Marjorie Taylor Greene EXPOSES AOC's REFUSAL To Work Together Against Israel! w/ Max Blumenthal

Come see me on tour in Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Atlanta,

“Rally, North Carolina, Spokane, Tacoma, and Levitown, New York.”

Go to jimmydoor.com for a link for tickets. [MUSIC] >> Our guest, that was Max Blumenthal. Max Blumenthal is in award-winning journalist as well as the editor-in-chief and founder of the independent investigative news website, The Great Zone.

He's also a best-selling author of several books, including Goliath, The Fifty Day War, Fifty One Day War, and the management of savagery. Max Blumenthal, thank you for accommodating my schedule.

As always, you're always so kind, and we always appreciate your insight and expertise.

Thanks for joining us once again. My good friend, Max Blumenthal. >> Thank you, Judge, and you've got to work on the Jersey accent a little. [LAUGH] >> Got the gravely voice down though.

>> And tell my friend, Aaron Matei, I said, hello. >> I will. >> I miss him, we don't talk anymore, but I miss him. I wanted to show you this, this is the, my favorite quote. I have a t-shirt with this quote out at that, with that, is available for sale.

It says, I will unite with anyone to do good, but with no one to do harm.

“Frederick Douglass said that, why do I show you that?”

Because AOC did this. AOC will not join with someone to do good. You want to hear what she said? >> Doesn't sound like the ruckus. >> Here we go.

[APPLAUSE] >> By the way, do you know where she is? Max, saying this, no, she's at some kind of David Axelrod. It's in Chicago. >> Oh yeah.

>> Some challenges and opportunities conference. >> Yes, so it's her trying to show up her base so she could run for president. She wants all the Democrats to love her, so she's a establishment as it comes.

Just so you know, she'd never challenged power ever.

“And now, the people who do challenge power were like Marjorie Taylor Green,”

she tries to take a dump on, and because I want to show you this. During a May 8th talk, because of your courts, she dismissed partnering with Marjorie Taylor Green, who in 2025 proposed stripping $500 million from Israel's Iron Dome. Marjorie Taylor Green did not, that AOC. I measure that failed, with Ocasio Cortez voting against that.

She voted against taking the $500 million away from Israel's Iron Dome. She argued on Twitter that it ignored offensive weapons and made her calls for an arms embargo while Green countered that votes reveal true stances. The exchange field left wing divides and some praising Greens resignation over Israel aid and Epstein files, others defending Ocasio Cortez against claims of bit consistency,

highlighting tensions and efforts to curb over $18 billion in USA to Israel since October,

2023. Okay. So, of course, AOC refuses to do anything that would actually be good for humanity. And she stands firmly on the principle that she has no principles. And her, her, her, her, her, she is at an establishment Democrat, a thought, a, I don't

know, a happy, okay, the Institute of Politics is the sponsor. That's like, I think that's Harvard. No kid. No, this isn't Chicago. Maybe, who knows?

Yeah, it's the University of Chicago Institute of Politics. Oh, there you go. There you go. Yeah, it is very establishment. They're at Rockefeller Memorial Chapel.

Aha. Come in. So, let's listen to her, Max, and then we'll get what you want to say, so it's very much catering to Obama here. Yes, what this is.

Let's watch. You know, and I care about results. I care about results. Now, there are certain places where certain areas where I don't think that we should ignore some folks record on some of these issues, right?

It's about where we trust intent, where we trust where those outcomes are going. I personally do not trust someone like Marjorie Taylor Green, a proven bigot and anti-Semite

By the way, first, there she is completely parading Benjamin Netanyahu's talking points,

apex talking points, calling people bigots and anti-Semites, and they're not Gaza's. They're called Palestinians, and they're from Palestine, which is where the Israeli stole the land from the Palestinians, not the Gaza's. Okay, a little bit more. I know, I don't think that it benefits our movements in that instance to line the left

with white nationalist. I don't think it serves us. Anybody who uses the term white nationalist is a sign-up, trying to propaganda as you. Just stopped with that bullshit, and that, but she can't.

“So I think it's about looking at the context, the place, the results, the outcomes,”

intentions, and where we think that train would go.

But, as far as what someone says about me, and I'm too careless and-- Well, really? Because you accused me when I held you, you freed to the fire to do what you campaigned on, you said I was committing violence against you with my words, because so you care. You know, I think it's really about what our outcomes are.

And to be honest, there are some areas where things will not get done if they're partisan, because they are anti-establishment. There is bipartisan consensus on keeping and protecting, stock trading in Congress. And so it's going to require a massive bipartisan consensus of people willing to come together across those differences to get it done.

So she's willing to work with white nationalists, bigots, and anti-Semites, to stop stock trade, insider trading in Congress, but not to stop the genocide of gozzins in Palestine. Is that kind of funny? By the way, you know AOC is not a bigot. She doesn't hate the Palestinians any more than she cares about them.

She can't afford to have an opinion on her climb to the middle of politics. Go ahead, Max. Say what you want to say about that. Well, I pointed out that, you know, and she talks about it's about the results.

“And well, here, you know, I think I have it.”

