Saagar Enjeti: “The Joke Is on Me”

Hello and welcome to the Bullard Podcast. I'm your host Tim Miller.

“I remind you I'm live stream in tonight.”

You know, I'm coming for Hassan and his destiny. He'll see how it goes. 830 in the East come hang. One thing I want to do on the podcast, I told you guys that's actually election. I'm trying to get a wider breadth of views on the show.

But I have some policies, which is like no bullshitters. Sometimes people can slip through the cracks on this. And it's a little challenging on the magazine getting no bullshitters. Because Trump has nature forces advocates to bullshit because he's like all over the place in the issues and he himself is a bullshitter and he rug polls people like all the time

on things. So I change his views in two seconds. And so I've been begging today's guest to come on the show for like months, literally begging. Our DMs are embarrassing.

It's like the lover that you who have sent nine straight DMs to. For this reason, he's an unapologetic right wing populist and there's much stuff we don't agree on, but he's not full of shit. And that's been evident recently as he's a lot of consistent criticism of Trump as he is betrayed the popular base on Epstein and Iran.

In particular, so with that glazing in Trump, it's the ghost of breaking points. The Sagarin Jettie, how you doing, brother? Thank you for having me, Tim. I'm not sure how I feel about it, but I'll take it. I'll take it.

Okay, well, obviously you feel a little nervous because it's been months. I wouldn't say I was nervous. I won't be honest. I mean, I was conflicted about coming on your show. Why?

“Well, you know, I think bull work style politics has been kind of the antithesis of like everything”

I believe. This is not really a shot at you personally, but weekly standard and bill crystal, Jonathan Lass, a lot of the people who you work with, Sarah Langwell, I mean a lot of these people I would consider like my ideological enemies and also at a policy level, these are the

very people who are protected some of the types of politics, which I have basically dedicated

my career to try to smash down. So I was like, well, you know, what's the appropriate level? But at the end of the day, you know, I think at the, you know, some discussion across these lines is probably important. And I finally decided to do it because I thought I want to expose, hopefully your audience

to, let's say, criticism, which they may not have heard previously and to potentially get them to change some of their ideas or the very least engage with some ideas, which they may think that they disagree with. So that's why I decided to do it. I love that.

We are kind of on opposite sides of the horseshoe. You know, reading Graham talked about this a little bit as well, who's like more of the left-popularist chair, we'll get into it. There may be more areas of agreement that discriminately thinking growth is good. You know, there's been growth and, you know, events have affected people's views on things.

So maybe events have certainly affected some of our views on things and the weekly standard types and maybe increasingly events will start to affect your views on things. We'll see.

As we go over the course of the podcast, I also want to congratulate you for being the first

person to do the Tucker Carlson podcast and the board podcast. So good as to you. Yeah, no, I saw that. I was like, wow, you told me I should get a New York Times profile, and I was like, I really, that's like the last thing.

I think that's right. I think that you showed. I was like, that's no, absolutely not, that's the last thing that I want. At the end of the day, I'm pretty much the same person. You know, I wouldn't say anything different than on Tucker than I would say on your

show. Explain your world view to people for people who are the don't know. Like you kind of just did it by contrasting against weekly standard world, but like, what is it the proactive, Sega world view? Yeah.

“So I mean, I think the way that I really see the world and this is why a lot of the stuff that”

originally, we let's talk about, like, so-called MAGA or Trump for me, really it's about ideas. And so my own personal world view is I started in politics around 2014, 2015. I actually was much more originally aligned with people like Bill Crystal at all. And I started working at the Daily Caller in 2016, I believe, and really the election

Donald Trump in 2016 kind of like shook me viscerally. And I said, I really don't understand my own country. I really don't understand the world. And clearly, I'm so out of touch and it's because I've been listening to a lot of the wrong people.

And so I started doing a lot of reading and thinking really about how I think America fundamentally should be and where should go and really came down to a principle of sovereignty. And a lot of that comes back to some of the original ideas, let's say, behind the original

America first movement, whether it's a culture not now, which can talk about in a little

bit and unfortunately I do think that has been the case. But that doesn't stop me from believing in a lot of the ideas. And so the idea is fundamentally, or about declaration of sovereignty, independence, lack of adherence or giving sovereignty away to let's say multinational institutions, things like NATO, worshiping of the old order, trying to rethink what it means to have an American

social contract. Some of that involves immigration dramatically, lessening or lowering immigration to the

A lot of it comes back to our foreign policy about intervention, tax policy as well. It's an element of maga and/or America first, which doesn't get talked about enough, because it's mostly dead. But it was a very live discussion, Tim, as I know that you are aware about dramatically rethinking our policy whenever it comes to economics and challenging some of the chamber

of commerce status quo, which was, again, pushed by a lot of people who you currently work with. So it's a two of three time Trump voter for you, for me, I guess, I guess it would have been two out of three. Two out of three.

Were you in Evan McMull and man in 2016? I was very conflicted. I actually didn't vote. I tried to vote, and then I requested my ballot, but I was still in Texas, so it was complicated.

We voted fraud, actually, because of where I was from. You committed voter fraud, don't you?

“I want you to try, I think I tried to commit voter fraud, because I didn't live in”

Texas anymore. And then something about my signature got challenged in the primary, and I was like, screw it. I'm sorry. Okay.

That's authentic, America, for example, the first piece of opo that we're looking at.

Yeah, you got me, you got, I'm never running for anything, so don't worry about it.

Let's start with Iran. People are going to honestly think, again, as mentioned in that long lined up, that I wanted to have you on, because it's like, finally, I get to use you to be a vassal to attack Trump on the Iran issue, but I'm trying to just for a while, and Iran has just happened to come to the forefront.

You have been almost out of say apocalypticly opposed to what has been happening the last week. Just give us a little summary of your view about what's the administration's decided to do. I think it's a strategic catastrophe, and I'll say, from a variety of different levels.

So obviously, we basically give an up our sovereignty act to the save Israel with the

“sector of state uttering, which I think is the most remarkable statement, literally, like,”

in modern history, saying that we had to do it, because Israel was going to do it, which apparently never entered in their minds. They couldn't say no. I mean, I'm not sure if you saw this, former Secretary of State Anthony Blinken even came out and said that they tried to pull this same nonsense on Biden.

They tried to pull it on Obama. They tried to pull it on, I mean, multiple different presidents. So it's shocking to actually see our sovereignty be sacrificed in this regard, specifically whenever it comes to Israeli interests. But then let's look at our own strategic interests.

I've been hammering home recently. The munitions problem. We have a very finite amount of resources, our defense industrial base is catastrophic. A lot of our munitions have been sacrificed on the battles of fields of Ukraine. And now, Israel, and now we are finding ourselves in a catastrophic shortage.

We're already pulling out that interceptors from South Korea, which is insane, considering

the amount of bilateral trade we do with South Korea, some 240 billion compared to Israel,

which is 50 billion with three carrier strike groups. Now on the way to the Middle East, we have oil prices, the largest release now this morning that you and I are talking of the strategic petroleum reserve ever from the IEA. And then also the closure of the Straits of Hormuz, it was a war of choice. It's something that I think is pretty explicitly, explicitly, violative of a lot of the original

principles of the America First Movement. And I also think I should clarify when I talk about the America First Movement because the natural liberal will say you're an idiot because Maga voters support the war. And you're right. I am not claiming in any way that there is some popular front anti-war movement.

