#2465 - Michael Shellenberger

>> The Joe Rogan experience. >> Join my day Joe Rogan podcast by night, all day. [MUSIC]

>> Thanks for having me back, my pleasure, my always.

>> Yeah. >> So much crazy shit going on in the world, and even before we scheduled this, like more crazy stuff is happening, the war broke out, all kinds of things.

“>> Yeah, how are you feeling about the President Trump?”

>> That's an open end of the question. >> Do you text with him and talk to him? >> Occasionally, occasionally he'll send me a text. I get these like true social posts of things that he's saying, but this whole fucking I brand thing, man, like, did you see this coming?

>> No, definitely, I don't know, I mean, who did, I mean, when did he even decide, you know, their national security strategy, put on November, basically, just said, we've degraded their capacity. It's a win, there was no sense in which there would be additional action. I think it usher's in a new paradigm, completely like the older postwar era is just over.

Mark Carney, the Prime Minister of Canada articulated that the World Economic Forum, probably better than the Trump administration did, saying very clearly that older rules based order is gone. You saw AOC try to sort of articulate it, but she sort of fell apart, the Munich Security Conference in February. So this is an administration that is, I mean, I don't even think they're thinking,

I wrote a piece and I decided not to publish it because I was sort of like, decapitation doesn't really work for regime change, but it's not clear that they're really out for regime change or they're just asserting power, shaking up things. I mean, some of it's art of the deal, changing the person that we're negotiating with.

That's Venezuela and Iran. Is it really going to change those regimes? I don't think most people don't think so,

“but that I'm not sure that that's what they're going for.”

They're just going for an assertion of American power in service of American interests, and then what happens in Iran, what happens in Venezuela, I don't think they care that much about. This is not behaving as though they do. Well, not neither thing made any sense to me.

The Venezuelan thing, I mean, look, they wanted him out forever,

and he definitely stole the election to get in there in the first place,

and he was a dictator, but at least that one was at least clean. They go in, kidnap him, get him out. This one's nuts, like in what's happening in Tel Aviv. It's hard to know what's real and what's not, because there's a lot of fake video going around and a lot of weird posts on X.

So it's, you know, when I do peek in, it's hard to know, and you have to listen to Grok and then Grok's dismantling a lot of the fake videos. What way do the fake videos that you're talking about? This is like fake videos of, you know, like an insane amount of bombs dropping down in the city,

but it seems like there's a massive amount of destruction in Tel Aviv. Yeah, I haven't checked in lately, but I'm assuming, was that just today, or yesterday? Yeah, yeah. I mean, I think the president is, there's been some, you know, Rubio said something about how, oh, we had to act,

because we knew that Israel was going to act anyway, and I think people interpreted it in a Netanyahu, who's in the White House a lot. This, I think this president has shown whether you like him or not, you know, and there's certainly things that I'm unhappy about and have criticized. But I think Trump is in charge, like he's making these decisions.

There's nobody behind him, there's nobody, he didn't be pulling it. For all of that, you know, the Russians, or whoever's something, you know, with his, now these railies, you know, it's just he's clearly,

I mean, Elon gave him, you know, $250 million, and he still,

and he didn't give him even the electric car credit, you know, like Trump is in charge. You know, like, I think that's one of the big lessons from this, and I don't think that, I think that means that there's not a lot of, like, second order thinking here, like, oh, what's the move after that? He isn't, he's just acting.

That's what's so wild about it is that this older foreign policy establishment, which, you know, was like, let the experts decide what the right foreign policy, you know, all these things tanks, and that's just gone now. It's just here relevant in this presidency, and I don't think it'll come back, like, if you get a Gavin Newsom or President AOC, I don't, President who, I don't think,

yeah, I don't, you have for a minute, before a music, but I don't think it's going to come back,

“and I think that that's what the Prime Minister of Canada realized,”

I think that's what the Europeans are starting to realize is that this is a completely different world that we live in than the one we lived in, just a couple of years ago. Which just doesn't make any sense to me, unless we're acting on someone else's interest, like, particularly Israel's interests, it does, just didn't make any sense to me. Like, if they had supposedly dismantled their chances of making the nuclear bomb,

whether or not that's true, I mean, it's so hard to know. He was unsatisfied, and just like he was like, I'm not getting anywhere in these negotiations, and I'm going to replace the person I'm negotiating with. It's just, you know, turn over the table, like change things up.

And their view was, the Democrats were too patient with Iran, they kept trying with Iran, Iran, they weren't giving them what they wanted.

“I'm not defending it, I'm just saying, I think that's what explains it.”

They, they haven't done a very good job explaining it, because I think that it just sounds to some extent like what it is, which is that it's, they're acting without, there's sort of like, well, does it result in regime change in Iran?

We don't know, they might say that we want that or whatever, but that's not ultimately.

They're not, they're not acting on the basis of achieving regime change. But just seems so insane based on what he ran on. I mean, this is why a lot of people feel betrayed, right? He ran on no more wars, and these stupid senseless wars, and then we have one that we can't even really clearly define why we did it.

Well, but he said he's against endless wars. Well, they're going to get endless with his men, they're all endless. Well, if we ever hear Rumsfeld talk about Iraq when it first happened, tell me. They were talking about like six weeks, six weeks, six weeks. But that was ground force, and I know that they've not ruled that out for me, that would be.

They have, I'm, they have not. Minority in the state should they have not. Yeah. They said it in now. Yeah.

But they don't seem eager to go into, I mean, I criticize the Venezuelan action, because I sort of was like, how are you possibly going to run Venezuela, and then I think a little bit more time passed, and I was like, oh, they're not going to try to run Venezuela. Like, that's not what this is. They wanted to take it over the oil.

Yeah, and even there, I mean, the oil, it's not significant at any global level. I don't, it's hard, I don't even think it's really about the oil. I don't think it's about the oil, I don't think it's about the oil in Iran either. Well, the oil reserves are significant. It's just the, the type of oil and how to extract it is extremely difficult.

That's the worst show. It's in the am, like, the big, a big abundant reserves are in the Amazon. So you're talking about what a nightmare is, super far away, it's terrible. You had a gorilla conflict, if you had a gorilla conflict break out around those oil facilities.

“I mean, it's already more expensive, because you have to heat up that particular type of.”

It's, you know, it's really heavy oils. If you heat it up to get out of the ground, then you have to heat it at the transports told my mayor, I just, I mean, and as a conservationist, I would say, that would be last place I'd want to see a skinny oil from. There's a lot of other places that have oil, we shouldn't be going into the Amazon.

So what if anything makes sense to you about this attack in Iran? I don't know that I'm, I'm not, I'm not sure what I think of it. I mean, I don't, I don't like it. I don't like, I mean, the whole older system was that you had this international security council would have to agree. The Congress would have to agree. That's all gone now.

I mean, it's just a totally different. This guy is just acting, you know, he says, he's not getting where they want to get in the negotiations with the Iranians, so he says, we have some leverage over you, and we're going to use it, some clearly Israel wanted this. Israel has its own motivations, I think.

Yeah. But I don't think, I think it's not quite accurate to say that I just don't think, I think all the evidence shows that Trump is his own man, and he's the president. And like, Larry, he couldn't even give back, he couldn't even give you along the battery subsidy that he wanted.

Yeah, it's like, I get that, but I've never seen a politician act that independently.

That's, I mean, a president act that independently. So I'm skeptical of, I mean, I think that Rubio was sort of like, well, they were going to attack and so we had to, you know, there's some of that, but I just think Trump is doing what he wants to do. And we should, you really think is that simple, Trump's doing what he wants to do. Yes, yes. Yes. You don't think people are influencing him?

Because there's a lot of war hawks around him, right? There's a lot of people that want the Tucker out for the right time. I mean, Netanyahu isn't there, but then Tucker was in there a bunch. But do you think Netanyahu against the Tucker has the kind of influence in Netanyahu has? Well, I mean, I guess if you just base it on the outcome, then the answer is no.

“No. But that's what I'm saying. I just think, he loses everybody, but I just don't think it's”

Russians aren't behind him. It's really, I mean, Trump is, look, what he's been through. I mean, he's, you know, he's got where he is. There's no way he's going to, they don't have anything on him. That's why you know that. I don't think they have anything on him because he knows that way. Well, he could, but I'm not, we don't see any evidence for it. This episode is brought to you by Squarespace, the all-in-one platform for building a website

that actually looks legit and helps you stand out online. And I should know, my site, JoeRogan.com is powered by Squarespace. They make it easy to lock down the right domain for your business or project and they've got built-in privacy and security tools to keep everything protected. Head to Squarespace.com/Rogan to try it out for free. And when you're ready to launch,

use the offer code Rogan to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain.

Well, you wouldn't see any evidence until it broke out. Sure, they released it. Yeah. And, and we'll get it. I'm sure we're going to have a scene, but I mean, I just think, when you don't have evidence of something, then you can't assume that it's happening.

