direct and impactful the show is called direct impact. the

so somebody how people in the united states take notice in fact there were people even in different parts of the world who seem to take notice as well. so what happens this fox news host tucker carlson, we have now learned is going to be leaving the fox news network. one of the company's top post tucker carlson is now out. folks, news says it's policy and company with tucker costs, and one of his most popular. i'm controversial, presenting costs and hosted his a tucker, carl said suddenly no longer with a why does that matter? i'll tell you what matters. it matters because he was the networks most watched personality with the most watched news show. so why would they then let him go when you ask?

because that's how cable news works. and as good as tuckers ratings were very something he maybe did not know about this business of ours. but let me take you through my own journey of how i came to know this secret about cable news that few, including my friend tucker seemed. it's really more about what they don't understand about the people who run the cable news companies. people like fox news owner, rupert murdoch here, let me take you back. i want them who made murdock his billions of dollars. none other than roger rails who practically invented fox news on the notion that america needed to have. so roger and i were friends, and we used to talk quite regularly. one day during one of those conversations. i remember i asked him, i asked roger rails who was building up, in fact,

had build up fox news. why he fired a particular host that day. despite his answer tomorrow, he said to me, well, just put somebody else there and nothing's gonna change. they're watching her, they're watching us. they're watching fox news. that's what roger said, what do you mean by that? see what he meant by that is something that i found about the hard way. in my own case, is he like tucker, i once had a show that was highly rated. in fact, it was often the highest rated show on cnn. one day to my astonishment and disappointment. they fired me just like the same way. they fox just fired tucker girls, and as i sat there trying to figure out why they would fire some of the highest ratings in the networks history, i remembered the words of both rush jim walton st. jim walton was the president of cnn world wide who i worked for, i guess it was my boss right at the very to is to have frequent conversations,

including one where i found myself in mr. watson's office. i was feeling pretty good about my sure that my show's ratings were okay. rick's list at the time my show was beating fox news and i'm a sudden b. c. and the ratings. i was hoping for a pat on the back. mr. walton says this to me is presidency and he says, look here and cnn wreck, we don't care about ratings. they just don't matter. we don't make money off of our ratings. that's the secret. the cable news, it's not about what people watch. it's not even an exercise in democracy really, and it's not even so much about journalism, really anymore. it's a business, and the business is about clearance. you say once a channel, like fox or cnn, are guaranteed a place on directv and comcast dish and verizon. they've made it, they really don't have to do 100000000 subscribers before they even open their

mouths. that is what i eventually came to understand. and that's what tucker maybe didn't understand. then again, maybe he did. maybe he knew that on cable news, you can't challenge the status quote, but he didn't have any way. and maybe that, that not the dominion lawsuit is what really got him fired. because after all, his writings, as i learned from not want names in cable news, in terms of executives told me, ratings, they just don't matter. this sabrina sal body, she's a, she's a car, most of the revolutionary blackouts network. and sabrina, thank you so much for joining us. i'm going to start with what your reaction was. the moment you heard that the fox news ad essentially fired for and highest rated anchor to. yeah, so i think for me,

i was very much surprised. i didn't understand where fox news would hire a would fire one of their basically their top show i. so that was really interesting to me, but then i figured it must have something to do with something that he's been discussing on that. i wore a rhetoric, he's had voices come on like armada and jamie door that are anti war. and i wondered if that was the reason why they decided to remove tucker cross. and so i really felt like it was the content that you probably discussed for, for their audience. you know, i've been reading a lot and i mentioned those moments ago as i was setting this conversation between me and you of that a lot of people don't understand the cable news does not like it's money offer ratings. people that, oh my god, why would they do that? he has a, has, they don't care about ratings. they don't care about ratings. they make their money off subscriptions. it's a business. they're guaranteed, 800000 subscriber. pardon me? a 100000000 subscribers a year between directv and comcast, etc,