But I also think that would be a huge mistake, which all of you found out in the 2024 election with how Michigan went, with how a lot of AOC Trump voters, a lot of young men. So for individual constituencies within the new Maga coalition of 2024, what did you find? You found that the anti-war position was very significant.

Again, it's not the only thing, but it was certainly something which was important for them.

And so watching this quagmire, these billions of dollars, $5.6 billion in munitions spent

in the first two days, the streets of Hormuz oil, sacrificing our sovereignty, the deaths of some seven confirmed KIA dozens, dozens of people who were horrifically wounded already that we know of on the very first day of the war, God only knows what's being hidden.

“I think it's a catastrophe, and the best thing you could do is just end the war.”

Today, even that would be a nightmare. On the end of the politics of it in the second, because I do think it's interesting to talk about kind of how Maga voters versus other parts of the Trump coalition are reacting to this. But just on the policy itself, like, so your explanation, it sounds like, is the reason you

got into this, is because you're struggling to buy BB, because I'm still really trying to kind of process why he is doing it, because it is, to me, it just seems like such an obvious quagmire and political mistake and for no clear purpose that would benefit Trump himself personally. The explanation I have is unfortunately very simple, is that Midnight Hammer was a

quote unquote great success. Midnight Hammer, for everybody who is, as a versionist, was the 12 day war, the bombing, the B2 bombers that took out allegedly the nuclear sites, although now they say they're going to obliterate them, and I thought we already obliterate them according to the White House.

So let's leave that to the side. So it was a one day bombing run where we came in, and we bombed it, and Trump was amazed by his success. The second thing, and you cannot underestimate this, is Venezuela.

it would be a quagmire, it would be a disaster, is that, oh, who knows, what could happen,

all of these troops could get killed, and he was like, no, we're going to do it anyway. Even though he had some praise, and he had a lot of, back up from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a lot of people warned about some of the bigger problems that could erupt in Latin America, and Venezuela, you know, in the interim, by the way, I hate what people say.

It's been a success. I've even seen some liberal pundits say this. Guys, I mean, does anybody remember how long it took Benghazi and Libya to completely fall apart or Syria, I mean, the whole idea is you don't get involved because on a long enough timeline, pretty much every single U.S. intervention turns out to be a disaster.

So in the interim, it turned out to be a quote unquote success, because we didn't have state collapse, and we had some sort of deal with the oil, and he really believed.

“I think that BB and Lindsey Graham, you've seen this in some of the Wall Street Journal reporting,”

convinced him that it would be that easy. All we have to do is take out the eye tolla, they'll cry uncle, but, you know, they didn't listen, and the military told them not to do this to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Vice Admiral Fred Cocker, he was literally fired by the Joint Chief staff, I think, because he probably leaked a lot of that meeting where he gave a great warning, I think to the American

people, and he's like, guys, this is not the same thing, we're going to have to deal with more moves, we're going to have to deal with interceptors, munitions, every warning that they said ended up coming true, but I'll give an analogy, I'm sure viewers will love for

anybody who has ever read a history of the Second World War, Hitler's dynamic with his generals

was very similar, he was told that the phony war, that the invasion of France and belt, it was going to be a disaster, it could be very difficult, sir, we could do this, but, you know, not on this timeline, and of course, what ended up happening, it was smashing success in the surrender of France in a couple of weeks, and the takeover, and so what happens is you have Norway, you have all of these great winds and winds, I mean, it looked unstoppable in 1940, and so

when Barbarossa comes around, they're like, no man, you really shouldn't do this, he doesn't listen, and so that's the same mindset, I mean, I'm giving that one because I know your viewers will love it. This is great, I need a cigarette right now, say, I'm just playing the Hitler, it's the Vice President and Sager, I knew he would all love it, thank you, but there are many other analogies, military analogies of this throughout the years where people have smashing success,

“and that's what makes, you know, great men supposedly great is that they, you know, the gamble,”

the gamble, I think the analogy I've heard, I mean, which is very apt, is if you've ever been playing craps, it's like sometimes you'll see people who are on top roll, and it's awesome, but seven's going to come up eventually, right? Statistically, you should, what is it you should seven out after X amount of rolls, but sometimes I've seen a guy roll for an hour and a half, right? It doesn't really happen, but sometimes it does, and you go on a hot one, and then,

you know, at the very end, people are like, oh, he can't miss, he's got magic hands, and then they put it all on six or eight, or whatever, and then boom, everybody goes bust on the table. So there are multiple analogies that we can all use here. I want to give you just some of the pushback I've seen online about defending him, not the Lindsey Graham pushback, but from some other folks, this guy, I mean, Ruben Rider, he goes, who I follow, I like, he wrote that. I know Ruben, Ruben,

I'm not surprised by that. Here at this, Gulf War, the first Gulf War, 292 killed 776 wounded, 75 aircraft

lost, but it's still considered smashing success. You can be against, or if you want, if you're a pass of us, but at present, we only have six KIA, this was a couple of days ago, and an adversary who boasted of a thousand missiles a day is now launching like 10, we've utterly ruined a regional power in 10 days. What's your pushback to that? Well, Gulf War had a very specific purpose. It was for the removal of Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. It had nothing to do with regime collapse like the

eventual Iraq war, which by the way, the Gulf War led to, extremely defined characteristics. Also, this is where I hate to be a process liberal, but the process does kind of matter. You had, you know, the so-called coalition, which came into place, where it was sold to the American people. The SPR was actually released, the strategic petroleum reserve was released on the very day of the invasion, specifically to mitigate problems on the home front, and then, you know,

to bring it into politics. It was dramatically popular. It had some 90% approval rating, not that that even matters, by the way, because as you and I both know, Bush went on to lose the election. So, the point is, is about the strategic ends. You know, we can blow shit up anywhere across the entire country. And the point about this is that there was no actual plan for what was going to happen if the Iranians did not immediately capitulate, which they haven't. Even right now,

“everyone's like, "Oh, Trump is going to taco." And it's like, "Uh, is it really up to him?”

The enemy gets a vote." They have an Iatola now who is, "Look, the new Iatola, what? I can't even list the number of relatives that he has lost in this conflict. His father's, why if his son?" I mean, knees or what? I mean, the number of relatives who were all killed, he's a hardliner who was pushed by the IRGC. You have the entire IRGC that remains intact.

there's been this hilarious scandal where Ted Cruz and others have been attacking an interview that I just gave with Tucker Carlson. Where Tucker Carlson said, "Uncusional surrender means foreign troops get to rape your wife and daughter." And they're like, "Oh, you're disgusting. You're saying American troops." Or because, no, that's not what he's saying. He's saying, "In history, as we saw during the Battle of Berlin and the eventual mass rape that took place at the hands of the Soviet

Union from Jenghis Khan or any other unconditional surrender, which has taken place throughout our history that we have been involved in, not saying our troops engage it, nor would they ever, but that that is the implication, especially that is taken to heart by the foreign populace. We've already seen a huge amount of reports of Iranian nationalism rising in the country directly, actually supporting the regime. I mean, there's videos. I can even send them if you want,

of people who are literally in the square being bombed, who are cheering as it has happened.