With it, particularly this case of Elon's surprise to me, I would have thought, at a minimum, you'd give your largest campaign contributor the one thing he wants. I mean, George was something he wanted to, but, and then I look at Iran and I kind of go,

you know, Trump has always won. I mean, Trump has been criticized. He said he doesn't want

Iran to have a nuclear weapon for a really long time. I don't know the exact date, but certainly,

“well, no one wants it. We're going to have a nuclear weapon other than Iran, right?”

Yeah, I think that the other, he was also put it this way. He's also critical of the Democrats approach, which was the sort of the mainstream IAEA approved approach, because of, of course, under international law, Iran has the right to a nuclear energy and a nuclear facilities, including a nuclear, a nuclear, the centrifuges and the enrichment, Iran has the right to all that under international law. And so, and Trump doesn't agree with that, and he's not going to let

international law get in his way. So, when you say he has a right to it, you're talking just about nuclear power, right? But that includes enrichment. So, you know, to a certain point, right? But they've already surpassed that point, right? Yeah, and I believe, you know, if I'm wrong, I'll correct it on X, but I don't think it specifies the level of enrichment, is part of the issue, and then you've got these centrifuges, and so it's all been a cat

mouse game. I personally do not doubt for a minute that Iran wants nuclear weapons,

“so that's what's been going on. I think most people think that, but the Obama administration”

was like, we can do, you know, we can lift sanctions and exchange for controlling their nuclear program. Trump has not for a very long time agreed with that approach. I think he was criticizing it for many years before 2016 before he decided to run, but definitely for the last 10 years. Did you read the thing today that came out that they're discussing some sort of a leak transmission that seems to be an activation of terror cells? Iranians have? Yeah. I'm not,

no, but I'm not surprised. Right. Sounds bad. Yeah. That's one of the things that, obviously, that was the first thing I thought of was like, oh, great. Are we going to get a bunch of Iranian suicide bombers in the United States now? It's obviously, I don't know if it's going to be suicide bombers, but I would imagine it would be something a little bit more destructive than that. It could be, um, I don't know what they can get in. I mean, this Sean Ryan's been having

folks on that say that, people are getting in with, with heavy artillery. I just don't know the status of it. Well, the real problem is they can do it for four years. The border was wide open. Oh, yeah. And definitely some people for the Middle East got through. And we have no idea. What is we? I mean, I'm sure there are some intelligence agencies that have an understanding

“of what the threat is. I hope so. I mean, I think we see that these terrorist”

are able to do an incredible amount of damage with pretty simple rifles. You know, and sometimes,

was it the French, the club, that particular terrorist action, there were other people that were using bombs that like only killed one or two people, but the guys with the machine guns were able to gun down like dozens of people. So certainly, that's scary. I think that's where a lot of Americans, when it happened, the reason so many people were against it, believe them majority is against it, is because you're like, great. First of all, is it going to be another

endless war and second of all, are we going to get a bunch of terrorist actions here? I think if we did, I don't think support for the workers up, I think it goes down. Oh, for sure. Yeah, I mean, it's just such a fuck. I mean, the whole situation internationally has been so tense already with what's going on in Gaza, with what's going on in Ukraine, it's like, and to add this to the pile, it genuinely feels like there's a real possibility that we might be entering

World War III. How would that look like? I don't know. I never expected Iran to start attacking,

you know, they launched bombs into UAE, Dubai, I mean, where else? There's an expected answer, right? I mean, Mesa Ron look, Ron looks pretty isolated. I mean, I will say, you know, I was totally, obviously, maybe not, obviously, but very much on the left and was opposed to all this of Reagan was doing, I remember even even in the '80s, but it's like he really did, I don't not could say it was the only reason. It was obviously a bunch of weakening within, but I mean,

he really did push back against Communism. He challenged the entire foreign policy establishment on the basic view of just, you know, of just kind of keeping it, you know, keeping the Communists where they were and instead Reagan really pushed back, again, since it got to be regime change, it's sort of almost at a moral sort of, there's a defense buildup, but a moral argument, and I think it had a big impact, and it took bring down Communism. So, you know, the Iranians,

it's, I'm, I'm obviously have very mixed feelings about it. The Iranian regime is just so evil and so awful that, you know, your, your, your, every time you see videos of people taking these courage actions, you're like, somebody bring that regime down, on the other hand, that country is pretty,

all the old, old 60 minutes from the 70s, they're amazing. But the, the Shah was, it really modernizing

the country. There was a lot of wealth coming in. There was a lot more inequality. There was also a lot more state repression from his intelligence services. But the country was, you know, full of radical Muslims who wanted, you know, that, when all that instability, they wanted to refer back to, you know, a radical Islamist regime. And that's still, you know, I've seen other estimates to say that, you know, the current regime is incredibly unpopular in Iran. But, you know, how that works out.

It's really hard to say. But there is something, I caution my own, I talk back to my own anti-interventionist

“instincts when I think about Reagan just being like, you know, we're not going to do just containment”

strategy anymore. We're actually going to talk back to Communism because people deserve to be free. And now, is everything better for, you know, is everything fine in Russia? Maybe not, but I mean, Communism was just awful, you know, just a totally sole killing, you know, crushing, you know, a giant lie. I mean, it's awful to totalitarianism. So I think we have to kind of keep that in mind.

And especially when you're in a moment of just such incredible chaos like we're in now,

I tell my students, I'm like, you get to live through one of the most interesting moments in history, certainly in the last 80 years because of the entire paradigm where the United States had these allies and everything's going to go through the security council and we're going to try to make it through the U.N. and there's got to get agreements and all this stuff that's just gone. I mean, it's just, it's gone to the part where they don't even, where you're kind of like, how are you, what's going to happen inside Iran, they're like,

that's not our concern. We hope that there's an overthrow of the government, but they're not, we're not like going to necessarily commit to that. Well, they're also calling on the people to rise up, which is, you know, I mean, look, look at what they did with the protesters. I mean, they killed thousands of people. And look at Iran and Venezuela, they don't have internal, the opposition is not united. There's not a united opposition with a united figure. I mean, remember, it's so interesting

to watch in '79, when these protests against the show were going on, the left and the Islamists made an alliance in Iran, something really interesting, topic, I just are only trying to explore right now, but they made it, so they'd be holding up, you know, to be holding up the idolical community, pictures in the street, like they had their guy. And the left was like, look, we're just going to,

“you know, go with this guy. I think he was making promises to the left around allowing, you know,”

more liberalism and then he came in. I just consolidate into this really hard line as long as this regime. But they had a guy. We don't, we don't have a guy in Venezuela. We don't have a guy in Iran. I don't know if there's anybody in Cuba, really. You know, in the older regime, under like the Biden, the Open Society people, the Open Society establishment, they had somebody for Venezuela, this machado woman, but Trump gets up there and he just goes, yeah, she doesn't have enough support.

So she's not with us gone. You know, like they recognize that they don't have, there's nobody with an opposition, you know, street cred that can come into power. So I think they, and they know that, they're not like unaware of that. So I think some of the like, oh, they should rise up in whatever, it's a little half-hearted. I don't know if they believe that that's going to happen. There's certainly not, they don't seem to be offering them, you know, material support.

Right. So it's just a symbolic gesture to talk about it. Sounds like it. And I mean, in this kind of this beautiful collapse of communism, which occurred so peacefully with the Berlin wall in the car, you eventually just sort of like, it's just in the vibes. And the guards are just like, yeah, we're not going to die in this wall anymore. And it's just over, you know, and it was just over. And it was like, there was a kind of like a moral collapse, not so sure that they're going to get

that in Iran, doesn't seem like it. It seems like they've been preparing for this for a long time. The Iranians. Yeah. They're dug in. Now it's the sun. And he's just part of the represents the, I was the IGRC, the security forces. I mean, it's their guy. It's what you would do. It's

rally around the flag. It's classic what happens. And so, but you know, never, you never know. I mean,

these guys then might just negotiate more with the Trump administration once. I think the Trump administration is like, we'll just keep killing your leaders until we get somebody into that. We'll make a deal with us.

“I think that's, I think that's how Trump thinks about it. Really? That's my, that's my best guess.”