I think I do. I have here it is. You say AOC will not team up with Marjorie Taylor Green. The sanction is real because of identity politics. But she did team up with Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton to call for more sanctions on China.

Yeah. So, I mean, she obviously would agree with the end result that Marjorie Taylor Green wants on Palestine. Like I don't think that that AOC is necessarily anti-Palestinian. But then here you have the result of a coalition with other Republicans who I would argue

are far more harmful than Marjorie Taylor Green at her worst when Marjorie Taylor Green first

entered Congress as Ultramaga and was harassing supporters of Palestine in the halls.

“And, you know, called anti-Zionist Jews who staged a protest against the Gaza genocide.”

She called them insurrectionists. She took some, you know, positions I thought were horrible. But on a purely objective basis, Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton are blood soaked. Neo conservative maniacs who are seeking to ramp up not just a new cold war with China, but they seek a hot war with China and AOC joined them in a coalition with pro-war Democrats

after she came into Congress. She would today probably say, "Oh, that was an mistake. I wouldn't do that again." I don't actually know what she thinks about that. But it really explodes the lie or it exposes the logic of who is unacceptable and who is deplorable

and she takes the establishment view of who is deplorable and who is acceptable and to her, it wasn't even controversial the team up with Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton. The AOC, as I said, I don't think she's anti-Palestinian. However, she made some comments there where she spoke about our movement. Okay, I don't know what movement she's speaking about, but she's actually not part of any

movement. She is part of the Democratic Party and ever since she embraced Nancy Pelosi as Mama Ver as Pelosi stroked her vanity, AOC became separate from any grassroots movement. And after the Gaza genocide unfolded in the most ghastly ways possible and we were watching videos of children being buried in funeral shrouds, in groups of 10, 20 parents trying to trip, trying to shovel their children out of rubble with their bare hands from homes.

The most horrific footage we've ever seen and Israeli leadership declared their absolute

came to pass. AOC refused to call it a genocide. It was like pulling teeth to get her to call it a genocide. And she was actually actually had to be confronted by activists from our movement, from the actual movement in public, along with her boyfriend. And she started screaming at them initially and was completely offended because she does care what people say about her, especially if they come out of the left. And then she finally sort of called it genocide in a throwaway remark.

And so, and then, and was attacked, it was, why wasn't she calling it a genocide? Was it because she actually didn't believe it was a genocide? Well, we don't really know what she believes.

“I think it's pretty obvious. She didn't call it a genocide because she was concerned about what”

democratic party leadership would call it because she ultimately wanted to run for higher office, sent it governor president. It looks like she has her eyes on the presidency. I'll talk about that in a second. But here's just one other point I wanted to make, which is about Marjorie Taylor Greene versus AOC. Marjorie Taylor Greene has taken positions in the past that were offensive to many progressive Democrats. We have to just objectively acknowledge that. There was like some

Tussle she had with Cory Bush. I don't know who is right or wrong, although it seems like actually it was Cory Bush's people telling her to take to like wear a mask in the halls of the Congress. But as she was, you know, calling for to censor Rashida to leave early on in the genocide and joining in the pile on the only Palestinian member of Congress, these are like allies of AOC in the

“squad. So obviously AOC has this problem with Marjorie Taylor Greene going back to that. But I think”

Marjorie Taylor Greene would be willing to say she was wrong on those things, whereas AOC would she's taken such a maximalist and insulting personally insulting position against Marjorie Taylor Greene.

She could never walk that back. Then Marjorie Taylor Greene had the courage to go against her own

party and against the most powerful figure in the Republican party of our lifetime. Someone who completely controls the entire Republican party. No matter how unpopular the House Republicans get, they do whatever Donald Trump wants. And Marjorie Taylor Greene went against Donald Trump and gave up her career. As a star of Maga 4 real principles, the Epstein files, Palestine, Ukraine, something which AOC supported, she deserves respect for that. Where was AOC when the Democrats Biden and Kamala Harris were carrying

out the Holocaust of our time in the Gaza Strip? Where was she? She was on stage at the Democratic National Committee claiming that Kamala Harris was working tirelessly for a ceasefire. That was

the line that AOC kept repeating. And by the way, she always referred to Palestinians as Gaza's

in those speeches because she had those consultants behind her who don't want to acknowledge the existence in Palestine. Kamala Harris was not working tirelessly for a ceasefire. Anyone who has involved in an negotiations in Doha could tell you Kamala Harris wasn't even involved and there was no movement at all for a ceasefire. In fact, Tony Blinken, who was running the show for Biden as he was deep in the throws of dementia, was lying and claiming that Hamas was the problem. And then

Netanyahu had agreed to a ceasefire. When in fact, Hamas had agreed to a ceasefire proposal in early May of 2024, which was completely written by the Israelis, shocking everyone, and then the Israelis backed away and committed a series of massacres and Blinken blamed Hamas. So, the entire Biden administration was working tirelessly against a ceasefire and AOC was working to guard their left flank against the movement. Those protesting outside the democratic convention

and preventing even a single Palestinian from speaking on stage lying about that. She never went

against her party. Nor did any of the big, I don't remember any of the big like a Democrat oriented, like progressive DSA podcasters going against the democratic party at that time on the genocide. The way Tucker Carlson has, Tucker Carlson has completely destroyed all of his, he cut off his line to the White House, where he could just walk right in and talk to Trump. That's all over because of his principled stand on Palestine and the Iran war. And where has AOC been on the Iran