And while the announcer says, "We will never relent and we will continue to fight." Pretty much

the opposite of what was supposedly intended. The 40 chess China people, there's some of that happening on Maga. This is really not even about Iran because Iran sells their gas to China, and Trump is just on a different level as everybody else. What do you mean? That is a beyond, I mean, I don't know how profane I can get. That is beyond retarded. Look, I gave you the example, that batteries are being taken out of South Korea. Now, little history lesson, when those that batteries were placed

in South Korea in 2016, China put a full-on economic boycott on South Korea, almost tanked their economy, closed down multiple of their stores, boycotted BTS concert, short Chinese tourism, for years, almost two years. I mean, they took billions in losses, but they decided, ultimately,

“our alliance with the United States is very important. And we need this battery. What these are”

these missile interceptors in order to deter North Korea? I've seen some mixed reports on this that they're like, they just have the entire system that it's taken, just some elements of it, but even-- I'm not claiming they took the entire system out. I just said the interceptors, the radar is still there, which is what the Chinese are really concerned about, but then why is it a political crisis right now in Korea? The front page of the Korea Harold literally today is saying,

"Can America defend us?" And the prime minister said, "I, or the president, I apologize," said, "I oppose this decision." You're already watching munitions from the entire Indo-Pacific,

not just South Korea, because that was a second part of that report, is that patriot missile

batteries from all across the Indo-Pacific are being taken back to the Middle East, which shows you the exact shortage that people like me were warning about. This is why I advocate for a policy of restraint. I don't think that the vast swaths of the American Empire are doing us any good.

“That's why I'm never supported funding the war in Ukraine. We did not have the munitions stock”

pile or capacity, and it's not that important to the United In fact, it's less important than Israel. And I'm here sitting here at this entire case around Israel and Iran. So it's shocking, actually to watch this entire stock pile get depleted, which was so foreseeable for people who don't know the situation is dire. So in the 12-day war, just in the 12-day war, the United States spent 25% of its that interstactor stock pile in just 12 days. God only knows what that number is right now.

God only knows. But that 25% was 150 interceptors. Do you want to know how many we acquired in 2025, 15, 12 the year before? It's a crisis. It's a crisis that money can't even solve. We have an entire downstream production problem. There's chemicals that are involved munitions, our entire industrial base, not only defense, but like broadly is catastrophic. And this is why I just say we need to acknowledge the problems of the Iraq War, which you know, foundational,

really to my world view, which I think really destroyed this country. And we need to acknowledge it we're no longer in living in some unipolar fantasy moment. And you know, personally,

“thought that that's what a lot of the people who are working with Trump administration thought too.”

And so that's why it's especially galling, shocking betrayal. We can use all the different adjectives. This episode of the board podcast is brought to you by the Freedom from Religion Foundation. The founders understood something simple in church and state merge liberty loses today's Christian nationalist movement isn't about faith. It's about power. And it's deeply on American.

The Freedom from Religion Foundation defends the first amendment. So no ideological movement

gets to weaponize religion against the rest of us. Separation of church and state is about protecting pluralism. It's about restraint. It's about keeping America a place where people different beliefs or no religious beliefs can coexist peacefully. Visit ffrf.us/tim or text the word religion to 511511 to learn more and join. Help protect the country, the belongs to us all, go to ffrf.us/tim or text religion to 511511 text religion to 511511. Message and data rates may apply.

So we'll come back to Ukraine during all that. We'll hit all the hot button and never-chompers issues.

What's happening inside the administration? I mean, I'm so far gone. I can trump 1.0. Some of these people would call me. I assume you're friends in the administration. And people that share your worldview, speak in New York Times profile. It's all the profiles about Bridge Colby and how he is in there influencing the administration and restraint and pivot to Asia. I assume that there are some junior bridge Colby's in the administration that I don't know

“who've come up through kind of the America First Pipeline. What do they think? What is happening?”

I can't speak for them. I can't speak for them. I can only speak for myself. I can guess really at what a lot of you? I can email from inside the, like, "See, sir, you're getting me out of here. Do you need a producer?" It can coincide. I need that. I don't know that. It's in the ground tunnel out of the Department of Defense right now. None of that is happening at all. To the, by the way, people should leak to me more. I'd love to have it.

Also, I'm sure that you know this. It's actually the people you least expect

a who will end up leaking to you, which is always kind of faster for anybody guessing about

who the people who are leakers. You'd be amazed. Who they actually are. And I do protect my sources. Do you have thoughts on JD? Like, what how? What are you? What's happening right now? He's been a little more quiet. He's, he's given speeches or in some reports that said he didn't want to do it, but then he else said if we do do it, we should go maximalist, which is like a pretty incoherent view. If the true, I don't know, like what's your political sense? What's happening?

I have no idea. I can only give you my guess. My guess is, is that we're living in Versailles

“and that the ear of the king is the only thing that matters. And to protect the ear of the”

king, you have to tell the king what he wants, who's enamored with his victory in Venezuela. Everyone's on an eye told you so tour right now. And that's fair. I think we deserve it. I think people like me deserve it. And I think let's talk about how, why did we think that this would not happen? And the first Trump administration, really all administrations, personnel is policy. We often say that, right? And so our belief of the first Trump administration

is that the staffing of Neocons, of John Bolton, of Jared Kushner, of people like this, their worldview, especially with the departure of Steve Bannon, became the default policy of the United States under Donald Trump. There were, of course, various different things were happening. Trump can say all things to all people and he really is that if anything, that's his superpower. Okay. So that was the framework, which we're operating. So there is a four-year

project after Trump has gone after the 2020. It's kind of funny. Like a lot of us, we're telling people like me and Nicole Wallace, right? They're telling people that Trump's 2.0 will be worse.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You're going to have all these other people always from your perspective.

The true belief, from our perspective, rather than I'm saying, for the, the true believers, the mega types of all be in there. Like that was our framework of it as well. It's just like you thought it was a good thing that was bad. Well, it depends because here's how it ended up manifesting. So our belief over that four-year period, again, my belief at least, was that this professionally elite project, so called America First, professionally project, which is very

indifferent. Organizations, personnel, people, we've all met conferences over the years that those people would be able to transpose their ideas into the policy of the United States. Some of them became the vice president of the United States, the Pentagon, the number three, like you're talking about. And then a myriad different other people who are all across the administration. And the belief was that those ideas would be professionalized into policy. But what I've ended up seeing actually

is an inversion, and this is something that I dramatically underestimated, is that what it actually has translated into is that the so-called lesson of Trump won was that people were not loyal enough to him personally. And that means that whatever he thinks is the policy, the idea or whatever that will then be set through in terms of policy, and that there will actually be very little pushback whatsoever if he disagrees or undermining, et cetera, because they don't want to be

seen as disloyal to the president. Even though there were a lot of people who were disloyal, let's say to the president, in the first term. But on a policy level, this time it's inverted.

“A lot of it is like personal, and that's why I gave the Versailles analogy. And so I look,”

I have no idea what's going on with JD. I have no idea what's going on with any of these people, but I can only speculate that for a lot of them, they have to maintain their access to the president. And you can look at what happened with Tulsi Gabbard. Tulsi Gabbard did, you know, what we thought people like her would do in the 12-day war. And she's like, I really don't think you should do this. I think this is a bad idea. And then she got, you know, DNI'd, as in Do Not Invite to the

Venezuelan meeting, and she got humiliated, right, on national stage. She got struck on by Trump around that Hiroshima video, which I didn't even think was that big of a deal, but it caused like some sort of problems for her. And now she's got to go galvanic around Fulton County, you know, searching for bamboo ballots or whatever, just to try and prove some, like, you know, some loyalty or whatever to Donald Trump. So that is the unfortunate story. The thing that we really

got wrong is we really believed, you know, that, that this project, which again, let's be honest, and you can even go pull the tape from, I never said Trump was the anti-war candidate.

where I was like, if you're pro-Palestinian, you should vote for Kamala. I was like, you're not

getting what you want out of this administration. We knew that there would be trades whenever