etc. so what do they have? one guy doing, uh, you know, uh, 3 dot 3000000 viewers or another guy doing 2500000 viewers. it's kind of all the same to them to business model like it used to be as an they'll probably be more changes over their fox. i mean, we saw seeing and go through a re shuffle of sorts. they have a new manager that came in and decided to just say that they're not just going to focus on the liberal audience. they're also going to focus on the conservative audience as hall. so i think there are shift happening and mainstream media. i think part of that has to do with the fact that since joe biden, one of the present dropped off off from mainstream media, trump did give them a lot of a lot of readings and a lot of support. so i think that they're trying to move the ball in different places to see my think. yeah, reason my viewers are leaving, but by the way, let me just stop you with the trump. the truck was a circus. so everybody wanted to go and watch the start because they wanted to be in the big top. they wanted to buy tickets to watch a circus, and that's essentially what,

what trump represents. and if that's why ratings were up, that's why ratings were, were rob, i, i, i don't think it's necessarily that the business is changing, based on the guy who's in office. i don't think there's any difference between trump and obama, and biden, or any other president of the united states because the policies are essentially the same. and the business interests which i have clenched fists with those policies. and the government are the ones that are really mandating what we watch or what we get on these cable channels. i think i, i leave it to you. you say what? i think people are starting to seek out independent media. i think they're tired of hearing the same and i think that they are starting to question things more and we can point to the pan demik. that's something that more americans to started to question are, since the information has changed from a cdc? i still this information like that. and then also this war with russian ukraine. war americans are starting to question. should we really send billions of dollars

to ukraine over the past, like year and a half the why should they? but why should they? they didn't question iraq. they didn't question of get us then. they didn't question. yeah, man, they didn't question libya, they didn't question series perkins, all of a sudden wake up and oh wait a minute. my government is spending between 50 and a $100000000000.00 a year and some places i, i can't even change the economy. a lot of people are still struggling right now. the gas prices, depending on what state you live in, the gas prices are still price is that the grocery store food is still expensive. this inflation that we're dealing with. so people are saying that more so people who are not left this have said this to me as well. there's, i'm paying what, $8.00 for a carton of eggs. and the bind administration has continued to send billions of dollars to another country. so i think more people are starting to make that connection. i think that's the difference when you compare it to iraq. you know, it's interesting what you just said about left. i don't even know what the hell is the less than what the hell is the right anymore, because it seems like they just, it somehow merged and found this place in the middle. in fact,

you couldn't credit. the party represents the left, which it certainly represents a lot more than the republican party represents the left that it's the left today in america that is promoting and supporting these raising expensive, endless wars like what we're now saying, developing a new credit. well, i wanna, i wanna clear something here because a lot of people are crowded parties, not left are those are liberals. are they still lean center, right? so i just want to make the distinction there, left. this are people who consider themselves to be progressive. people who are left of the democratic party, people like myself, we're the ones. yeah. now listen i, i get that as a way to a hold on i, i get that and god love you for saying that. and i think you're making an important point that there's a true distinction between, you know, the institutional formalized that the establishment,

which is maybe the best word democratic party and left us. but my point is, you certainly can, you know, you cannot. yeah. so if you have to go down to specter between who's closer to the library with what you say by the way, that they're not necessarily representing a left point of view, which i think is what you're saying. right? right. i mean, they're calling for censorship now. like this is ridiculous. you have people who were suppose to be progressive like amc calling for censorship. calling for the silence of voices that she disagrees with. are people who tend to criticize her. this is a problem, any time that you have, people like marjorie taylor green is calling for anti censorship and just calling to stops in, in the money to ukraine. that's supposed to be the perspective that comes from the left. yes, i think it happened when we come back. i want to ask you a little bit about the, the specific things that uh, that tucker has said and done in recent weeks prior to his uh, being well,

he supposedly resigned. but as we all know, he was fired, he was let go and that's the truth of it. you stay right there. sabrina, i look forward to talking to you on the other side of the break. by the way, i should tell you, i have a pod cast where i as a journalist as a latino and as an entrepreneur or tell my story and share it with you. i also talk about what we learned about the stories that we talked about on the show. it's called rick sanchez podcast. i invite you to check it out when we come back. more on the firing of tucker cross and then what? uh, what really meets stay with the the hungry this being a member of the european union, a native during the 1st post. so good wave of nato's eastwood expansion

number to be sales because of the main longest sense is there like a month or 2, but i see as a country it's a to me. so me that me it, if so we did like i saw zap, i did do my i just bought the pre show is the name. yeah. it's the lawyers now will beach by choice. some of which is strongly in the early ninety's hungry was a country with the west view of russia to day star co disagreements left over from the soviet union. the why he's what and you some of mine yours. i'm going to go to what i see if you follow up, you must somebody in the compare the police report more than otherwise, but i sees great and i did is a, it's a political though as much but the