“war very quiet, very quiet. So, I think, whether whatever your politics are, let's just take”

identity politics out of it for a second. Like I probably would line up more with AOC on issues of like civil rights or immigration or something, but let's take it out that out of it. And talk about like the most substantial issue today, which is imperialism.

her congressional career, and any chance of higher office, you could have run for Senate and

“Georgia with Trump's blessing. For that, and what is AOC done? She's demonstrated very little”

principle on this issue, protected the actual architects of genocide from her own party in order for herself to reach the pinnacle of her career, which is actually a fantasy by maybe winning a few democratic primaries. So, here is Marjorie Taylor Green showing you that she is willing to work across the aisle with a very lefty congressman. As far as congressman go, he's not a real lefty, but here he is on CNN, just the other day talking with Rokana. You know, here I want to talk

tonight about the reason why we're having this discussion is Rokana and I both are willing to say

that the current center of right and left that have been coming together for decades have failed Americans. And Rokana, just like he said, we're completely different. I'm unapologetically pro-life. I'm against a transition on children. I'm against the Green New Deal. I'm for very secure borders and a strong economy and a smaller government. But the current center right and left that coalition in America have got us in $40 trillion in death. I'm in debt. Have funded foreign war after

foreign war, after foreign war, and now funding another one, and they will be in how we don't know how long this will go. And it's gotten to a point where Americans can't afford life, Caitlin. And so Rokana, we exchanged comments on social media saying that we recognize how for the left and the right to come together and find issues that we can work together on, together on, but Rokana did that on the Epstein files. And it was incredibly important. And there's

also issues such as funding foreign governments that we share that in common. And we know this

“in that Americans are going in. So I think this is an important conversation with Rokana.”

Rokana is willing to work with the Marjorie Taylor Green. I thought she's a white nationalist.

I thought it doesn't help our cause. Here's what Marjorie Taylor Green said, AOC refused to vote

for my amendment to strip funding for Israel. She couldn't run her mouth all she wants. But votes are the only thing that matter, not a bunch of words and nasty name calling. And before that, AOC voted present on another vote to send weapons to Israel framed as defensive weapons, which they're not. So it wasn't the first time she did that. And here's a friend of the show, Ryan Grimm, he says, Marjorie Taylor Green sacrificed her political career to stand against genocide,

against Trump, against the Epstein class, and to defend the survival of Epstein's trafficking. And and defend the survivors of Epstein's trafficking. If that doesn't earn credibility, I don't know what possibly could. And here's Glenn Grimm while breaks it down what's wrong with AOC

“in this moment. He says, AOC is right that there are important differences between her and Marjorie”

Taylor Green. AOC emphatically condemns policies only went Trump and the GOP do them. Gets muted and deferential when Democrats do it. By contrast, Marjorie Taylor Green criticizes policies with equal further, regardless of which party does them. Marjorie Taylor Green condemns GOP leaders when they betray their purported values, even risking her political career to do so, by contrast, AOC lies to protect Democrats who betray their purported values.

Kamala is working tirelessly for a ceasefire in Gaza that has supreme devotion to partisan advancement and self-interest above all. Number three, Marjorie Taylor Green introduced a build to cut all U.S. financing of Israel's military. AOC voted, no. Are doing Americans should pay for Israel's defensive weapons. Big substants of difference there. Number four, Marjorie Taylor Green scorned to the APEC ADL tactic of accusing Israel critics of being racist and anti-Semitic.

AOC embraces and fortifies that accusatory smear campaign to justify why only liberal critics like her are compassionate and legitimate, and everyone else is just racist. Number five, Marjorie Taylor Green cares about results and outcomes, and will thus work with anyone left the right to stop a policy she considers evil and wrong. AOC only cares about posturing and her political branding, not outcomes, and will thus reject the opportunity to form majorities

and can be good people. AOC is the embodiment of privilege, having no real urgency about stopping

“things that don't personally affect her, like Israel wars or U.S. financing them. That's why she”

has harsher words for GOP critics of Israel than she does for Democratic supporters of Israel. This, and more, is why Marjorie Taylor Green was pushed out of her own party, while AOC has fully morphed into Nancy Pelosi Jr., and is one of the Democratic parties, most valuable partisan tools, and why she's beloved by Democrats as such. Any comment on that, Max? Yeah, I think that's like 98, 99% of what I like, how I see it. I would say AOC has not fully

morphed into Nancy Pelosi. She recently signed the letter with 39 House Democrats calling for