“it came to the West Bank or Gaza. I don't think any of us, or I think maybe I can only speak”

for myself. When the Vice President of the United States in October of 2024 goes on a podcast and says, I don't think that it's within our interest to go to war with Iran. I believed it. You know, and you could say, we told you so, Trump is a charlatan. Yeah, we know. Okay, it's not that we had any faith in Trump. Okay. Anybody with faith in Trump is an idiot. We had a faith in Trump. We had faith in the personnel who were around Trump. And I think, you know,

when I say it's a greatest professional disappointment in my life, really what it is, it's like, it's been a hit on a multitude of areas. Because look, Israel, we knew it was going to happen. That was pretty much baked in, even though, by the way, they still took that wave farther than even I ever thought that they would. But then, let's say we thought we'd end the war in Ukraine. Well, that hasn't happened either. We've we'd a whip-saud through this insane policy. We're like

braiding Zelensky, then he's our best friend, selling weapons, and then we're not. Then we're doing

so much of Putin. They end up being totally fake. Basically, nothing has really happened on that

front. And then, let's say, you know, on the Iran situation, for me, I knew it was basically lost in the 12-day war. And really, I mean, you had to give it to the neocons. What they have understood is that Trump is just enamored with the show of military force. And that that alone is the easiest way to sway him. And, you know, there were some bad signs in the initial days of the admin, the appointment of Mike Wall, Mark O'Rubio, as Secretary of State. So I knew things were already

not trending in the right direction, I guess, if you will. But let's say, you know, people like

“Pete Hegseth, what did he say? He's a reform neocon. You remember that? He said that on the Sean”

Ryan podcast. I'll get, look, call me an idiot. You're right to do so. I actually believed it. And it's not because I believed in Hegseth. I believed in the people who were around Hegseth. I knew

a lot of people knew him. They said, no, nude. He really believes it. I trust a lot of these people.

And the joke is on me. The joke is absolutely on me. I'm trying to reclaim both words liberal and neocon. These guys are hawks. This is a war hawk war. They're not, they're not even claiming that they're trying to get democracy. They didn't try to get serum. You might have been able to sell me on Venezuela if we were putting Machado in there, not with Trump's president, but if Marco was president, he came to me and said, hey, we'll do this Venezuela again,

but we'll put Machado in there and maybe that they democracy will flourish in our hemisphere. Out of it, like, some of my old muscles would have started flaring with that. That's not what they're doing. That's how what he's doing. Well, that's how he's doing. It's corruption. It's just like a straight, like it's a like with a shake down. Yeah. I mean, that's where it's on and things go boom. Well, don't forget. It's actually, let's not discount the role that Machado and her entire cohort

played in this entire operation. Because she is, he should be. She's a joke and she wanted to bomb her own people. So congratulations, Maria. You didn't even get what you wanted, but let's put that to the side. Now, you're not wrong, but let's parse, you know, some of the language. Remember, the original impetus for this whole thing goes back to the protest. It had nothing to do with the nuclear program. That became the Cassis Belli. Right. Originally, this was about which,

you're, again, you're, I don't know, but it was co-founder Bill Crystal supported. He was like, oh, we must go, what did he say? He said, this is January 2026. He's like, oh, we have to go and

“free and liberate, you know, the great Iranian people, which, again, I think is a disastrous idea.”

And as we have all seen, isn't even going to work. What are they going to thank you as you rain down acid rain on their children? Yeah. That's definitely a very natural impulse. So that element of it was genuinely new conservative. Now, let's get to what you're talking about. And this is fair. You know, terms matter, there is a robust, hawkish nationalist. I would call it John Bolton. So John Bolton is not a neocon. He is somebody who is robustly hawkish. Now, this is a hawk,

neocon, whatever you want to call it. A hawkish. This is a hawk. Jinguish. Actually, Jinguish is a probably the best term, really for it. Because, I mean, I'm watching these Pentagon press conferences. And it's like military assistance command to Tehran, like, which is a joke about the Vietnam War because in the Vietnam War, it was called military assistance command Vietnam. And General West Morlin, we're like, today we have killed a 252 Vietnamese. And it was like, oh my god, an operation

rolling thunder has dropped more munitions than all of World War II. And America was like, right, right, right, right, look at us. We're beating the shit out of the North Vietnamese. Yeah, how did that work out, right? And I mean, I'm, I'm literally, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, watching General Kane be like, we've dropped double the amount of munitions as shock and awe. And I was like, oh, yeah, because that was a smashing success. That was awesome.

And yeah, if you're too young to know, even get the reference, shock and awe was the invasion of rock. It was the bombing campaign on the invasion of Iraq. You said something in the middle of the rant there about how if anybody like trust Trump or doesn't understand that he's a Charlotton, they're stupid. I'm a little concerned that you impune most of the people that you're up at the

I think parsing the kind of cross tabs, which is, there's some words to that. But like, if you look it when people ask like, hey, do you identify as a Magra Republican, do you identify just as a Republican or you an independent Trump voter? Like the independent Trump voters hate this. Like the newest people into the coalition, hate a lot of you talk to the breaking points. They hate this. Okay, interesting part of the parsing, though, is when you look at people who say, I'm a Magra

Republican, they're like Hell, yeah, 94% whatever you want, Mr. Trump. Yeah, and people who just say, I'm a Republican, but I'm not Magra, they're a little more skeptical. I was interested in that. Because what that tells me is that the Magra movement is actually like a lifestyle brand, and that the people are in a cult, and that they're not, you know, taking into the facts in

“the consideration. It's just whatever Trump wants, it's a raw, raw Trump. And I wonder if that's how”

you kind of assess the coalition at this point? Yes, in a sense. And by the way, I'm not imputing them particularly. I think that a lot of voters are like that. And I should also be clear, a core part of my philosophy is, I don't blame voters. Notice all of my critique right here, it's not about voters. It's about individual parts of an elite network who should no better. Okay? And even, you know, my entire critique is really specifically about an elite project

that has gone completely wrong. But let's talk about the voters. You and I do see some of those like me talking about my people eight years ago. Welcome to the, this is why I felt like we was, you know, get along so well. I give that same speech on multiple podcasts in 2017. Oh, really? Oh, okay. Good. Oh, look, it is important. People should know, like, I don't blame voters. A lot of people are very busy. They go about their lives. If you're listening to the show,

you're probably in the top, what 2% of news consumers in the United States, I always say that

on my own show. I go, guys, you need to check your bias. If you're listening to this, you're literally in the top one percent. And it's on a compliment. Either means your news junky, you're paying attention. You're like super locked in. And that's great for you. Obviously, it's great for us. We're happy to have you. But, you know, the vast majority of people are not paying attention to this stuff. They also believe politicians whenever they say things. And that's okay.

“I mean, kind of I think you should know better at this point. But, look, I mean, you know,”

who really is taking the time to read platforms and assess internal dynamics of white houses. Like, this is not a game that you have to play. That's fair. I guess my question for you just to make a more precise notice. And like, it seems to me like the America first movement is actually like made for where. And like the actual Mac of voters, like the core Trump voters are part of a lifestyle brand and a cult. Yes. And they'll do whatever Trump will. I'm agreeing with you. Yeah. Yeah. I got it. I

am agreeing with you. 100 percent. No, maga is about Trump specifically. I actually always believe that.