You're smiling. Do you think this is funny? Because it's funny because it's, it's so, Joe, it's just like, you just look at all the think tanks and all the white papers and the state department and the plan, you know, whatever. And it's just like, Trump's just, he's going to listen to Tucker. He's going to listen to, yeah, and he's going to decide what to do. This episode is brought to you by visible. Folks, there's one thing nobody wants this season. And that's getting catfished. And it's not just

dating profiles that are putting you at risk. It's also big wireless carriers. You know the type looks great at first. Promises a low price. But once you're locked in, surprise fees. And it expensive bill that isn't what you were expecting. Your night and shining armor, visible wireless.

included. Now that's a green flag. The best part visible is all digital. So you can switch as fast

as you can swipe. Don't fall for the trap of getting catfished by wireless. Visit visible.com to learn more and start loving your wireless carrier. Terms apply. See visible.com for plan features and network management details. Is that good? I don't know if it's good. I mean, I just

“we don't know yet. I mean, I think part of it is, is it going to work? Part of you go as it”

moral and you're like, well, but does it, does it work to make, have better outcomes? I don't know. We're in a realm of absolute chaos. We're also in a realm where AI is going to be powering autonomous weapons if not already. I mean, that is going on. That is so interesting. This thing within anthropic and the DOD and what's happening there, that is really interesting. So initially

anthropic was hesitant to allow them to use autonomous weapons, right? I don't know the status

of it, but you saw the open AI, the head of open AI autonomous. It was the head of autonomous weapons. I think I'm not, don't, don't give me exactly what she just quit. Like a couple of days ago, it was on AX and it was just like a huge story. So you have a bunch of, you have a, you have a rift in between, you know, I think, you know, Sam and Elon are both on board and want to keep working with the DOD, but it looks like anthropic broke and, you know, and then hexat was like, well,

but then we're going to punish you. That's very consistent with a kind of nationalist vision, which is that, which the Trump administration has, which is that your security strategy, your economic strategy, your border strategy, it's all a single, your industrial strategy, it's all a single thing,

“your trade strategy, it's all a single thing. And I think for Trump, it's just, you're either a”

asserting power and using your leverage and demanding more or your engaged and managed to climb.

You're just giving up, you know, and I, part of me, I'm, of mixed minds on it because on the one hand, I'm with the kind of, I kind of go, let's invest at home. We have all, you know, we have skid road to clean up, you know, uh, we should be focused on that, not on trying to do regime change or bombing other countries or creating other problems. On the other hand, I think there's something right about defending the West, I mean, defending Western civilization, you know, uh, defending

ours, our institutions, our norms, our liberal values and, and nobody's done that. And we just had a guy in power that was, that opened our borders, that kind of gave a blank check to Ukraine. It seems like, at a minimum with Trump, you have somebody that is taking responsibility in ways where Biden would be like, well, we're going to do what, you know, we're going to work with our allies, and it was just all kind of, like, it was like, it was all kind of going to be decided in this,

in this, you know, what Chris Yarvan famously calls the cathedral, you know, just the, the, the single thing of the media and the think tanks and the academics and, and Trump was like, it's not working and the working class of this country elected media to show strength and to demand a better return on our investment in terms of protecting our allies for our people. So that part of it, I think is really overdue and really necessary in assertion of why the West is special, why we need

to defend the West. Is bombing Iran and replacing the, you know, the community with his son, Masha, you know, is what's having been as well as that, the right approach that I don't know, but I think we were, the system was, was failing. I mean, the open society system, which was supposed to be this liberal, you know, you know, you know, system of tolerance that became intolerant, it became totalitarian. It created censorship and destroy complex. They, they weaponized the intelligence communities. We, you know,

it started getting ourselves into conflicts that we, that was not clear why we were in them, including Venezuela. I mean, sorry, including Ukraine. I mean, with Ukraine, it's like, that we're only continues because we continue to, to arm it. Like, if we stopped, if we just were like, let's just have the, just, you know, just cut a deal wherever the border is right now. I mean, just like, that's where it's going to stop. Then you can, I mean, I don't know, I'm not sure what's preventing that from Trump. I think he's

annoyed with Putin, but, yeah, I mean, my view is like, I don't see an interest in that war, continuing. I don't know how it's in the interest of the working of working class Americans or Americans. And I have the same questions about Iran and Venezuela and Cuba, but I think that is a totally different paradigm than the one that we had from 1945 to 2024. Well, the idea of tolerance for, you know, with the last administration, that seems just to be a narrative. It seems to be a political

strategy of keeping the borders open to increase populations and blue states, raise the senses, get more congressional seats, and then a path to citizenship where you'd have permanent

“voters. That's what it seems like. And then there's also a ton of Medicaid fraud that's wrapped”

up in that that we're now seeing. Yeah, I think that's part of it. I mean, the times did a piece

there was this, it was, you know, part of it, he's so out of it, right? Like, there were just, it was not clear. Like, there wasn't clear. There was like a meeting where he was like, yeah, we're going to just do this thing. They kind of concluded that, I think Cecilia Menjose, who's one of the more moderate advocates and was in the bottom of the station, think she said something like, Biden just wanted to give the left, just felt like you wanted to

“give the left what they wanted. And that's what, you know, the Soros think tanks and the, you know,”

the, the very progressive immigration groups have been and, you know, have been advocating, did the same thing on climate. So it makes sense. I know Elon talks a lot about how, oh, it's about importing voters and whatnot, maybe. But it's not even clear that that's a good,

that's a strategy that's going to work. You know, well, because first of all, we don't know the

Latinos. Like, why are like, why do we assume Latinos are all going to, you know, vote for Democrats? Well, if you've got them all on Medicaid and social security, the numbers there are, it's actually more complicated. Europe is definitely the case that you have higher rates of crime and higher rates of social services among migrants. Here are Latino migrants, traditionally, you know, be, you know, really thrive. You know, they do much better than, then the,

mostly Muslim immigrants in Europe. So I, you know, I'm skeptical, I mean, the other thing, the other statistic that I learned from David Shore, who's like the, one of the top Democrat pollsters when he was talking to Ezra Klein after the 2020 for elections, he was like if all eligible voters had voted, Trump would have won by three percentage points, rather than 1.5.

So it's also, so I always think it's kind of funny because the Republicans are always like trying to

make it harder for people to vote, but under that calculation anyway, and maybe it's just Trump, maybe other Republicans won't. When you say it harder for people to vote, what do you mean? You mean male and vote? Yeah, just the whole effort to. But the problem is male and voting is always been a vector for fraud. That's, it may be, I don't know how much of it there is. I've seen different things on it. Like decades people have been talking about male and voting

just being too open to fraud. Well, but then maybe, but then the question is, this is a really benefit. I mean, in the words, if David Shore is right, if everybody who could vote had voted, Trump would have won like basically by twice the market. Yeah. Well, I don't know if that's necessarily true, but when I see laws like what California has, where you're not allowed to show ID, there's only, I mean, I've tried to find some sort of charitable way where that would make sense.

Other than you want to open the door for fraud. There's nothing. This is narrative that they say, oh poor people don't have like, see Kamala Harris. You don't believe that. They don't have a Xerox machine. No, but you ever see the thing, I think it was like, I don't know if you do it for free press. So guy was going around interviewing, well, first thing interviewed liberals at like,

“I think you see Berkeley, and he was like, you know, do you think that you should have to have an”

ID to vote? And they were like, no, because black people don't have IDs. And like, that's just when he goes hearing that on end. No, I know. Of course, but they believe that. Yeah. I mean,

but the, I don't know if you saw that it's an incredible video because then he goes to like,

I think he goes to Harlem or he goes to like black neighborhood in New York and he was just asking black people, it's like, do you have an ID on you? It was like, everybody was like, yeah, like, what's the matter with you? Well, it's also we just got done with three years of you need an ID to prove that you have been vaccinated. So you need to be able to have that to go to work, get on the plane, to eat a restaurant, it didn't make any sense. It was so immediately contradicting

what had just gone down, you know, months earlier. It's just stupid. Well, yeah, that was about that was because the left wanted to control people's behavior. And on voting, they, the old I, I know because I just, when I talked to my progressive friends about it, what, you know, and family of friends, it's, it's very much like, no, we can't put barriers on the way of voting,

“because that's what they did during Jim Crow. I mean, that's where it goes back to. It was bad.”

It's not a barrier. It's just an insurance that you're a citizen while you're voting. And then they say there's really not much, they say there's very little fraud. I'm just telling you what they say. I'm not saying that I agree. I'm saying what they say, though. Progressive? Yeah, do believe that. That's horseshit. That's a horseshit. I think they believe it. I'll put it that way. Yes. I think they just say it because that's the thing that everybody says.

I think it's a group thing. I mean, I think if you sit down with any rational person and no one's watching, you know, with no cameras on them and you ask them, does that make any sense? No one would say it makes any sense. Most people in this country or citizens have some form of ID or can get some form of ID. And it's entirely reasonable to ask people to prove that you are who you are if you're voting for the president of the United States. That seems pretty reasonable.

I, I, I, I find it totally reasonable and I support it. I'm just saying that if you make it, I'm saying that you may, the Republicans may, it may result in outcomes that are not the predictable ones that they think they'll get just because Trump, at least, and Trump is maybe, you know, a special case. But I mean, he's able to turn out reluctant voters. Like he motivated people to vote. Because people were fed up with what had gone on in the last four years. And I think that

hopeless. Like this is crazy. Like what you're doing, you're letting in what's equivalent. Oh,

“at least, if you're, if you're just being charitable, it's 10 million people.”

It was, it was huge. If you're just being conservative, it's 10 times Austin. You let 10 Austin's in in four years of people who you have no idea who they are. Yeah. And Americans were on board with closing the borders. And then when it came time to actually asking all the getting those folks to leave, that came in, the all the support disappeared, right? I mean, well, it's not asking them to leave. It's showing up at home depot and just

rounding people up in rating places and going to restaurants and pulling people out of their houses. And I think people got very uncomfortable with the idea of militarized police wearing masks on the street.