Transparency on Israel's nuclear secret nuclear program. That's a calculated position. She's taking AOC's rise to the extent that she's rising represents a recognition that Nancy Pelosi represents the politics of yesterday, which is also the politics of APAC. I mean, AOC's former chief of staff, Psychot Chakrabati, who's running for Congress out of San Francisco, you know, I was just out there and there were flyers all over the place, and he's campaigning as someone who doesn't take any

money from APAC, by the way, she's refused to endorse him for some reason that I don't. No, but it's like, you're going to start seeing all these Democrats campaigning against APAC, but don't totally, we shouldn't believe the hype. Palestine isn't, is, is, is not an issue about human rights alone. It's an issue about imperialism, and as Glenn Greenwald said,

“the most important issue that challenges your principles is imperialism. The highest stage of”

capitalism, which is affecting American so negatively through the Iran war, that we are losing hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth among the American public while crony oligarchs are earning billions through insider training, trading, and all sorts of other schemes. AOC's not calling this out, she's not prioritizing it. She's running a calculated employee. She is herself a brand. She is an empty vessel for calculating political strategists who actually want

to supplant Nancy Pelosi with something else, and they're actually going to exploit Palestine to win over younger people while preserving imperialism in order to preserve imperialism. And that means preserving the proxy wars. The ability for the U.S. to attack what James Mattis called in his defense strategy, revisionist powers, Russia and China. Another figure who represents this very cynical play is Kat Abuguzala from Chicago, who you, I'm sure critiqued on this show, and she's

in favor of sending weapons to Taiwan. She's a big cheerleader for the Ukraine proxy war, and she's also for boycotting Israel. And you know, she speaks, she poses as this radical podcaster with anti, with like a, you know, a kofia behind her. But she's also a cheerleader for the war machine as a progressive Democrat. This is what I think this is the model of the future. And remember, before AOC went to the Institute of Politics to appeal to the Obama Cracks and Hyde Park,

where Obama came from, where he's just erected this giant soar-on-like tribute to himself, destroying a forest, Obama presidential library, for she did that. She went to the Munich

“security conference. Remember that? Yeah. And she was asked about Taiwan. They said,”

"Do you favor sending weapons to Taiwan?" So, should you, no, the U.S. troops to Taiwan? Should the U.S. put boots on the ground and fight China directly if China attempts to take Taiwan. And she could answer the question. Could answer it. That's a pretty easy question to ask. It's like, "Do you want to direct military confrontation with China or not?"

And she didn't know what to say because she's going to ultimately take the position

that the U.S. needs to continue this status quo of Cold War with China and a proxy war with Russia, which could very well soon expand. Trust me, if she runs her president, that's going to be her platform. And the man behind that all is Matt Dust. Matt Dust came from Bernie, but Bernie sort of his own man. He came from the Center for American Progress, which is the Center for American Progress. Yeah, a, you know, Podesta Think Tank, backed by industry, was getting pro-Israel.

Progress, their blog, were all ejected under pressure from the Israel army, all fired except

“Matt Dust. And Matt Dust goes to Bernie's campaign ensures that, you know, it's anti-Russian”

and anti-Chinese, while, you know, mildly supportive of Palestinian liberation or at least like a Palestinian state. But again, Bernie kind of is his own guy. He's whatever you want to say about him. He's hugely disappointing, but he's an authentic person. AOC is not. So she's a better vessel for the agenda of someone like Matt Dust, who really wants to keep guardrails around issues, like Russia, China, making sure the U.S. is confronting all of these so-called authoritarian

states, while being more supportive of ending the occupation of Palestine. And then her chief of staff is a name Mike Casca. And I, I, I've heard this from people I talk to on the Hill. He, he really believes that he can be the chief of staff in a White House under AOC in the near future. And they are fueling her ambitions. And she's in this constant defensive mode where, you know, she's, she's, she's young. She doesn't have that much experience in politics kind of came out of

nowhere. And she's being pushed to actually run for president. There isn't a whole lot of time for her to pause and think about what she actually believes in. And they're taking advantage of that

“with aspirations of their own. And I think a real, a real, a real, a real train wreck is coming”

one way or another. She talked about the train. I'm talking about the train wreck. And it's either her being, uh, becoming a source of embarrassment and discrediting the progressive left on the campaign trail if she runs or her, uh, sheep dogging. All of these well-meaning young and very angry and betrayed people back into the democratic party of she succeeds. Either way, it's a mess. Max, I appreciate you commenting our schedule. And I appreciate all the time you spent your

great insight as always, Max, you're spot on as, uh, as usual. Uh, you're a great man and a great

friend to this show. And I really appreciate, uh, you, uh, keeping us on your schedule. Uh, you judge and you're so much warmer than Jimmy Dorr when you grew me inside. Ha ha ha ha ha. Hey, you know, here's another great way you can help support the show.