That's why I noticed. I'm not one of these people on Epstein or Iran who goes, he betrayed the base. I'm like the base does give it shit about anything. They just care about Trump. There is a term called thermostatic public opinion where public opinion shifts depending on whoever's in power. There's greens of data on this for Democrats and for Republicans when a Republicans in power, Democratic outlook on the economy is low, when a Democratic is in power, Democratic output is high,

same for Republicans like a lot of voters are in cults, and for all being honest. So the latest trend in hiring is skills-based hiring, which emphasizes capabilities over education and direct experience, according to experts' leads to faster hiring and better job performance. So if you're

“an employer who's looking to adapt to skills-based hiring, the best way to ensure your applicants”

have the right skills is our friends at ZipperCruiter. ZipperCruiter's powerful matching technology finds qualified candidates fast. You can easily add ZipperCruiter's screening questions to your job post so you get the highest quality applicants. What it seems recently active, ZipperCruiter's filters can show you that too. Let ZipperCruiter help you find amazing candidates with the skills you seek for out of five employers who post on ZipperCruiter get a quality candidate within the first day.

And now you can try it for free at zippercruiter.com/bolework. That's zippercruiter.com/bolework meet your match on a zippercruiter. Let's talk about Epstein. You could you've been alive, you've been covering this for covering it before we were to be fair seven years. Yeah, you've done deep dives on this stuff. I'm wondering, I just kind of open-ended like what you think some of the listeners or viewers of this show might not know about the Epstein files that you guys are following.

What are you guys covering that hasn't been covered in other places? Well, Epstein was a Israeli asset almost certainly. He was an intelligence asset for multiple different intelligence agencies. He was primarily a money mover and potentially even an arms dealer. He was a very important node in a global intelligence network for moving money around for very,

very powerful people. And the reason why I always start with that is that his usefulness to this

global intelligence network is what enabled him to get away with his behavior for decades. And really, I think the reason people allied the first part of that story is it's politically uncomfortable for a lot of people and constituencies and various different elite networks. Are you sure that

And what I see is a guy who loves being around power who's like trying to set up dinners with people that he thinks is rich in famous. And some of that is whatever ego, some of that's because they give him cover for his gross activities, criminal activities, some of it is whatever. But like there are non-pedophiles that do that, right? Like they're like this is we know I know this type. Like I read his email and I'm like, oh, I know this type. It's like the hangers on a dinner

parties and D.C. and you know he just expanded it out globally. I don't really know the type for multinational arms dealing but it's the same archetype. So how is that? Like I look at it

“and that's what I see. Like that is different. That's why I'm trying to ask of the of the government.”

Oh yeah. See, I actually think you're confusing the term asset is exactly what we're talking about. It's somebody who's like a fly-by-the-night person who works in this convenient where as agent and or directly implores this kind of what I think you're assuming. Yeah, that's not the correct use of the term. He was a hatchet man, a bag man, really. For a variety of these different elite networks and what Epstein did is, I mean, allow me, I'm sorry, this is we're

going to have to go back because I literally spent hours on this topic but the U.S. and the CIA,

the way that they would operate before the church committee is they would never need an Epstein

or an Adnan Kishogi or a Douglas lease to do a ran contra. They would just do it, right? So after the church committee, what ended up happening in events to try and have transparency and oversight of the U.S. intelligence community is that the CIA had to start using all of these unsavory people. And that's specifically the story of a ran contra. A ran contra was a scandal because it broke the law, right? They were like, you cannot do this. Now, the way that they were able

to move money and funds and all this to illegally fund these wars was specifically to use these outside, you know, hatchet man, bag man, arm traffickers. And then what Epstein's note was that he was an expert in moving money around. This is where he primarily got a lot of his expertise at Bear Stearns, where's eventually fired and all in the early 1980s. So at that time period, what he does is he specializes in moving and opening a listed bank accounts and moving money

across the globe. That really was his like reason for being important to a lot of these intelligence

“agencies. And that's why his name, you know, starts a pop up. I would also note, you know, in the”

Epstein files, one of the craziest things that come out that nobody talks about is his false Austrian passport from when he was like 29 years old. In the 1980s, Austria was literally known as the bed of spies. If you have ever visited Austria or Vienna specifically, Vienna was the nexus of Eastern West because of the treaty and it had to remain neutral. And it was one of the highest concentration of spies in the globe. And so this is long before he became a billionaire

or any of this. So he was very useful to this and also he had his, you know, disgusting, kind of sexual proclivities that were going on. And there has been a long, long history of intelligence agencies who have these types of assets like Jeffrey Epstein, who remember foiled his name in 1999 to the CIA, along before anybody even knew who he was, asking them to acknowledge his work with the agency or any of the name in the agency of that's come up in his files. But the reason why this is important

and why I think this had some impact on his sweetheart deal in 2007 is there's a long history of intelligence agencies that when their assets or their agents or anybody gets involved in a criminal case, particularly involving underage children, is that they want to brush this under the rug.

And the reason why is they never want this to go into open court. So we have multiple confirmed

instances of actual agents, CIA personnel who were actually caught, let's say, with child pornography, where they will pressure the FBI and they're like, hey, this cannot go to trial. Sources and methods cannot come out and open court. We need a plea deal, got to cut a deal. This is happened multiple different times. And there's a long, unfortunate, long history of a lot of this going on. So I do think people can get a little conspiracy brain saying that the government

itself was running this or any of that. No, I don't think any of that is the case. Just conspiracy brain really quick on the Israel side of it. You see this. I'm sure in your comments and from people like legitimate criticism of Israel, which there's a lot to criticize right now, can tip over into either conspiracy brain or straight anti-Semitism or, you know, using Zionist as a slur, like all that kind of stuff. I'm wondering how you try to like think about that

navigate it. That's very woke view Tim. See, I think it's the opposite. I, it is not my

“responsibility what other people do. And that's what I mean by that. But this is this”

implication that we have to be very careful or critical of, or let's say less than our criticism

of foreign state because we're worried about anti-Semitism is ridiculous. Anti-Semitism is stupid, wrong, immoral, et cetera. I don't really even know why I have to say that, but obviously, you know, for anybody who tries to smear me otherwise. However, however, it is often weaponized specifically, you know, the term anti-Semitism. You shut down a lot of this legitimate criticism. Sure, but I mean, you would put on that. Well, can you police your comments if people were

dropping the n-word all the time in the comments? Absolutely. But that's awesome policing.

Jewish slurs, like that would make me feel least as the, as the, I can't control it, but it make me as the person communicating, like, one at least, say to them, "Hey, guys, fuck you, they're the doors. Get out of here. Sorry. Sure. I'm not going to be through this." You know, if we have to say it, I guess I will, but like, the idea of, you know, this idea that we're fostering it or any of that is frankly preposterous. We follow the fact

where they lead. And on the Israel side, I mean, how much more do we need? Is relationship with the Prime Minister, Ayd Barak, the amount of funding between the two, what back and forth, the amount of time that they spent together, his own long history of, I mean, by the way, I mean, a lot of people are not even know this. Whenever he was negotiating, his little sweetheart deal back in '07, he fled to Israel for a while and where there was some

speculation that he might have to actually stay there and take advantage of their extradition treaty. That's not anti-Semitic to say. I got to be honest, something you said there bothered me a little bit that the Zionist is a slur. It's not, I mean, it's a literal term, right? People use Zionist as a slur. Okay, but it is a term, no, like it is quite literally a definitional term about somebody who believes an expansion of the Israeli state in the Middle East. Like, I don't think that that's a slur.