Yeah. And then when you find out that these guys have only been trained for seven weeks,

and they get a $50,000 signing bonus. And then you find out that a giant percentage of them are Latino, which is kind of crazy. You know, like the two guys who shot that guy in Minnesota,

“they're both Latino. And that, yeah, I mean, that's what you get when you have completely”

untrained, unprepared people. Well, that's just like that. The whole Minnesota thing with Alex Prudy is a complete claustrophuck. I still not have not seen verification of whether or not the narrative that makes sense is true. But the narrative that makes sense was that there was an accidental discharge of his gun as they were pulling it away from him. And then that led to them thinking that maybe he still had the gun on him, because you're in the chaos of arresting someone,

someone says he has a gun, a gun goes off, and then they shoot the guy. Yeah.

I bet when you go, I bet when they do the proper evaluation of it, they're going to find multiple mistakes. I'm sure by the law enforcement. I'm literally dead. And then there was the thing with the woman who got shot, where you have a guy who had almost been run over just a couple of weeks before and be dragged in his car. The guy who shot her had been dragged by another vehicle. I didn't see that. She's got dragged like 300 feet to something crazy. So when a car is coming

at him, you could imagine this guy's got some PTSD from that. And he should not have been certain. He should not have been. No. And also, Alex, he shouldn't have said that fucking bitch, like after he shoots her in the face, too. That's crazy too. Yeah. I mean, the reaction, they're just the heartlessness of the reaction. It's horrible. It's horrible. And including by the administration, and it's probably like Christy Nome, and they're having to go. But then on the

other side, these protests are organized. They're organized, and they're paid for, which is also something that people need to understand. These are not organic protests. It's not organic that it just happened to be taking place in the very same place where you've found hundreds of millions of dollars in fraud. Right. This is one of the clearest, most obvious distractions you've ever seen. In the public arena, where you have these people who are being paid to protest, they give them

money to go out there and protest. They give them signs. They're organizing it. They give signal groups. They're doxing all these different ice workers. They find out what their license plates numbers are. They find out where they're staying. They go to the hotel. The cops, the local cops are being told to stand down. So you've got it like this convergence of all these factors. That lead to chaos. Mike Benz was talking about it. It was essentially saying it's a mathematical

thing. If you have these things play out, you're going to have a certain amount. It was Mike Benz. It was a certain amount of people that are, you're going to have instances. You're just playing it out over the numbers. Certain amount of these protests. You have organized protests. You have untrained ice agents. You have a lot of chaos. You have support for people screaming in the streets. Some we get shot. Boom. And then it moves the needle. And this is calculated. They want this

to happen. They want it to happen this way. Because then this kills all the support for people that, you know, we're kind of on the fence whether or not I should be deporting all the illegals. Excuse me. It should... Excuse me. Whether they should just go after violent criminals. And then this is weird narrative. It's like, oh, only 14% are violent criminals that have been arrested. You have a 60% or criminals. 60% of the people plus were criminals. And like what,

by what definition violent criminals? Like, what do you, is it okay if they just come in here and

“rip people off? Like, are you fine with that? It's just like the violent ones we need to get rid of?”

Like, I think they didn't, yeah, they did a fairly poor job of it. Like why were they focused on on Minneapolis? I think most of them understand how radical the left in Minneapolis is because you do have some Midwestern plays, but it's actually got a long radical left tradition. Yeah. And as you were saying, I mean, Alex pretty, he should have been arrested several days

arrested him then and then they could have, the judge could have done a lot of different things.

But they could have taken away his gun. They could have put a restraining order on him. So the next time he showed up and people will know to look for him, then he would have been,

“you know, kept out of the area. Do you know the story about the gun that he was carrying?”

No. Okay. So he's carrying a gun called a sick P320, which is notorious for accidental discharges. Not, not mean there's lawsuits all over the place. There's videos of cops in precincts bending over to pick something up and the gun goes off in his holster. There's a ton of these. So I don't know if this is completely accurate because this is obviously the fog of chaos of these type of altercations and situations, but there's a video that many people

have reviewed and it's their conclusion that if you watch the video when one of the ice officers

removes his gun, even though he does not have his finger on the trigger, has his hand on the gun and the fingers on the slide. As he's moving off, it appears the gun goes off. Now they've zoomed in on it and shown that it does look like the gun's going off and it does correspond with the sound of a gunshot. Okay. It's just hard to say. You hear a gunshot in the video. Yes, but I don't know if it's legitimate. It's hard to know, but if it was any other gun, like say it was a clock,

I would say that doesn't make any sense. It's fingers on on the trigger. It's not going to go off. But that gun is notorious for going off. There's a guy online that he shows a video where he takes the gun and he manipulates the slide and it goes off. It goes off without nothing touching the trigger.

No one's pulling on it. It's just if you have the other problem as people alter guns. Okay.

“So the issue with the sig was they had, I believe up to 2017, they had a lighter trigger. And this”

lighter trigger, if the gun was dropped or something happened to it, it was going off. And they determined it's, the gun does not have an internal safety, like some other guns do. It's not an expert, so I don't know exactly what the trigger mechanism is. But my understanding is that the trigger mechanism is different than their other guns. Like they have another gun that's notoriously reliable. It's a sig p365. You could drop that gun and it's not going to go off. It's not known for

accidental discharge. But the 320 is known. And there's tons of videos of people demonstrating this online. There's a video where they're on a range and a gun goes off in a guy's holster. And the range instructor says, "What the fuck just happened?" And this guy, he points to the gun that went off. And he said, "Is that a sig?" And he goes, "Hey, go get that fucking thing off the range." So it's that notorious. It's one particular model. And it just happened to be the one particular

model that Alex Prady was carrying, which is fucking crazy. Well, his behavior was really reckless. It's really hard for people to hold two ideas in their mind at the same time. Like I mess that up. I clearly. And Alex Prady, I mean, we see the earlier video. You know, we kick out the tail light of the ice vehicle. Right. And he's got a gun in the waistband of his jacket. He gets into this altercation with the police. I mean, when I posted about it, I didn't say this. But one of the other responses were suicide by cop.

People were like suicide by cop. I mean, and I'm not making that claim. But I mean, it his behavior was, I mean, the recklessness of the gun choice mirrors the recklessness of his behavior in those instances. And I heard people will be like, "Oh, well, he, you know, he was just defending that poor woman. There was a police officer engaged in a rest of a person and Alex Prady intervened in that. I mean, he could mess around about that. Well, it was a little, I don't know if it was an arrest.

The police officer shoved this woman. Yeah, he was in an altercation with some police.

“Yes. You don't go, you know, there was people go, "Oh, you got to put yourself in, what do you think you're like?”

Who do you, what do you think is going on here?" Like the police should put himself in between that. No. The way the, the ice officer wasn't police officer, right? It's an ice officer. Do you call them police? The way the ice officer reacted to the woman, that bothered me. Like he just shoved this lady. Like, like, step forward and fully shoved her. That's when Alex Prady gets involved. And then pepper spray comes out. And then, and Alex Prady should have absolutely filmed that.

Should have filmed the whole thing. That's exactly what people were filming it. It was clear that the camera's all over. But, but don't, I mean, multiple angles. Yeah. So, but it's like, um, I just don't think that's appropriate behavior. But that's not the tradition of like, I mean, I think there's a non-violent left-wing tradition that's actually quite beautiful and spiritual. Right. Great. The row and Gandhi and King. That's not what was going on in Minneapolis.

Well, that's not at all what's going on. This is a part of the problem with these things being organized, right? Organized paid protests and also people being radicalized by narratives. Then, of course,

So, people are like radically pushed in one direction or another. And it's not clear whether or not

that's organic. It's not clear. Is this the voice of the people? Or is this bot farms that are pushing things in one direction or another? Is it, I mean, there's, there's a lot of people that I cautiously watch their posts on, on X where I know that they're AI. I know it's AI. I can just tell by the way, right now. There's so much AI slap on. It's right now. It's weird. Yeah. It's weird. Because it does muddy the water. And it does fuck with discourse. But it also radicalizes people. One way or the

radicalize people towards the right. Radicalizes people towards the left. It's not good. And I think this guy, whatever his mental health struggles were, that they appear to exist. It seems like he was a troubled guy already. So, a thing comes along that defines them a cause that they're going to stand up for and fight for. Because their life's probably a fucking mess. And their mind is probably a mess. And they look at it like, this is black and white binary situation. Good

guys and bad guys. And let's fuck all these fascists and he's kick it tail lights and, you know, get involved in pushing matches with ice agents. It's like, that's crazy. Like, all that stuff