the say welcome back. i'm much sanchez, you know, there's something else that's been happening of late regarding what we know in the firing of talk across and remember question was, fox is most, when you know most highly rated most companies breaking host, for example, we have the compunction, if not the temerity, the questionnaire countries, foreign policy, something needs the establishment, media outlets. it is perhaps for that very reason that fox is getting

a lot of heat now for firing cross back once again talking to uh sabrina sell body . she hosts savvy sides, that's her podcast, and it's a darned good one. and she has a very unique way of looking at the, the politics of our time, which explains that news. and the editorial decisions of our time non bigger, more recently than what he was just off a sudden told one morning hey, don't come to work. you're fired. it was a complete shock to him. he was totally surprised. i know tucker, as you know, tuckers had me on a show many times and he, and i've talked a lot over the years, i would consider him most a friend because you know, in this business like those. but he did, he did get by, you're in this whole dominion lawsuit and he did something which was quite interesting. he was actually uh heard, or i guess written on tags where he said about donald trump. i hate

him. i hate him passionately. and ask for the argument that donald trump had lost the election and that, you know, he was embarrassed having to put that story on the air because he didn't think there was an a trip to it yet. he was going on the air and loading donald trump and promoting the, the story about the election being a fraudulent. so not as i would say. so i think a big part of the problem is, you know, in network network news, you have to do what the producers want you to do, or you lose your seat and they'll replace you with someone else, you know, but i couldn't imagine going on air almost every other night promoting a donald trump promoting something that i really despise. so i would say that tucker was a good actor, and this is something what, what does that say? but what does that say? what, what does that say? and you know, okay, tucker was doing that because for some reason he figured the right calculation was

not to go on the or and criticized drop. so he defended trump on the air. the privately, he would tell his friends donald trump's that area and on the air he defended the election square foot whole. but privately he said this is bullcrap and he did that. do you think they all do that is i wouldn't. i wouldn't be surprised. i really wouldn't, i wouldn't be surprised if there's commentators of cnn or m as in dc that are not too keen on joe biden, but they have to read the script that they're given. they have to come on there and do their job. that's the thing is like they're trying to sell an image. they're trying to sell a certain types of politics. they're trying to support the state department on narrative, and that really is their job. i just wish more americans realize that. do you think? uh, okay, here's where the rubber meets the road, or it's not so much what the, the editorial is,

or the bosses and cnn are on a 70 c or fox, or anywhere. what they say great is that your executive producer who are set on board rooms, who want to make sure that the entity stays whole. so why would i, for example, the fact that politician arrives legal bribes so that they can have campaign funds so that they can then run for office into cnn, and fox and tv to do commercials. so if i was to go on the or and tell the truth, which is almost every politician in the united states is taking a legal bride. and politicians are being patients, right? but because that money goes back to cnn and back to fox and backed them as nbc in the form of advertising, they're not going to talk about it. and they're not going criticize it. that's just one example that we saw it sort of businesses determining. and unfortunately, this is how it works, and that's why people have to look at who owns these companies, where the shareholders that are invested in these networks. you really have to

trace it back and see if you look at a company like black rock or via gartner states state street. yeah. they're shareholders in the media space. and this is really important for people to understand. so the people that you see on the screen, they are merely just a pop it like they don't really have get the opportunity to say their real opinion . you know, this is why they were so critical against someone like bernie sanders because to bring him on the network and hear him say, the billionaires are the problem. well, that doesn't sit well with the people who are on the board of the network. you know, so of course they're going to some your, someone like it, you know, it's interesting in the case of tucker, once again, he really played it. he played both sides against the middle because he knew fox's audience is very old and white and male. right? so the great for ponder and of foxes audience probably between 80 and 90 percent are white. the males. um certainly white. uh,

