Ask Me Anything

with Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar (Premium)

Ask a question

If you could interview any living person(s), who would you pick and what would you ask them?

If you could get any living person(s) on Breaking Points for an interview, who would you pick, and what questions would you ask them?

Becoming a journalist

Is there a path into the industry for someone who did not go to college?

Gen. H.R. McMaster

In the 1/16/22 answer episode, Saagar took some shots at General H.R.McMaster. Many of your listeners heard H.R.M. speak on the JRE this week. I heard H.R. McMaster speak very intelligently, and kindly about many subjects. What am I missing? Can you elaborate on McMaster advocating for the war in Iraq? He seems too me like he is a good man, am I wrong?

Krystal's Facebook Page

Love you guys! So, Krystal... I decided to find Saagar and yourself on Facebook. Time to do some updates! Still looks like the ole' Rising days over there lol. Just shows how irrelevant Facebook is becoming. Doesn't it? (Hey! I actually did end up asking a question!)

Voter ID compromise

Joe Manchin offered up a compromise position on voting rights legislation last year that was never incorporated into the house or senate version of the bill. The compromise was effectively Democrats getting the main aspects of the bill (automatic voter registration, early voting, and vote by mail expansion) and Republicans getting Voter ID. Why wouldn't Democrats incorporate this to get Manchin's support and why aren't they trying to do so this time around to potentially get his filibuster reform support on this one bill? This also raises the general debate of Voter ID laws. Some Voter ID laws clearly disenfranchise on the margins and Voter ID is security theater in my opinion overall. That said, some voter ID laws require the government to offer free and universal identification or accept a very expansive definition of identification (like Manchin's compromise position last year). In these latter cases, where I personally have not seen empirical evidence of disenfranchisement, why wouldn't the Democrat party accept this type of compromise to advance what they believe to be legislation integral to defending democracy?