“can should and can get you arrested. Yeah. I mean, I think on the organized issue, remember”

like the civil rights movement was really well organized. Right. In terms of, it was like actually we're being paid for it. It wasn't me to promote on social media. It wasn't people's job. There are people in America right now that are unemployed, that are paid protesters for a living. Oh, I mean, that's the entire, like, left-wing NGO sector is basically that. Right. I mean, that's like, we saw, I see the level of San Francisco for homelessness. They just go and you

work at a government funded or Soros funded NGO and then you do all that civil disobedient stuff on your free time. And, but I was, I just think, I think that you're, you were right when you're saying,

like, because I think it's, the problem is not the organization. The problem is that the organization

in Minneapolis had a goal of causing exactly what occurred. Yeah. The organization around the civil rights movement was to desegregate soda counters. Yeah. And so, one of them was about actually, I mean, the other thing is that brought, pull back a little bit further. Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement was about affirming our liberal democratic western civilization, black people wanted to be a part of it. Yeah. This stuff where you're like, we want to, you know,

open the border and defund the police and basically start attacking all of these institutions of liberal democratic civilization. That's different. That's a radicalized left. It was government funded different. Clearly, he defines it best as suicidal empathy. I don't agree with gad on that. No. You don't think it's suicidal empathy. I don't think it's either suicidal or empathic. Because empathy is, empathy is like, when he humanized that to a lot of progressive ideas,

not just the immigration that I don't think he'd necessarily, I think it was actually long before the immigration thing that he was talking about it suicidal empathy. The idea being that you need the rule of law to have a safe and peaceful society. Yes. That means true. That's true. Yeah. You need, you need no violence. You need no crime. And when you're taking criminals and just releasing them

“from jail and you have no cash bail and you're doing all these things, if you want to put on the”

fucking tin foil hat, you would do that because you want chaos because you want chaos so you can have more rules and tighten down on people and have more control over the civilization. I mean, I think in that, I mean, I think like it's not empathic to allow more violent crime. Like, I don't think that's empathy towards victims. So I don't think I wouldn't call it empathy. And not only that, but like, when you look at like the these who these folks are and I spent a

lot of time looking at them and was one of them, they hate Western civilization. They hate the United States of America. They hate capitalism. Like, it's, it's an anti-civilization thing that's motivating it. And that's not to say that like MSNBC watchers don't feel like, oh, I feel bad for that

person. But I mean, I always, you know, it's like, like, the people I hear complaining about ice,

they don't know any illegal immigrants. They've never talked to them other than maybe their server or that, you know, but they don't even really talk to their gardeners or their, or their, you know, their, their maids, like the idea that they empathy implies a deep understanding of

“someone's situation. And so I think it's a misdescription of empathy. I think in some ways it's more”

quite the opposite of that that they're actually not showing empathy for all the people that are hurt by their policies, whether it's open borders or enabling addiction or utilizing poor and mentally ill people and Canada or transient kids. I don't think that those things are empathic. And the person that's doing, doing them, I don't think is suicidal. If anything, they're actually

altruism in San Francisco, and I say it's close to Monkhausen syndrome by proxy. Maybe it is. Monkhausen syndrome by proxy, but I don't think it's, I worry about, I worry about affirming, because I think it's how progressive it's going to go. Oh, well, if we go for the homeless or our worse off, that's just because we care so much. I just don't think that's the case. Well, that's the homeless thing is nuts because the homeless thing is just a scam. And we know

that basically because of California, like California, what, what's happened with the whole homeless

budget is so insane and that the vetoed audits of these budgets. There's been $24 billion spent.

No one knows where it went. There's no accountability. And then the homeless situation increases.

“Well, that's why. I mean, remember, it's like, I was funny, like, my students just did a”

pay. We have something we've been working on, too, like the Canadian youth and Asia program. Yeah. And it's like every year the numbers just keep going up and up and remind me that when you interview homeless, you know, service providers in San Francisco, they'd be like, yeah, no, we're doing an amazing job every year. We serve more and more people. It's like, right, you have been at, you have all the, you have a wrong incentives. You're trying, you're, you're

even incentive to serve to, you have incentive to create homelessness. And that's what they've done. Well, if you get more money, if you have more homeless, you're incentive is now not to eliminate homelessness because that's your job. Right. That's how you make all your money. When I first was alert to that, I was like, I can't believe this is real. Like, when you find out

the amount of money that's involved in homelessness, like that, they spend 24 billion dollars.

Okay. Where did that go? Where'd and then there's no accountability? Okay. There's no fraud. You're saying there's no fraud? Zero? Well, I wish there was fraud. I mean, somebody was sort of like, can we expose, you know, like Nick Shirley exposed the daycare is not doing anything and then like Minnesota? I was like, I wish the homeless service providers weren't doing anything. They're, if they're stealing the money, then there'd be a lot less homelessness.

Well, what do you, so you think they're actually using the money to create homelessness? Yeah. Oh, yeah. I mean, think about like, so San Francisco was like up between $100, $120,000. A year per homeless person thinks San, I think LA at a bargain of something more like $25,000. That's just San Francisco. That doesn't count the 24 billion that California gave. So that money's going to, you know, single resident occupancy hotel owners.

It's going to non-profit service providers or just bringing food and, you know, alcohol and drug paraphernalia to make it easier for people to do drugs and overdose and live and tense on the street. That's, it's very expensive to kill that many people that way.

“That's what San Francisco was proven. Right. But it's really about the amount of people”

where that's their industry. That there is an industry and taking care of the homeless situation and addressing the homeless situation. And you know, Koleon Nguar when he was on the podcast, he was explaining to me that he went to San Francisco and he was like, why is it so bad up here? Do they need money? He's like, no, no, no. This guy was a lawyer. He was explaining to him. He's a lawyer as well. He's explaining to him like, no, no, these people are getting money

to deal with the homeless situation. And some of them are making $4 billion a year and more,

which is just nuts. And then it's not getting better. It's only getting worse. And yet they still keep getting that money. So it's like there's zero incentive to make it better. There's only an incentive to make it worse. And then when you have no accountability, so there's no auditing over the money. $24 billion is a lot of fucking money. So who's getting greased up? Where's that money going? Mostly, it's into the, it's into the temporary, what they call,

they call it permanent, it's propaganda word, propaganda, it's a permanent support of housing. It's neither permanent nor supportive. It's often warehousing addicts where they die. I mean, we know that they died very high levels and those little, this is a little crummy, you know, single residency rooms. They bought a lot of motels that were, you know, low income, you know, low cheap motels, converting them, having, but they don't really, there's no, I mean,

all that money should have gone into a centralized addiction and psychiatric care system. Cal Psych is what it should have been. And instead, it's just, it's just kind of, yeah, it's just basically incentivizing people to live on the streets and use hard drugs and dying overdose. What's just so crazy? I mean, if you wanted to make it better you to incentivize them and pay them based on the amount of people that are no longer homeless. Right. But they don't do that.

But then the problem with that is, well, you're eventually going to fix it all and then your

“business is going to go away. Right. And that's all happening. I think it's, I think it's all”

happening unconsciously. Like, there's no room. There's no, like, you know, a secret room where they're rubbing their hands and being like, "Oh, they're going to make a lot of money this way." It's just, you know, when you interview them, it's a very basic view. You know, it's just, these people are victims. They're victims of white supremacy and capitalism and, and to victims, everything should be given in nothing required. Well, I think that's a nice narrative. But I think

I think you're incentive is to keep this party going. Well, sure, but they think it's good. I mean, they go, this shows how, how good we're doing that. We got a bigger budget this year.

“And that's how they, that's how they rationalize it. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, I mean, it's a sign of a very”

sex society. Once the title of your book, San Francisco, sicko, which is a great title. I mean, it's a sick place. And it was one of my favorite cities. It was an amazing city. Well, California owned my Netflix special there in 2016. So in just the amount of time in 10 years, it's completely fallen apart. When I was there in 2016, it was great.

With the, I mean, there was always a lot of homeless people there, but you have that many liberal

city, but it was never an epidemic. It was never like tents everywhere and shit on the streets. That wasn't the case. It was just, you know, it was a liberal city, a progressive liberal city, but it was cool. There was a lot of outdoor music. It was fun. It was a great place to go to restaurants and people walked around. It was a great city filled with intelligent, interesting, open-minded people. Man, I live there when I was a little kid. I was there during the Vietnam War,

from age 7 to 11. I lived in San Francisco. It's a little bit better now. There's a new mayor. Yeah, a little bit. I mean, I want to acknowledge, I can't lie about it. It's a little bit better. I agree. I interview a lot of people still about what's going on.

“It's still there. Did you see what happened with the mayor?”

With his security guard. Yeah, got pulled down. Yeah, first of all. That's still going on.

For sure. He's the learned fucking jujitsu. The way he let that guy grab him. You didn't, he didn't pummel. He didn't do anything. It looked like he had no understanding of what to do when that guy grabbed his body. How is he a security guard? That's crazy. How can you be a security for the mayor? If you literally don't know what to do in a clinch, I thought he looked like he didn't really see the guy as a threat or something. Like maybe he thought he was just crazy.

Even if I didn't see a guy as a threat. If a guy grabs me like that, I'm not going to let him get that position on him. He's cut it back. He probably cut his back of his head and he banged him on the ground. He bought his land onto the fucking concrete and then he had a metaphor for the whole situation. He just walks away. He walked away like it was nothing. Like he walked away, not here. Do you see those? I saw that video and I couldn't tell if the mayor actually saw what was happening.