I mean, maybe you could use it as a slur, but I don't think that's a difficult thing. Sure, I just see if somebody got there going willy-nilly. Like, I hate that actor, like, fucking Zionist so-and-so. I'm like, why are you, like, that's just you trying to say the K word without saying, I'm just like, like, that is happening. I disagree with that. I mean, there might be some

“basis, but I completely disagree. What's your Trump theory on upstream? Why is he covering it up?”

I have no clue. This is, see, this is what you're saying, Benny Ron. Um, I think Trump is now caught in a basket of lies of his own making. And I think that his obvious social relationship with Epstein that goes back decades, all the way back to the 1990s, the infamous 2002, what is it, New York magazine quote, where he's like, Jeffrey, he likes him young, he enjoys his social something like that.

I think that was the quote. I mean, there were obviously very close. And then what he said

afterwards is he's lied about it, basically. He's like, no, I threw him out of my club. Not really true.

Or it is true, but not in the circumstances, uh, which he wants it to be true. It was over like Virginia Group Frey being stolen from the Marlacco spa, and not about whether he was concerned about his own creepy behavior. I think really they buried him. He buried himself with a lot of the denials for the White House. The birthday book, remember he said it was totally false, sued murder times from a playing or ridiculous. It's ridiculous. It's obvious that their social relationship

“was deep. And that's a bad look, I think, for the president. You also knew these people,”

socially, glean Maxwell, what did you say to Jonathan Swan? He was like, I wish her well or something that infamous interview. That was crazy. Melania, maybe, it would be mad. Yeah, I've seen the Melania theory a floated, but what's his name? By Michael Wolf. I haven't seen enough evidence. I hate you. I haven't any credit. Yeah, I was more talking about her being mad than like, Melania. Yeah. Yeah, right. That was very important on the Stormy Daniels front. So,

I really have no idea. I do think it is important to say. In retrospect, it was really the people around

Trump who are obsessed with Epstein. It really wasn't Trump himself. Right. Obviously, never really,

never really was into. He's like, yeah, sure, release a kind of the way that I'm a big UFO guy, same thing. He obviously was just using it for cloud clicks or whatever. He knows people are interested in the subject, but he never had any real enthusiasm for it. So, that's my guess for why they've handled it this way. He has very little empathy, but one of the groups he has not to be far as men who are accused of sexually harassing people. That's another reason I think he's doing it.

You've been pretty mean to Donald Trump. The president United States were 43 minutes in two votes for him. So, let's talk about the good stuff. Two of the last 14 months and you're like, man, he's really killed it on that. What would be the list? Shot the border down. Shot the border down.

“Yeah. I would say that's probably number one. I mean, for a lot of people that's essential, right?”

For a lot of the people, if you even look at some of the most die-hard, like America first,

Magga, or whatever, they're like, look, I don't care about anything else. That's number one. So, you could say that. I would say that's probably as big as when. There's been literally no more incoming, you know, the other one coming across. Oh, let's think. So, let me think chronologically. So, we had the border, then there was Doge, which I would say was a failure. I don't know. I have Charles for you. One win for Donald Trump. Yeah. Well, it depends.

I mean, it really depends on your last one. First of all, first of all, first of all, first of all, first of all, and then we'll go back to the grading, the Trump presidency. I give credit just on the narrow question of, it's important that we secure our border. And I do agree with that. And I think that this has been a failure. Bring a lot of past presidents and some of that's out of their control a little bit, but they've

done a good job in the securing of the border. If you bring that into the whole, you know, kind of immigration policy though, like the fact that we have probably fewer people in the country now than we did when he was elected president is insane to me. I like that is not the sign,

leaving than coming. And that was a declared goal of the campaign. Well, sure. So, obviously, it was a policy success. But I'm saying is, okay, it's bad for the country. Like he did, like that's true. Yeah, but I'm saying that is, I don't understand why anyone would think that is a good policy. And it's going to contribute to inflation. It's going to contribute to, like there's a lot of needs we have for a growing country, growth in a country is important. You know, I don't think

we want to be Japan in the 1980s. I don't think we want to be a country that people are fleeing.

“I think that it's good to bring people into the country, maybe not the same way that they were”

brought in between 2000 and 2024, but we have to have some way to add people to the country, right? Well, I think it's kind of a neoliberal view, right? Kind of looking at his immigrants as utils, like economic utils and their plug-and-play. Well, I also can't really personally consider it. That too. But I think that I think that they are here. I don't think it's mutual exclusive. I think both of those things are true. Right. But by the way, you would find a lot more agreement

between you and me on ice than you might even think. And there's also a political problem with all of this. I've talked about thermostatic public opinion. The way that the Trump administration has carried out a lot of their immigration agenda has actually flipped support for mass migration more than I think ever before in history, including amnesty, which I think would be a catastrophe for the United States. But let's just think philosophically. So, first of all, I reject the idea that human beings

are utils and we should care about that. But a secondary, and I think that there are much bigger arguments. Now, when let's talk about the border, and really about the historical trend. So, Trump, you can look at Trump as a singular force or as a historical force. I like both theories. But I also think that historically, if you're going to take a look at our own history,

they're under the Biden administration about 10 million people illegally entered the country.

“10 million. The most, I think, ever in American history. You also had the largest foreign-born”

population of the United States ever since the early 1900s, which was met at the time by a organic democratic pushback and shutdown of US immigration, specifically because they were having chaos in their internal society from unmitigated mass migration over the last what? For 50, 60 years, I think at that time period. Also, to your economic point, at that time, we had much more industrial plug-and-play style labor where any individual human being could be reasonably expected to perform well in that

economy. You cannot say that at this time, except with the same level of mass migration, we're a service-based economy. A lot of this idea about basically turning people from Guatemala, or whatever, into home and health aids. I think it's like deeply, actually almost racist, honestly.

And what it does is basically import some sort of like slave class in order to serve all of us

to keep. There's a gap between importing a slave class and having negative net migration, and having a similar level. I mean, there certainly is, but I'm, look, in the same way that you gave the maximum argument, I'm giving you the same one. Sure. Is that we don't need maximal number of home health aids. And I mean, the biggest growing sector of our economy right now is health care, and specifically, home health care aid for old people. I mean, look, I'm not saying that it's not

“a noble job or any of that, but if you want to drive the price down on that, it's a big argument”

for basically like low-skilled immigration, which I don't think that we need. We're a service-based economy. We have industrial-based problems of our own wage growth. Obviously, has been stagnant now for decades, a couple of blips up in there over the years. But at a bigger, more important level, and this is really why Trump really shifted me on the immigration question. I'm really just thinking

about it, bigger, is really like we need a cohesive social understanding of America. And finally,

you said something that made me mad. Great. Fifteen minutes in, awesome. That's fine. We can guide you. I just think we look at Minneapolis, for example, and we've seen a very socially cohesive society that's had a lot of immigration into it. We had the society coming together, volunteering, helping their neighbors. I don't think there was any sense. And like, there was some fraud, right? Like, that's true, and that should have been dealt with. But like, as a society, I only

be asked people of Minneapolis. Like, do you feel incohesive in your community? I think you adhere right now exactly the opposite. And you saw that these masked agents coming into the community to bully and harass people were the ones that caused social discohesion. I wouldn't even disagree in terms of the way that the operation went down. What I would fundamentally disagree with, though, is that there is not a chaotic element to tens of millions of people living in your country illegally.