“You should become a premium member. We give you a couple of hours of premium bonus content every week”

and it's a great way to help support the show. You can do it by going to Jimmy Dorr.com, clicking on join premium. It's the most affordable premium program in the business. And it's a great way to help put to thumb back in the eye of the bastards. Thanks for everybody who was already in premium member. And if you haven't, you're missing out. We give you lots of bonus content. Thanks for your support. We've got, uh, one of our favorite guest Tony Heller,

environmentalist geologist with the BS in geology from Arizona State University's

electrical engineer teacher. He testified at his first congressional hearing in support of

wilderness in 1972 and has had a broad and successful career in science, education, environment and engineering. He analyzes climate science claims and is the founder of real climate science.com. Welcome back to the show, Mr. Tony Heller. Hey, Tony. Hey, Jimmy, good to be here. Now, the reason why I had you on is because I came across this story. And let me it's, uh, this is from the international panel on climate change. They, according to Toby Young,

they have, they have essentially just admitted that all the climate scare stories of the past 20 years are junk. Turns out the alarmists forecast that lead to mass climate psychosis are

implausible. Let's listen. You like BCC. As Turnran said, basically, everything written in

the last 20 years is junk. This is like a sort of bunker bottom trail, uh, this is huge because it's difficult to understand what's happened here. It's rendered most mainstream media, stories and headlines on catastrophic climate change, junk, fake over the last 20 years. And that is driven, of course, children are going to bed, uh, crying, it's driven, King Charles to make all sorts of ridiculous announcements. They've been asked them for as well.

It's in use, uh, mass climate psychosis from all of the headlines that you see in mainstream media. All junk. So, uh, there's a whole podcast on it over at the daily, at, over at the skeptic. But I asked, grok, if this was true, if what that guy is saying about the IPCC is true. And this is what grok said. The tweet refers to a real development. The IPCC link scenario developers have officially

What actually happened a paper in geoscientific model development for the next round of IPCC modeling

“states on the high end of the range, the CMI P6 high emission levels quantified by SSP5-8.5 have”

become impossible based on trends and the costs of renewables, the emergence of climate policy and recent emissions trends. This is an, a notable admission. RCP8-5 SSP5-8.5 assumed massive continued coal expansion and was often presented or implied in media studies and policy as business as usual or likely outcome. It produced the most apocalyptic projections of four degrees Celsius warming by 2100 extreme impacts. That fueled many scare stories over the past 15 years.

Critics like Roger Pelkey Jr. had long called this out. Many climate impact papers and headlines

relied on this unrealistic scenario dropping it as implausible in a correction. Not a full IPC admission that climate change is fake. The IPP has used a range of scenarios. Extreme ones were

“overused but not the only ones. Mainstream climate science still expects humans call the bottom line”

Toby Young the daily skeptic are right. That many extreme media panic stories from the last 20 years were based on unrealistic assumptions and now officially undermined. So what they're saying away. I read this Tony. You tell me how you read it. Is that the al-gores of the world every

newspaper, every establishment newspaper or news outlet has been hyping a fake scare scenario. How do

you read it? Well, yeah, absolutely. The whole climate thing since James Hansen started for a Congress in 1988 has been driven by that same thing wildly exaggerated scenarios. There's lots of money, lots of people interested in obtaining power from this. So they they create these completely fictional or just wildly exaggerated stories and propagate them over and over again. James Hansen was NASA's leading expert in 1988 he predicted the lower Manhattan would be underwater in 30 years

which would have been 2018. I don't think that happened but these sort of scare stories of driven the whole thing since day one. Since day one. Yeah, actually before a real Steven Schneider was one of the guys who started this back in the 1970s he actually wrote and he was published in an a prominent article that they should exaggerate. They should say things which they don't really know for sure because they need to get the public's attention about this. So that's been

the attitude all along. We know we're going to be right. Things are to get really bad. So we need to tell these wild scare stories. Get people afraid and do something about it. So what do you think the impact of all this will be this? This is a this is like a groundbreaking earth shattering of the narrative that we've heard. Now recently Bill Gates came out and he told people yeah, don't worry so much about climate change that they're there will be some effects of climate

change but it's not going to be what people have been saying. So he's kind of actually in a weird

“way Bill Gates has been kind of out and front on this because I think he has the various reasons”

for poop pooling climate change but anyway that one of the biggest scare bongers around was Bill Gates and now he's slipped and now the IPC is admitting that it's it's not as scary as everybody meant what does this mean for this climate change movement do you think? Well the climate change movement has definitely been dying since President Trump took office. He's defended everything so there hasn't been there's much money in it anymore but the danger we've got right now is with this

terrible drought and water shortage we're having in the western US is that it's going to come back again in a few months. They're going to start pointing the finger they're going to say Trump cut all of our programs all of our and now we're having this horrible drought and heat wave as a result of drug results of his actions. So I wouldn't be surprised to see the whole thing come back again in a few months. So when you say you're talking about the movement you're talking about the climate

change scare mongering you think it's going to come back in just a few months? Oh yeah probably I mean Trump took a lot of actions like shutting down the national center for atmospheric research eliminating the CO2 in danger when finding and then we're having a really bad climate event

they're going to say he caused this by shutting down in car re-caused this by eliminating

by cutting back funding for climate research and I fully expect that to happen in the next few

“months and so and so what is the real reason for this drought that's happening right now?”