He was like he was going, he was looking that way. He was here when they started physically struggling with each other. And then when they're struggling with each other, he walks off. And then the guy gets body slowly. It was the weirdest video to watch. Yeah, but because it's a nonchalant. It was a metaphor for the community. This is a different angle. The mayor actually is running off to get help. Oh, yeah. So,

running off? Yeah, me, me refresh this. Oh, it was it. Yeah. Show me. Oh, no, no, no. Show me. Oh, no. Yeah. So there's the mayor right there. Okay. He pushes this guy here in a second. The mayor sort of

“as soon as he gets to watch the takes off. So why are they hanging out with this guy in the first?”

That looks like they're in chaos. So the security guy started it and he doesn't know what the fuck he's doing. And there's the man over here. Okay. Oh, look at this. It's like she didn't see much better. Much better video. And the other guy's a lot stronger than him. So the mayor. He looks off one on the take. He starts running right. He seems relaxed. Okay. Okay. He did start walking slowly. And then starts with that going to get help. That guy started it all. He pushed that guy.

If you're a security guy, the last thing you want to do when there's one of you and two of those other guys is deal with the situation that way where you push a guy. I'm, I have to say

as soon as you said, I'm always surprised when I see them. Like that was the same thing that happened

with the predi. We're just talking about it. Don't you think this guy's probably armed too? I mean, but also he shouldn't have pushed that guy that way. I mean, the whole thing is fucking stupid. Look at the chaos or somebody else just ran around and then they're homeless person or something. Yeah. Yeah. The other guy's probably talking shit. I bet that guy's funny. I bet he said it's funny. Got the big code on. I mean, I don't, for the life of me, none of it makes sense.

Right. None of it makes sense. The, the mayor walking off casually and then eventually running. It doesn't make sense. It's a security guy. I just walked up to those guys and pushed him when your details to take care of the mayor. He should be escorting him around that and getting him away from any potential trouble. Like the brazeness of just walking up and pushing that guy, well, you don't have to fight at all. It's very clear when you watch the way they grapple with each other.

He doesn't know what he's doing. This episode is brought to you by Intuit Turbo Tax. April 15th is coming fast. There's been so many tax law changes this year, which means you're going to need an expert who has your back. You're in luck. Turbo Tax now has in-person locations nationwide walking to their tech-enabled stores and meet face-to-face

you every doll you deserve while updating you as you go about your day. Head to TurboTax.com to find a store near you. Seems like we're having a lot of security problems in our society, right? It's wild, right? I can believe the pushing, I mean, that's the same in the pretty thing.

“Like, pushing is that like an important law enforcement technique? I mean, what is that?”

Well, he knows that he pushed a small woman. The ice guy just completely just full on

shoves this small woman. Which means he was emotionally out of control first, right?

I mean, he was angry. He was angry. These guys are not like special forces. No, they're not well-trained. Right. These guys are seven weeks now. Seven weeks and a lot of them are financially incentivized because if you get $50,000, if you're in debt and then you could take this job on. When they get the $50,000, how long do they have to stay on the job for to have that money, to have that signing bonus? Or is it one of those things where you get the $50,000 as a signing

bonus but you pay it like a record deal type deal? Well, it's not really your money. You have to make it up later. I imagine. But still, if you can get $50,000, there's a lot of people that will take that job. Yeah. It was just a bunch of bad choices made by the administration on that one.

Someone's Reddit comments saying they have no personal experience but they've heard that it's

50K over four years. If you're in good standing at the end of those four years. So you only get it after four years. Okay. But for some people that have no job opportunities and nothing on the

“horizon, that $50,000 looks like, look, it's an extra 25K year or an extra 25K. For four years?”

For fifty for four years. For a person says that's incorrect. It's broken in ten payments, once at 90 days, then once every year for four more years. Anyway, it's broken. But either way, it's $50,000 that you would not have been able to make. Yeah. I mean, we had police shortages before 2020. We had a bunch of police shortages after that. Mostly by police officers who were just filled mistreated by the society, by their local mayors who said that they were evil.

Well, didn't a lot of cops resign when Adam Donney got elected? Oh, I'm sure. And then a COVID, and then a bunch of police officers driven out during COVID. So the guys already are security forces have been, you know, and they were just, people underestimate how important it is to feel like important in your job and to be respected. And it's not just about the money, because they would be offering more money. But I think love people like, oh, no, I don't want to be in a job where

“people are like spitting at me or throwing your in. Well, not just as a job where your life is on the”

level. Yeah, your life is already on the line. And then you're mistreated by the wider society, which actually creates additional risks, you know, as this chaos in Minneapolis shows. So yeah, it's just people want to believe that they're doing something that is appreciated by the community. And so in the community decides that they're against policing, your civilization is pretty far gone. But this is a difference between policing and this ice thing. The ice thing is a different thing.

Right. They're looking at it differently. It's not like you're watching a violent altercation take place. The police show up and people are spitting on them. Like you're trying to break up a violent crime. This is different. They're looking at it. Like in the progressive narrative, it's like no one's illegal on stolen land. And we need to have open borders and illegal or immigrants, rather, or the foundation of this country. And you hear all that, those narratives.

The president and the administration, they wanted to pick a fight, obviously, with this left wing with activists in the left wing city, they thought it would read down to their benefit to show how crazy the left was and it backfired on them. Well, I think they wanted to do something about the amount of illegal fraud that was just recently exposed in Minneapolis. But that I don't know that that's, but you wouldn't do it with ice raids, though. I mean, well, it's illegal immigrants.

If you have illegal immigrants that are responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars in the fraud, and you know, at least some of them were illegal. It seems rational that you would send ice in to find out who's illegal and who's not and put a stop to some of it. And there's also this nationwide focus on this one place because of the next surely video. Yeah. Yeah, the way I think that the motivate, my inner saying, is that the motivation was to motivate people that are here

illegally to self-deport. And so that that's the main part of the strategy is the show of force. Because of course, it's, they wanted the public, they wanted people to be scared and self-deport.

They claim that, you know, one point, I think, three million people self-deported or at one

point four and another four hundred thousand or six hundred thousand deported through the normal channels. And apparently, they're just limited to how many people they can actually deport through the normal channels. But they can get people can self-deport. They can just go. Right. And because of course, there's this thing called e-verify where you just have the employers have to prove that everybody you're employing is here legally. And they don't want to do that. Trump administration

but other intrusion, construction, who depend on. So it's a, it's a funny, it's not great.

“I don't know, I'm not saying that there's that I have the perfect, you know, answer to the other”

one. But obviously, like politically, the president doesn't feel like they can do e-verify and maintain support from the business community for his political agenda. So you end up, but you end up with a kind of underclass. That's here illegally. But that's protected because they're working in the sector that the president and the administration wants to protect. But then you're also self-deporting people. I'm not sure exactly how they're thinking about it. But that appears to be what the, the

heart of their goal is. Well, this was always, you know, what a lot of people in the left

back in the day would say that illegal immigrants was, this was like a Koch brothers thing. This was like a right wing thing that they wanted this for, for exactly what you just described, and that this is not a left wing progressive idea. And then what it would do is would lower the wages for the lower class, the middle class, this country, and it would be bad for the citizens. And so you don't want unchecked illegal immigration, unchecked illegal immigration would just be

for the right. Because they're the ones who own these massive corporations that are profiting off of illegal labor, they don't have to pay them benefits, they don't have to pay them health care, any of the things that are, you know, that cost money. Yeah, I mean, the on the left was always balancing

a sort of open society, you know, they wanted, the Soros Foundation always wanted to have a free

movement of people. That was sort of their view of why, part of why the Holocaust occurred is that you couldn't move, you know, or at least the persecutions you couldn't move people as easily. But then you had the working class, you know, who were negatively affected by bringing in migrants, who had pushed out wages and unions who were a big part of the Democrat party. So the Democrats were sort of divided on it for a while, but they managed it in Hillary and Obama would sort of,

if you look at when they were competing in 2008, they were very carefully, like there was a whole thing around like driver's licenses, whether she would give them or not, and Obama accused Hillary of kind of playing both sides of it, you know, typical thing. But they also both spoke out strongly against mass migration, fast forward 10 year, you know, fast forward, much more than that. It was at 16 years into, in today, and now you've got a much more working class Republican party who's unified

around keeping the borders closed and restricting the supply of low-income, unskilled workers,

because, I mean, it was really weird to watch people that are always defending supply and demand

and economics and economic policy, then say, "Oh, no, but having open borders and having all these working class people come in, I'm just going to have no impact on wages when obviously it would."

“And I think that's now, that's also now gone. I think that's another thing that's just Trump has”

just changed. I don't think you're going to see Democrats going back to advocating that kind of mass migration again. Right, but you could see a world where they would push back against what has happened, what would they would say the barbaric nature of some of these ice raids, and then saying, "This is a filter of ice water on that, too, if you'd like." But you don't have to not have your bottle, we don't care. It's in the shot. No, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter.