And specifically, having people and their children have to be educated at the price of the state, while a lot of these people barely speak any English, 25% of the people that Biden let in, literally didn't even have a high school diploma, not even literate in English, let alone Spanish, significant portion of the population, not even literate in Spanish. I mean, whenever they're lawyers and other, after this, are having discourse with them, they're

speaking like, like native languages. That person is not going to succeed in the United States. This, you know, to your economic point, if we want to reduce people, to you, Tills, maybe it's not just volunteering for people in the mom community and Guatemala, they were kids in high school. I have a lot of things, I've asked these people personally, what I'm saying is that, let's say, again, to reduce people to you, Tills, what would you say

not going to do very well. Now, it would be madness to allow that person to come to the United

States, legalize them, give them citizenship, and then just expect them to flourish. Like, we know that it's not going to work, based on the data. And really what it comes down to, again, and this is kind of your point around like social cohesion and like an understanding is we get to decide democratically. And I will say there was a, I think, again, I think immigration was probably number one, maybe number two reason why Donald Trump got elected is the people

want to feel some sort of control over the border. And it was a popular vote, I think mandate, really, on the immigration question, like I really think there's a lot of like you fell for it award stuff, whatever it comes to Trump. He stood in front of a sign at the RNC, and it said

“the mass deportation. And he won the popular vote. And I think people like you have to”

reckon then that your idea of Minneapolis, then of some, you know, utopian vision is just not true.

My reckoning is, I'm sorry, my reckoning is that I was right, and there was a big portion of

people that Donald Trump, the voted for Donald Trump to didn't know what mass deportation looked like. I didn't know what mass deportation looked like. And I knew it was going to be an assault on American citizens' rights and an assault on the human rights of people that tried to come here legally through the asylumie process, even if you don't like that process. They weren't criminals that snuck across the border. They tried to go through the legal process. And now they're being assaulted,

they're being sent to foreign countries. And I think the people look at that. And that's why ICE, like the only thing less popular than ICE in the polls right now is AI and Iran and the Democratic Party. Well, look, I think the people are out seeing that I look as deportation really is. Maybe I totally disagree. I don't think mass deportation had to look like this at all. And in fact, my criticism on the immigration agenda of the Trump is that a lot of it is for show. And it's

not actually for affect. Don't forget that the White House itself just put out a memo or something yesterday saying, don't talk about mass deportation. Talk about removal of what is a violent, violent criminals or any of that. I mean, the real story of the immigration agenda under Donald Trump is he didn't live up to the fundamental promise, which is that to tackle immigration,

“you have to tackle big business. And there has been a absolute courting of big business and”

allowance, really of like farm labor or a reduction in work rates, any of this. And this is where the economic question is. So how would I deal with the mass deportation? I don't think it's very difficult at all. Pass mandatory verify for the entire country. Make it so that you have to verify citizenship whenever you're employed and then put a massive tax on remittances to any foreign country. The everyone will go home tomorrow. You don't have to lock anybody up or very, very few

people. However, it will dramatically affect a lot of the house building industry. I don't know, like the weed industry in California banking. It's not going to create the show. You know, necessarily like I guess some people in the Trump administration want, but I think that would be a much easier way to do it. Frankly, a lot more effective, too. So he said he's done one good thing since he's been in there for two months or any any regrets, any any feeling like maybe

you're a little too pro Trump in retrospect. Of course. How could I not? No, that definitely not. It's special. Well, I mean, this is why we'd be better off. If Kamala is present, we'd be better off right now. The country would be better off. Okay. Well, I mean, we wouldn't be in the Iran war. We wouldn't have, we wouldn't have like the tariffs. Do you do you remember what the mass agents in the streets? Those are three things we remember. Do you remember a segment on your show

“where I think it was Jonathan last said that the neocons are now in control of the democratic party?”

Do you remember that hate this said that you all took that so far out of contact? Why did we take it? Because he was joking. Because we have a job. We have a clubhouse joke. We're joking. He was laughing about the nature of how she talked about lethality at the, um, I thought we're going back and watch it. I went back and rewatched that. I will clip. I will. The 17 seconds goes around and then we keep talking about it later and have a longer conversation.

Fair point because I hate when people clip me out of context too. By the way, please don't do that for this episode. We won't do it. So, okay, let's put that clip aside. Let's talk about the DNC platform from 2024. Were they attacked Donald Trump from the right on him? I don't want to really like 24. I mean, we're here. Do you think we're going to do Iran war right now? Do you think we're being the Iran war right now? In this way, no, no, obviously. And I'll give you that. What we have

some of the Israel policy? Yeah, I do think so. Actually, I was at the DNC. I remember how they treated a lot of those Palestinian protesters. I interviewed a lot of them, actually, with my colleague Ryan Grimm. Yeah, that was bad politics. But it was politics. I mean, these are people like again. But see, this is where I get frustrated. It is like we could only evaluate candidates at the time. And the time was Liz Cheney. It was a DNC platform. Their attack trump from the right on Iran.

It was somebody who had just come through this disastrous policy in the war in Ukraine, incredibly new conservative. We're going to kill Putin. I mean, we had real reason to kill the campaign, which is not just a nuclear policy. I'm not asking you if you would vote for a normal based on the information that you had in November 2024. Obviously, no, you voted for Trump. It's March 26. I'm asking you based on the information you have now having learned about

what Trump was going to do the first 14 months. Do you think, Kamala, it would have been better.

If I could have gone back, a published would vote to be honest, because immigration is also a very

democratic, like legislative basis, like they really still believe in the same numbers in the

“video, but the asylum so called asylum process that you just said, I think mass amnesty is the plan.”

Was the plan will be the plan whenever people come back into power? And like that's a red line for a lot of us on the immigration question. Rapid Fire TDS, and then Rapid Fire Fund, stuff we disagree with. Really, we'll just, you know, it's like a chess match. Well, 45 seconds back and forth. Why was January 6th not the end for you? What do you mean? Some people in the Trump administration walked away, Mike Pence walked away, they said, "Look, anybody, anybody that

would sit there and watch TV?" Well, they mob of his fans stormed the capital and attacked police officers. It was a judgment call that was so horrible that like based on a lie that he made up.

Like the judgment call was so horrible, you could never trust somebody that has that judgment to

do anything again to run a fucking corner, store to coach a kid's basketball team and there's no way you could ever make friends. And again, why was that not your view? Well, though, there was lesser of two evils, easy logic. Watch Democratic leaders and can take cloth, get on their knees and encourage one of the worst riots. And that's actually the easiest answer is why January 6th was not the breaking point was literally watching the entire

Democratic party and media encourage the mass looting and rioting and burning. Oh, so I mean, I lived in DC, literally where I used to live there were riots that were going on. People,

“the crime rate exploded was a disaster. So no, that's that's the easiest. What did I think it was bad?”

Yeah, I said so too at the time on my show, people don't not some Jan 6 apologists or any of that. Like, you know, I'm not sitting here, but it was like a disaster. Like, I was like, I wasn't playing the choir. I wasn't, you know, I didn't say Q and on Shaman or whatever was a hero. I said, well, when every you have to choose between this and the people who encourage, I still think would encourage mass rioting and looting. Yeah, that was not that's honestly the easiest TDS question.