There's been a very low snow pack in Colorado which as everybody should know that the snow pack is responsible for the Colorado River which brings water to everybody in the west and places like Las Vegas and beyond what is what is what is that what's the real cause of that? You know I wish I knew Jimmy I've heard a number of different theories related to El Nino and so but I haven't heard anything convincing. I don't know anyone who predicted this

heat wave in drought we had in the last this year and so I'm not inclined to believe anyone's theories about what caused it or when it's going to go away but hopefully the big El Nino that's developing this for the next winter will improve the situation but we've got a very

“serious problem right now and I'm certain that climate alarmists are going to attempt to take”

advantage of it. Now I live in Los Angeles where two out of the last four winters we've had record rains. Yeah. Are you aware of that? Yeah. And in 2016 the voters in California approved

a proposition that would give six to eight billion dollars for the state of California to build

more reservoirs to capture that water when it falls because we're you know Los Angeles and the desert but we're getting all these and then so then they didn't build them that that not even one brick has been laid nothing has happened even though now it's been 10 years since the people of California voted for bill eight billion six to eight billion dollars to be used to create reservoirs and we don't so when it rained the last time was last year was raining record rings

and then the year two years before that record rings they had to open up the reservoirs and let that water go into the ocean so they're not even capturing so when something like this happens we could have reservoirs of water but now we don't have those reservoirs because of is it you think it's planned that they don't want to have reservoir so they could continue this climate change scared-mongering narratives? Well California was lucky this year they had a lot of

well precipitation which they didn't get east of the Sierra Nevada but it wouldn't wouldn't do the Colorado River I mean in the any good anyway because all of the drainage from the Sierra Nevada goes west to the Pacific Ocean so like in the Imperial Valley where they grow like 90% of the United States winter vegetable crop they depend completely on Colorado River water because they're they don't currently isn't any mechanism to move water from you know the western

side over to the Imperial Valley or to you Marizona where the lettuce is grown so yeah California situation is is another really interesting story but it's actually kind of unrelated to what's going on along the Colorado River. Do you have any do you think that the governments the state governments the federal governments will actually have a plan for this or is it just going to become some kind of waterless hellscape? Well the the problem of God

is that the amount of water that's been used on the Colorado River which is mostly by agriculture has far exceeded what falls every year for a long time. Lake Palf he was very wet during the 1980s and Lake Palf fell that and so the western growth in the western US has been based on taking water out of Lake Palf which was stored for a year as a go but now we're that that's pretty much gone we're not able to do that anymore and now they're going to come have to come up with

the way to reduce water consumption in the west to a maintainable level and it's we're likely to

“see wars between the cities and the farmers as a result of this. Yeah that's what it sounds like to”

me. Yeah. Who do you think will win those wars? Well I'm going to assume that the cities will win

because they can't they can't relocate you know all the the 8 million people who live in Phoenix

in Las Vegas but what they can but it might be possible to obtain food when are vegetables for another location like Comcentral or South America but the people you can't move Phoenix you can't

think this tell me what what what it is an El Nino how is it forming and what you what would be the

“best case scenario for it? Well El Nino is the thing which happens every few years get very warm water”

in the central Pacific Ocean around the equator and what it tends to do is it creates terrible droughts in Asia but in the United States it makes the southwest wet in the southeast wet and I met often we had a very bit we had a big El Nino in 2023 in Lake Powell recovered quite a bit in 1983 there was a huge El Nino in Lake Powell filled up so the hope is that the El Nino building El Nino will do something similar and it will see a restoration of the lakes on the Colorado River and

you know there's no way to know that'll happen for sure but a lot of people think that will.

So there might be some kind of silver lining to the story that there might be some kind of relief

coming and in shape in the form of an El Nino? Yeah absolutely the 2023 El Nino improved things

“for a few years but now we're back to the same mass we were three years ago so the best El Nino”

could do would be provide some temporary respite respite for the government to figure out how to deal with the longer term problem but we've been consistently using more water than is available in the Colorado River for like a hundred years so something needs to change. So why do you have you looked into why governments don't create more reservoirs so when there are El Nino's that they can capture more water because they're not doing that? Yeah that don't probably be

good idea but the downside of having big reservoirs on the Colorado River is that they lose water evaporate water. The Lake Pelle loses a huge amount of water from a evaporation every year so if you had like 10 Lake Pelle's on the Colorado River you would lose almost all of that water by evaporation so wouldn't be any good. It's very high in dry in the desert and having a large area like Lake Pelle exposed to the sun and the dry air and it's just kind of evaporated to water away.

So it's kind of a two-edged sword. Those legs.

So at first I thought this was AI. I swear to God I thought this was AI because I know

I didn't think anybody would say something this not only out of touch with the common man or the common worker in the United States but it goes past out of touch. It's almost evil that someone would say this with a smile on their face. So what am I talking about? This is Kevin Hassett. He is a conservative economist and the current director of the National Economic Council in the second Trump administration having previously served as a chairman of the Council on Economic Advisors

from 2017 to 2019 Trump's first term. So this is real. His name is Kevin Hassett and listen to how he's going to tell you that you can tell the economy's doing well. You ready for this current ready for this? It's so the consumer is really, really firing on all cylinders just like the corporate sector you're seeing in the earnings reports and they're doing that because they have so much more money in their pockets. In fact I had the head of one of the big five banks in my

office yesterday going through the credit card data and just as Secretary Besson said, a credit card spending is through the roof. They're spending more on gasoline but they're spending more on everything else too. Interesting gasoline. So the fact that people are maxing out their credit cards right now as this asshole says with the smile on his face is to sign that so that people are using their credit. So it is a sign that the economy is strong

but so as our friends on Twitter say, so he thinks consumers maxing out credit cards is a good