But you could see how they could go back to a much looser border policy. I think you could be back to a 30 because they won't. I think they won't. I think the closed border, I mean, I think that that sweet spot of public opinion is like people really want to close, I think it was just really but I don't think public opinion supported an open border even on the left. No. During those last four years, we get they did it in any way, and they were moving people to blue states.

They were moving people to swing states. They were flying people in busing people. They were doing

“up purpose. Isn't that also the because the blue state governors were more welcoming of them?”

There's a little bit of that, but there was also the idea that you were going to juice up the congressional seats because you're going to change the census. Maybe although California lost seats, right? Well, because California doesn't such a fucking terrible job of governing their state. It's so, that place is so crazy. Every time there's some new law that they're trying to push through, some new bill, they just want everyone to leave. Will they drove the billionaires

out, right? Yeah. I mean, I know they drove out David Sachs, came to Austin. I think Mark Zuckerberg moved to Florida. I heard rumors to Steven Spielberg. I don't know if that's, I don't want to spread disinformation. I don't want to spread misinformation, but I heard he was leaving, but yeah, it's good. The thing that drives me the most nuts is when these progressive talking heads dang, they don't want to pay their fair share with the amount of waste and fraud. Why would

you? You don't think this should be some accountability to how much fucking waste and fraud that has been clearly demonstrated? The solutions just give more money when they can do it because they have it. So what? You just give more money and now it's $30 billion goes to homeless with no accountability. What are you saying? Where do you think this money is going to go? Where it's

that that's the case. That the real problem is they just haven't had enough money from the billionaires. That's fucking ludicrous. That idea is lud, it's such a lazy, intellectually lazy way of framing this whole discussion. They're saying, oh, they don't want to pay their fair share. Fuck you. That's not what's going on here. It's going on here. You give a completely incompetent government that's absolutely corrupt and they want more money. Yeah. Gas is like $8 a gallon almost now. That's

bananas. They were going to shut down. I mean, the refiners are being shut down. That initiative, the Billionaire's tax, is an SCIU initiative. So meaning it's the union that covers healthcare workers like nurses. They're very radical, very radical left. And the money is to provide Medicaid

“for undocumented immigrants. That's what they want it for, right? So that's the whole thing. And so”

you literally get the, this is like, this is what people worry about democracy. You get all the is very democratic, but you get these powerful unions and they're able to change the laws like that. I mean, it's called the Curly Effect because there was a Boston mayor named Curly who made everything so bad for his political opponents that they left. But the consequence was that he ended up gaining more power. So all of, when everybody moves to, you know, when all the, like moderate Democrats move

to Austin or Miami or Denver or wherever, California just sends a locked in more to a progressive agenda, that's the problem. Well, I think the idea is that it's so good there that most people are just going to tolerate whatever new bullshit they throw your way. 100%. And also, I mean, it seems like the tech community is now backing the San Jose mayor who's running, who's a very, he's Democrat,

very moderate. I, you know, he's, but he's been critical of gathering for governor. Yeah, mad

mayhem. So keep your eyes on him. I mean, he's not, he's not like, maybe the most exciting guy, but he's definitely running as a moderate. He's going to have some money. Yeah, he's exciting people. No, no, no, he might be enough to, I don't know, it's hard to say, but it does look like, because I mean, look, there's plenty of the tech community only woke up politically in 2024. It's how long it took. And it really took things getting so bad where they were telling Mark

and Dreson as he said to you on your show that they were shutting off all parts of AI. The buy administration was openly threatening AI and this huge new. And, you know, there's concerns. I'm

“not saying that there's not, but I think that, I think at some point, the tech community, which had”

been, you know, either leaning Democrat, you know, for a long time since the Obama era, you know, or wanted to stay out of politics, because they just want to focus on their machines and their investments. They don't really want to be involved in politics, but they woke up in 2024. And so hopefully, because it's not, I mean, when you see what Soros has done and you really appreciate the power that one billionaire can have, you kind of go, why is there nothing like that,

you know, on the other side? Why is it so dominated by Soros? And so I hope that that's starting to happen, but yeah, when you start to chase out the billionaires and the billionaires just give up on California, then it's got to be whoever's remaining to try to, you know, put the money behind the guy that can get some change there. Yeah, that's, I mean, I don't see a pathway where California anytime soon turns around. I don't see how it could. I feel like it's, the momentum has shifted so far

in a terrible direction and the solutions are always tax more, take more money from people,

and you see of this completely corrupt, irresponsible, fraud-ridden, wasteful government that wants more of your money. And the solution is, if we take more money, we're going to make things better, which is just insanity. I mean, things that can't go on don't. So, I mean, you could see it, right? I mean, if they met Mahan or somebody more moderate gets him to be governor,

“Rick Kurusa runs for LA mayor again. I mean, honestly, like, if somebody can't defeat”

Karen Bass after she let Los Angeles burn away, which is now we now know for a fact, was just totally preventable. Absolutely preventable. I was saying at the time, but now we know, they tried to rewrite the report, but it's clear it was totally preventable. Have they tried to rewrite the report? Well, the report, you know, said here's all the

things that the fire department should have done that didn't happen. And ultimately, you know,

the mayor is the one that chooses the fire chief and fires the fire chief. And the mayor was warned, they were warned. And she goes to Flastagonia for this little junket, presidential inauguration, piling around when she should have been in LA with a headquartered, and you know, and if she wasn't then Gavin should have been, you know, Schwarzenegger, towards the end of his administration, they would just mobilize planes full of water. You know,

this huge cargo planes full of water before they were fires, just to start to circulate, just to get ready to put stuff out. This idea that there was this idea promoted that it was inevitable that the fire is that, oh, eventually it's just no, like it's absurd. Like, of course,

reservoirs, have water in them. Even the one that was like was like not repaired yet,

which should have been repaired, they could have kept, they could have air gapped the pipes so that it didn't contaminate the water supply, but left it for firefighting. They didn't do that. They didn't station the engines where they needed to station. Now, nobody was on, you know, it's like, they're not taking responsibility, like they weren't taking responsibility for it. So, maybe to the point being, get a new governor, you get a better mayor of LA. You've got a guy in San Francisco

“now who I think has still has a lot of potential. I mean, this latest video, you know, showing the chaos”

there. But you, with that, I think that could fix him, though. That's not his fault. His, you know, the criticism of him, they walked away too casually. That's no big deal. Yeah. So, I mean, I think there is a, there is a way for California to come out. And my view is like, look,

you've got, it's, it's on the tech billionaires that, you know, and I know some of them have

left, and obviously they don't need, but there's still a lot of billionaire rich guys in California that are perfectly capable of financing an alternative effort. The vote, you know, 75% of San Francisco voters want to arrest people using fentanyl and public. They, they want to arrest them. Okay. That sounds so, that's so taboo and progressive. That's 75% of San Francisco voters. So, the voters are not, they're not the radical laughs. Some ways they're radicalized and they're

hatred of Trump and the Trump to raise them in syndrome. But I mean, everyone like Caruso and Mohan and anybody else there will just be able to say they hate Trump like everybody else.

“Well, I think they've seen the consequences of these policies. Oh, yeah, there's people are,”

people are really, there's, there's not like anything has changed that significantly. They will, in fact, my inner people in San Francisco, they're a little reluctant to admit that's gotten better because I think they don't want to take any pressure off the politicians. So, I mean, I do think it's, it's rescuable, but it's hard. When you say it's gotten better like, how so? Mostly the encampments are being broken up. Now you see a little, you see more of that sort of

thing that we just saw in the video where there's like, I call them like a little more of like a nest, you know, there's just a little homestay, and big encampments, like, yeah, the whole block. That's in Oakland. Yeah. That's in Skidra. Oh, Oakland's not. Oakland is, Oakland might not be safe. They had a chance to save themselves in the end of voting for the wrong person for May or it's just as bad as ever. So, but I think if you get San Francisco L.A. in a new governor in place, I think you've got

the making to save it. I've recently seen this video, this guy does the subscription of what's going on in Oakland, and then drives across the county line into the next place, and it's immediately all done, and you just see what the difference between two different forms of government and how it works. I didn't see them, but I saw the one between Venice and Santa Monica. Yeah, I was there when the Venice and Santa Monica was someone like, you're like, why are there tents? Why aren't there

any tents there? It's like, that's Santa Monica. Yeah, different. Well, there's still some Santa Monica I got back to, but they cleaned it up a little bit better. Yeah, but Venice is bananas. It's just, but Venice is nothing compared to Skidra. Skidra is 50 blocks. Venice is okay now. Venice is okay now. Yeah, they cleaned that up pretty quickly, and then they, and then the voters fired their city council member, who represented them, who was total crazy radical Chesapo Dean

level radical and replaced them with a more moderate person. So, but yeah, when you go to the beach,

it's not chaos. Yeah. I mean, I'm not, there's always, but I mean, remember before it was just,

it was tents everywhere. I mean, it was right. Hey, everywhere. And then we dug in, you know, that's like crazy. So, no, that's gone, but Skidra, it's bad, it's ever. Skidra is 50 blocks. 50 blocks is so crazy. 50 blocks of tents and homeless people. When we first heard that, I was like, that's got to be wrong. It's probably five blocks. No, it's five zero, 50 blocks. That's an enormous amount of land that's completely covered by homeless in campus. There's like a whole genre of like,

of like influencers when they first visit Skidra, because everyone hears about it, and then you