My least favorite bullet call I've ever written was that I thought that the punishment for the Shaman was too much. So there's my consistency. Actually, by the way, you, that was true. Yeah, I know, I understand about it. I understand about it. I don't think we can actually do Ukraine rapid fire style. So why don't we just take Ukraine and we'll do it another day. How about that? We can fight about your country another day. Let's go to the fun stuff. You are apparently against

daylight. It takes time, which is a total of front on the human spirit. You have 30 seconds to explain why. It's bad for your circadian biology. It is bad for the productive class who actually does anything in this country. It's only good for boomers who want to golf later on in the day, and it is massively disruptive. You're tearing now? How old are you? Yes. My daughter is 10 months old. 10 months. Okay. We're going to redo this one in three years. When you have a

30th of March, when you're going to park after school, when school ends, that's already fucking dark. And you've got to have your child running around the house. It's just that energy. We don't have 30 seconds to get into this. I've battled all of these bullshed arguments for bears and years and years. Okay, I'll redo it. If you want, by the way, for anybody who wants, I put out an entire essay where I destroyed Nate Silver on the DST question. You can go on.

I can find advice on vices. Yes. I've said that I'm not accepting Kalshi or predict, chin, whatever advertising on the bullwork. I refuse to. If he's endorsed, I think it's deeply pernicious. I do accept weed gummy advertising, though. You are, uh, it's worse. You're, you're harshly against weed. And in gambling, no, it seemed like you did play crap earlier. So what, what, what are your, what's your weed and gambling and alcohol? Give me just kind of a

run of the vices. Well, first of all, I don't drink. Uh, on the gambling question, I'm very

against online gambling. I'm fine with in person gambling. You need to introduce friction into the system. This is another reason why I'm against prediction markets. Uh, you know, my modest proposal on gambling is just make it casino gambling. You have to be able to go to a casino to place your bets. And when you go to casino, you see all the other degenerates inside of a casino. Number one, you're like, God, I don't remember want to be like these people. Uh, but also if you

get into your car and drive, you can't just do it sitting in your underwear in your home, which leads to runaway addiction problems. Also, the sports books, I don't have enough time to go into this. They are robbing you blind. The types of bets that calcium, polymarket, and straff kings in fan dual have would make a 80s vagus guy. He would blush red at the idea of stealing that much money from you. And that's what's normalized now inside of the system. Okay. We do all

of that is even worse than years of, uh, we gum these 10 times worse. Well, because it's misused by

“more of the population. Yeah. We have a mass parts of our population. I think what's the latest number?”

20 million. I think it is 20 million. I'm pretty sure for introducing high potency team story on a daily

basis. It's destroying your for you. It's destroying your testosterone. Uh, it's destroying your testosterone, destroying your sleep. It's bad for pregnant women. It smells like shit whenever

do we? When you go down to a park or you're going to smell cigar, you're going to smell

weed sometimes. When you get on a plane in the guy's, he's going to wreak of, is he going to wreak of cigars or weed? Whenever I walk down the streets of New York City, am I going to smell cigarettes or am I going to smell weed? Same in DC where I can see cannabis dispensaries everywhere. What am I going to smell? You know it's weed. It's going to be weed in this everywhere. It encourages you legalization encourages teen use. It dramatically lowers IQ in the developing brain. Also

in the adult brain makes you slow, makes you lazy. It's just bad for you. It's a horrible product. It's the typoed CTHC, which you're probably encouraging people to use with weed gummies, is, I mean, psychoactive to the point where we have have a mass explosion across the globe in schizophrenia and the outbreak of mental illness. So the social costs of marijuana are so much higher than any of these stoners let us to believe. And in fact, big weed is a big weed.

I would say is one of the like the preeminent threats to the country right now. Oh my god. Okay.

“One of the preeminent threats to the country? What about crypto? How about how you compare it to crypto?”

We have a president running a crypto scam and people are doing gambling and they're wallets with ship coins. It isn't even gambling. It's actually stealing. It's theft. The president is family or stealing from regular people. What they're cool. It's an abomination. Yeah. We didn't even get an corruption unfortunately. We can do that at another time. No, crypto has completely out of control. I was a Bitcoin guy very originally. I really like some of the hype and some of the use case

specifically around Bitcoin, the Bitcoin, the manifesto and some of the original theory. But the

way that the industry has now become worse basically. I mean, just run away ridiculousness and

really gambling whenever it comes to mean coins, shit coins, prediction markets. Remember, prediction market started with crypto. It's on an accident. Actually, that it did. And so I think it's gone completely run a mock and I think all of this needs to be shut down. I did this yesterday. I already made my case on why it would be fine for basketball team to have a strip club night. You just agree with that. People can go listen to yesterday's show up. Don't hear about me and favor. Give an

outsider an outsider on top. Oh, I mean, this. How I mean, we're still living. I cannot even conceive of a sports league, which is watched by children trying to normalize, celebrating a fucking strip club. You realize they're in a place out of the game, right? It's just the logo. Their tits are not at the game, right? It just has magic. Regardless, it's like this is a horrible, it's just like gambling, like weed or any of these other things. These are industries, which should be resigned to the

“gutter of American society. Just like gambling, you need to go find some fact guy to go and place”

your ridiculous bet on the cowboys for 3.5. You should not be able to do it on your phone with billions of dollars of advertising normalizing it into your life. So I'll make the exact same case on the strip club. I mean, I can't even believe this is up for discussion. Just absolutely not. So this sets up for my final question, which is listening to your case. You're against gambling, gummies, alcohol, strip clubs. Are you kind of low key for Sharia law? Are you a low key

for Sharia law? People have asked me that before. People have asked me for that. Look, I still believe in individuality and freedom and, you know, two to a certain extent. Uh, there, but in the way, in the way, in the way. I'm not saying like you really want America to be a Sharia country, but like you low key Sharia theory. So I live my life more consistent with Sharia law than the American degenerates. Minus praying five times a day and some of the other stuff that would come

with it. But listen, you know, those laws and those traditions, they come from from good practice.

“I think liberalitarian right wing populace. We found a lot of coming around today. You never know”

things are shaking. You have another practice called the realignment that you do. Let's listen to that episode this morning, walk and unwalk. And I was super with you on that. Like I wrote an article

you're before me maybe like six months. I wrote an article for the book when I first article

was called The Trade. And I was like we've got a full shift called Red Dog Democrats and our Democrats and these, you know, working class folks and our Republicans has already happened, like people pretending like it has. I do wonder if what's had been happening the last month is read jiggling that a little bit. And I guess that's my final question for you. And I'm wondering kind of looking into your crystal ball. What you're seeing as far as the restructuring

of the delicious right now. I absolutely think that that is happening. I especially think with the newly activated parts of politics. So like young men, right? That's we're going to see a dramatic reduction. I think in that I think that group is really going to be either off of grabs or maybe apathetic, they may just not vote. But there are also, you know, the Latino swings that have been wild all over the place from 2020 up until 2024 either reverting back to normal or changing in a

different way. Coalition, I think one of the favorite things and one of the reasons I love about covering politics is that nothing is static. Do you remember the book? I have it behind me somewhere. The 40 more years book by James Carville. I keep it as a reminder, as a reminder that you are old, nothing is that people change your mind. James, I'm sad about what I can refresh myself. I'll tell them that you said that. Tell them I'll have it. Tell them to sign it. Because I use it as an example of how wrong you can be, is that demographics are not destiny. There is no such thing as a static coalition in American politics. And my faith in America is that they change their mind all the time. Go and look at the 96 electoral map to 2000, look at 2000, 2004,

doomer, like all people are in cults and all of that. And enough people on the margins actually do change their mind literally all the time. And they respond to incentives to politics, the news. And that's kind of what keeps me excited and doing this every day.

“Thank you. And Jenny, thanks for all the time. Man, go check them out on breaking points. Everybody else, we'll be back here tomorrow for another edition of the show. See you all then. Peace. Thanks for having me, Tim.”

We don't get full again. The board podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering

and editing by Jason Brown.