“thing. Yes, that's what he's saying with a smile on his face. Well, so I just want to let you know”

credit card delinquency rates have risen to their highest level since 2011. Ooh, on all cylinders. Oh, firing on all cylinders. The debt's fired. 12% of all credit card debt as as 90% 90 days passed due. So while 90 days past due credit card defaults are going through the roof farmers are going broke at levels not seen before in his 70% of farmers say they can't afford to make food because they can't afford the they can't afford the fertilizer because of the

war. He'll get said that. He's not funny. This guy should be stripped of his economic credentials. You're right, because they're running out of cash. You magnificent, magnificent, effing moron. That's why

everything costs more to. Yeah. Well, this isn't for you this show. It's. It's when they come.

Yeah. So when they go to a gas station and they buy gas, it's now costing them double and they're

“putting it on their credit card. So that's why credit card spending is going to be good stuff”

costs more. Well, Trump doesn't. He's not going to put that together. And you know, so any things to be because people are spending more money on their credit cards. It could be that Americans are throwing one big party before they get locked down again from the hand to virus. That it could that be it. So anyway, maxing out your credit cards is great for elite, especially if they need a plot of land where you live to build another data center. How about that? Well, I'm worried about

these mom and pops. You know, sure, they're eighth home. Okay. They're not under water on,

but what about the ninth and tenth home? Yeah. Oh, that member of that. Yeah. Scott Bessant saying, you know, the mom and pop who got what, but eight, no, that was, Scott Bessant said that. What is? Yeah. You know, the mom and pop who bought the eight or nine houses so they could retire. He literally said that. That came out of his mouth. Well, losers all look alike. So it's just, so here it is. Again, credit card delinquencies at an all-time high. So it's almost seems like the

ones encouraging this credit card spending are actually and secretly setting us up to be forced into using digital currency. Oh, most seems like that. Whoops. All the real money's gone. We don't

“know where it went or where it is. If you want to feed your family now, just let us install these”

tiny chips into your eyeballs so we can monitor your entire existence. Yeah. So pretty soon with

the digital currency current we're going to be living, it'll be like China, but with a lot more street crime and slow trains. They don't go to put a chip in your eye by the way. They train you to snitch on yourself all day via social media. You self report all day. That's what these are for. What do you think that's for? That's exactly the Facebook. Correct me if I'm wrong. Was originally invented by the deep state of my and DARPA and then it was and then they somehow

Zuckerberg got a hold of it. Yeah, he's he's a figurehead. I think these people are in charge. We have state capitalism that they pretend with these made up stories of they're in Steve Jobs, worked his way and he was the hippie and Bill Gates was the middle class kid. Remember how they push these stories of billionaires for a history channel, the men who built them, you're better off watching ancient aliens than watching the men who built America for an accurate picture of

oligarchs. If you think Mark Zuckerberg is not in charge. Okay, people. Okay. I've seen that kid at an origin. He wasn't in charge. He was in charge. Okay. You got a better chance of some guy being in charge. Okay. I really should put that on a loop of Joe Rogan and some guy. I said, oh, I could you know what, Kurt, I was kicking myself because when I said on the Bill Mar segment that Bill Joe Rogan says that, oh, Bill Mar doesn't even know what the W E F is and I said he doesn't

even know what M.K. Ultra is and the reason I knew he didn't know that was because Rose and Bar was on his podcast and she had to tell him he was like, what's that? What's M.K. Ultra? He told him what the W E F is also on that. And she had to tell him what the W E F is and what M.K. Ultra was because he didn't know what it was because they don't tell you that in the paper. I read the newspapers. I read the papers. I read it in the newspapers. Well, it wasn't all the papers in the 90s and guess what,

I ignored it because I was young though. And now you're not allowed to put it in a paper. No more it's dangerous. But in the 90s M.K. Monarch was all over TV. It was on the Moripo, you know, current affair, hard copy, the Bill O'Reilly, they were all talking about that. And I and I so kicked myself after I did that segment and dropped it because I didn't put in that clip of Rose and Bar having to explain Rose and Bar having to explain to Bill Maher what exactly the W E F and

M.K. Ultra was. So that would have been the so he's pretending like he did know and that Joe

“Rogan would somehow the idiot. I know it Davos. I was actually, I believe in that. The”

everybody I know that is like Davos kind of people. They called Davos. They don't say wet with. Right. They're called Davos because they're not there for you know, that guy they fired. They're there for because it's in a ski chat to whatever the hell they stay. Hey, this is Jimmy, who's this? That did cashpap. FBI director, Patel, what, what's the,

I'll tell you what's on my mind dude, space. What final front here? Meaning what's up there

“are those little efforts coming here to earth and if so, what do they want? Also, are any of them hot?”