and the males pretty high as well. russert in argument for them. and that's why tucker, when it came to the traditional, which i'm sorry, tends to be a little on the anti immigrant side. pardon me, i'm an immigrant, but you're not gonna hear fox news advocating for the rights of latino to that matter. that a fairly pays better funding place for that audience. tucker knew how to continue that rhetoric sort of speak. but he gave a more even just and there he didn't just do you know what a riley and how did he do, which is just play down the middle to the republican talking points. he stayed on some republicans having voice, but then took them out of the conduct reports like you said, with the situation in the ukraine which, which was a tomato strategy. i've never seen anybody else do that on any network, which is i'll give you some of what i think you want, right? i'll give you your, your, your, your, uh, your dessert for lack of

a better word or description. but you know what, here's your spinach and you're going to learn this. and by doing that he actually was leading the conservative cause toward trying to straighten out our foreign policy greeting debacle. that it is no. yeah, i would say so i think, you know, he's trying to show again he was trying to give them what they want, but at the same time kind of slowly walk them to where they should be headed. and i think that's not easy to do. i don't think a lot of commentators do that. they usually tend to be one sided, one way or the other. but i said this when when tucker was, was fired. i said, talk across and can start a youtube channel tomorrow and probably already have a 1000000 subscribers. a lot of people like to listen to them and not just conservative their democrats. they used to watch like talk across and show. so i think people have to understand whatever he was doing, it was engaging in a way that people wanted to tune in and watch him. do you think? what do you think killed the?

i mean, 1st of all, we think because he's a swanson air and that means he is, you know, rich beyond anyone's wildest imaginations. and if he didn't want to work another day in his life, he didn't have to. however, i do believe like most of us. so that he wants to be famous and he wants to be on the tv, and he will be well, according to the law and mosque, he's supposed to do a show on twitter. yeah, so this should be out, but i think people will tune into twitter to see like tucker because weren't, i think this is a whole shift in the platform. apparently they're gonna allow people to subscribe to the show as well. so they go that way. 100000000 people, a 100000000 people watched tuckers blurb on twitter announcing that he was going to be creating a show on that. the format 100000000. think about that. do, do, do you know,

tuckers, everybody gets excited about ratings, but cable news readings are actually pretty small. tucker, on a good day, had 3000000 people watching. and in terms of the demo, or what we call the $25.00 to $54.00 audience, which is the audience that matters. sorry, elation of the united states, maybe 500000. not a good day, maybe. oh, i mean that's basically what the numbers were in a country of 350000000 people. it's not a huge, not about a 100000000. that's a big not. what does that say? yeah, more people have gone away from cable to be honest with you, like the a lot of people i know don't have cable subscription, haven't had one in years, their streaming services. so more people have like, especially my generation netflix, hulu. uh. but every body, uh for the most part, my generation is on twitter. so twitter, again like the social media sites. youtube is another one that a lot of. so i think again, i think the days of just like cable news, either they're going to have to do something, draft new audience,

particularly your younger audience, or they're just going to fade away. sabrina, somebody. uh my, uh, my thanks to you. the host of the savvy sab, you can catch your broadcast on uh, the out network and uh, and she's out there and we think are for us taking some time in with us today about the tucker carlson firing or lack of a better term, or maybe using the most correct term. thanks again. sabrina. thank you. hey, before we go, i want to remind you of our mission here. it's simple really. i want the silo, the world, the cost of living and these little boxes truths don't live in boxes. they're everywhere. commer sanchez and i'll be looking for you again, right here for i helped to provide a direct impact the

costs. how much that you, whatever you do, do not watch my new show. search like why watch something that's so different opinions that he won't get anywhere else. welcome to please, or do you have the state department to see i a weapons bankers, multi 1000000000 dollar corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead. change and whatever you do. don't want my show, say main street, because i'm probably going to make you uncomfortable. my show is called stretching time, but again, you probably don't want to watch it because it might just change the way you a nice sort of course in for solving for now are you in the morning? no problem ma'am. ma'am. can you me upload the

like the,

the order will adjust the pieces they asked as of today because there's a lot of censorship on many topics in schools that start to just the migration topic. to my impression, it went on with the atomic change, gone back, it went on to send them a call. you see, i mean, there was no, there was no way of debate. it was either or that's never. and now it's about russia and it's about, yes, we have to fight the russia and pressure has to be taken off the map, the, the, the white inc. i'm gonna get, i sent ended. there is the need, the team comes is all set. russia for questioning the blog said deal most i'm big tells you and only 3 percent of the grade under that's a grievance we.