I'm sorry. You have photos to shoot. That's my new shiz. That's the new tip of 'em on right now. UFOs are as they've been rebranded, UAPs. You dealt with UAPs yet, you know me. What? Why UFOs? Well, as I announced on the Sean Hannity podcast recently, I guess you didn't hear. The FBI will be releasing a large dump or a tronch of UFO/UAP documents to the public previously on known to and unseen by the public, like toss and raw meat to wild dogs, dude. Why now? Why the sudden

change in FBI focus? Well, it's straight out of the operating manual, the trumpet administration, isn't it? Epstein files not satisfactory or incomplete? Guess what? We're invading around now, bitches. Iran war turns out to be a disaster. Well, we're going to drop the ET files on YouTube Roney's now. When the public gets bored with aliens, it's your Ask Cuba, cyclical, controlled.

Always step ahead. Calculations. Having sex with many bitches. Narratives.

I see, well, this is truly fascinating, could you give us a hint on what may be contained in these alien files? Ah, you know me, Jimmy. I hate to give away spoilers. I'm afraid you in the rest of the media just can't have to wait and find out what kind of tight-ass shit space shit is going to be in there just like everybody else. Oh, come on, director. But tell us got to be something you could tell us? All right, fine. Okay, take this out. Probably the most shocking

revelation included in these files. If it rather leech the host of lifestyles of the rich and famous, one strangled a girl to death at a high profile or a G. Okay, but we already know this from the Epstein files. Amazingly, it needs a pair to be too separate with this one having a UFO tension or a component. I see, but it's fascinating. For real, for real. I can also say with confidence at the United States government was once in fact in possession of the bodies of deceased alien

beings clutch. Was, well, where are the bodies now? Well, that's the problem. Their locations

“are not currently known with confidence. The location of said clutch alien bodies. We lost aliens?”

That's not what I said, dude. We didn't lose shit. Older agents within various bureaus have told younger agents with confidence to date themselves and seen the bodies that it was widely known that these bodies were being preserved, but when it ever was made to locate the bodies, no one could find them. So it was a hoax? No, that's fairly dude. Not necessarily. Serious dude, bro. Do you realize how much shit is in the US government's possession,

like the sheer size of our files and archives? It makes this Smithsonian oldings look like a junk drawer.

Just because you misplace something that doesn't mean it never existed, at least, you know, usually.

They'll turn up eventually, I'm sure of it. Maybe, and who knows, maybe the public knows

“something. About where top secret government aliens are? You never know, dude. You never know.”

Maybe someone out there has ESP and two or whatever. This is alien shit, dude. We're in a whole new territory. Maybe that lady can help us. Whatever name is, Claire Boyant. No, Claire Boyant is a word. That's, it's, it's the pronounced Claire Boyant. It's a word. I mean, what do you build Mar over here? You don't know what stuff is? Claire Boyant is a word meaning psychic. There's that, there's not, there's not a person named Claire Boyant. No, you're wrong, dude. She's in the files.

Claire Boyant. No, she's not. No, she is now. Which brings us to the UAVs themselves. These fucked up hypersonic zippers, fucking super flying, all throughout our airspace. I say, fucked that. Top pilots and generals and shit have seen them and they cannot explain it.

passengers seen similar things. How come you never hear from them on this matter? I don't know.

“The fight of fucking no, dude. Get southwest airlines to release their UFO files, okay?”

That shit's none of my business, son. I focused on big daddy shit over. She all. Point is, these brave pilots and generals and colonels and shit, because they're lives to come for.

And speak their truth. And now the world will know which is Pious Fuck. Wait,

their lives were at risk from whom? I don't know the government was going to kill US military

“personnel for reporting atmospheric phenomena to the US military. Well, I don't know that aliens,”

the deep state, deep state aliens, dude, fuck you. The point is, we need this to be a giant

distraction. And the more we can whip up the public imagination based on the X files and the other

media, the better. There's that Steven Spielberg movie coming out of like that's literally exactly about this shit that can only help us talk. Okay. I see. Yeah. So if we roll this out properly,

“the entire population will forget all about the fact that we bombed Iran and accomplished nothing”

other than feeding large chunk of the sovereign nation to Israel. Oh, well. Well, in case that, I hope it fails and I hope I look forward to debunking all of it. Oh, yeah. Well, maybe you'll get fucking adopted if you try that shit. I do not recommend that shit. We may have to send Randy and them over there and I'm going to browse the channel in an anal probe. Then you'll be ready to fucking believe then. Well, you know, I'm just fucking with you. We wouldn't do that. We can't, we can't even

not lose aliens as you tell it. Plus I can't really spare Randy right now. I'm leading on him a lot. All right. I got to go, dude. We still have to redact some shit from the 50s to make a small playing crash. Look like a UFO landed in the desert. I love the creative part of this job. Hey, become a premium member go to Jimmy dork comedy.com. Sign up. It's the most affordable premium program in the business. All the voices performed today are by the one and only the

inimitable Mike McCray. He can be found at Mike McCray.com. That's it for this week. You'd be the best you can be and I'll keep being me. [Music]