“see like their, their tweets are just like, they're just like all I couldn't believe. Like I think”

it's like maybe Ben Shapiro or there's various conservative influencers who have gone to Skidra and they're like, I had no idea. There was a good idea until you see it. There was a comic from the comedy store that filmed something. He went like undercover and said he had, like, in this past. He had some, I don't think, I think currently he was sober when he did this, but he decided to go there and film and stay in one of these encampments just to show it. It was like, and this

was like 2006, sixish, sixish somewhere around there, and it was fucking nuts, even back then. And you know, we talked about the story of how Skidra, with the whole Jerome hotel, and how it all started, Skidra was the place where they would take all the homeless people and all the people that were problematic, and they would move them there and keep them there. And the idea was that you just keep them out of Beverly Hills, keep them away from Hollywood. We're doing movies,

and we've got famous people walking around. We can't have homeless people. It's just snatch them

called it Skidra, and then it just kept getting bigger. It's not that different from the tender

one in the sense that there's replaces where the single resident, those are the places where the really cheap hotels were. They were often for like working people that were in town temporarily, like temporary hotels. Some of them would just to be cages. There were no walls, like you just get your own, but that was how primitive they were, and then it'd be just evolved over time, and then they became all of them became subsidized for the homeless. But yeah, it's um,

“I don't think, I think California, I think it's important, I think with Trump, and again,”

like I'm or hate him or disagree or whatever, you see the potential of this country in particular to make a big change. And I think that it's ultimately resulted from a unleashing of in a social media, made it all possible, allowed for people to get, you know, accurate information for the first time in a different paradigm. So I don't want to lose hope on the Golden State,

but you lost hope on Oakland. Yeah. Yeah, but maybe I never had hope for Oakland. So

one point time, Oakland was great. I mean, Jerry Brown actually brought it up a bit, you know, got it more development there, but yeah, it's all about governance. Yeah, it is. Um, yes. Hey, can I use the bathroom? Yeah, sure, sure. We'll pause. We'll grab back, folks. I just sent Jamie something funny that someone just sent me about San Francisco. This is a guy. I think he calls himself the gay Republican, the gay Republican, the problem. There's a lot of those actually,

um, but which is, shouldn't shock people. They're closets about the Republican part now. That's the thing. Well, it depends on how wealthy they are. I mean, some of them are pretty, you know,

“Peter Teele, pretty open about it. He will, he was, yeah, about his Republicanism. What's this?”

Graham Transit, we refuse to release crime surveillance videos because it will make people racist, releasing videos would create a racial bias in the writers against minorities on the trains. Why wouldn't it do that San Fran Transit? Why would it, why would it create a bias? Is there, is there a reoccurring theme among the people committing crimes? But you can say that about European crime statistics as well. Yeah, it's also why the, the Germans

actually, uh, in particular, but I think other European countries did not want to release. Right. And, but they, they did get them out. They have come out now. So, and the UK. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um, so let's move on to happier subjects. Which way? So what do you think about all this, uh, UAP talk? It's one thing that Trump has said that is going to release whatever files that they might have on UAP's alien terrestrial beings. Oh, it's just, uh, I talked to Jesse Michaels about it.

He is highly skeptical. And he said the people that are involved are all old guard and, you know, they're just, it's just going to be a bunch of horseshit. Maybe, I mean, just first of all, look,

I mean, I think whatever you think about the phenomenon, this is amazing. I mean, the president

just said he's going to release all these things. So I mean, after decades of saying we're not interested in this, we're not, we're not following this, uh, we're shutting down blue book, you know, there's nothing there. Uh, they're like, he's saying, so I mean, that right there is, is I think amazing. And I thought the whole thing was amazing. Like Obama comes out and he goes, "Well, there's definitely aliens." Oh, but they're not an area 51. Unless they're hiding it from presidents,

which is like a well-established conspiracy theory. So to have Obama even say that. And then Trump comes up and he goes, he goes, Obama revealed classified information with a little grin on his face because he's a little rivalry with Obama. I might help him out by declassifying. And then if you hours later he did, I mean, I, what can't you like about that? I mean, I think that, well,

“it's theater. That's what you can't like about it. It's theater, but I mean, we just thought”

things really come out. This is just another distraction to keep us from thinking about all the other things that are going on. But you can't be so, I mean, we should get into Epstein Falls too, because if you think I have a different view of Epstein now. But look, I just think we've been asking for more transparency like we had in this very brief period in the mid-70s with the church committee hearings. It really took a whole watergate. It took something big. It's been over 50 years.

We got a lot of Epstein files. Yes, there's some missing, but we got JFK files, Amelia Airhart Files, and now we're going to get some UFO files. Is it going to be everything? Of course not. It's just no way. You know, but I don't think like, I think we should hold, but we should be happy that like there is an acknowledgement that there's a lot of government files and that there's some commitment to release them because I do think like it's easier to get new Epstein

files released after you have some Epstein files released than if you have none. And I feel the same way about UFOs. Okay. So it's easier to get more UFO files released. But like, release, like, what do you want? What do you think one of it is like, what do we want? And I've been, you know,

FOIA. He's been issuing, you know, freedom of information act requests on UAP, but also a ton of other issues since the mid 90s. When he was like 15 years old, he became obsessed with doing it FOIA requests. And he has identified a number of documents that we know exist with reductions. One of them is the

UAP task force, which has a line that just says potential explanations, you know, the first

explanation is redacted. It's blacked out. The second one is, you know, some sort of natural phenomenon. Number three is blacked out as redacted. Unredact those. Yeah. Come on, guys. You can't tell me what we have to protect our sensor data. Come on, guys. I mean, like, that's not sensor data. Tell us what the potential explanations are. On terms of the sensor data, John also made a great point. Do you remember when the the Pentagon released the video of the Russian jet dumping fuel on

one of our drones? There's like a famous video when they show us a hostile act by the Russians jumping fuel on our drone. When was this? Just recently. I mean, must have been within the last year or so. So, like, they're not, we do see. They do release, you know, warfare various, various times, they do release things and you can kind of go, okay, that means that we have, I don't think what I'm saying is the main excuse has been not to reveal our methods for getting, you know, this if we're just

talking about UAP here, getting, you know, photographs and video, we know that a huge amount of it exists. They haven't even released the full, you know, gimbal and go fast videos. There's a whole bunch more video left. Really? So, just really, yeah. So, the video that came out, those were whistleblower leaks, right? Eventually, they released them formally, though, the Pentagon did. So, there's much more of that. So, and the, particularly, started in Russia, was the gimbal or the

“go fast where there was many more crafts. I believe that there was, so there's three videos, right?”

It's gimbal, go fast, and then what was the one where the tick-tack video moves out of the frame? Yeah. And my understanding is that there's significantly more video for all of those. And then, I also, my understanding is also there's just a lot of other videos, particularly from those two incidents, certainly have. There's so much more sensor data, because we know those incidents had a lot more going on, right? And just was filmed by those videos. So, I think that now,

there is, I was going to say, the UAP community. There isn't really an organized one, although Jesse's doing an amazing job of organizing it. We should be really specific and say,

you know, here's what we want. I did a piece with John Greenwald, representative Nancy Mace,

wrote an open letter to the intelligence and military community saying, here's a set of documents that we want to release. So, I think the good news is we're like, look, the president has said he wants this. We've identified a bunch of documents. I identified a

“bunch of videos in film. Yeah, I mean, I think, and with whole stuff, are they going to”

mislead probably, but that's been the story for 80 years. Yeah, you saw the age of disclosure, right? Yes, of course. Okay. So, I think they make a really good point in age of disclosure that if they did release things, the real problem is misappropriation of funds lying to Congress. And the fact that some of these, you would assume that the way these things are being handled, if they do have crafts, if they are, if there is some sort of a back engineering program,

that back engineering program is going to be held by a military contractor. So, so whatever the contractor is, whether it's, you know, rock a dime or whoever has it, right, you would imagine that the other competing groups would be very pissed off that they didn't have access to this thing and they think it's too. The misappropriation of funds lying to Congress, people go to jail, also, most likely fraud. There's, there's got to be tons of fraud. If there's so much money

that's being like shuffled away into these black ops projects, if you, there's no oversight, then who knows where the money's going, right? Sure. So, there's a problem there. If you open

up the books and people go, why was there 100 million dollar check written here? Where's the

2.3 billion that's missing here? Yeah, I have doubts now. I mean, I have to say, I didn't finish watching it, but you know, Jesse just dropped a video with him and Eric Weinstein and Eric Davis. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, so Jesse, yeah, so Jesse, I haven't seen that yet. Yeah, I found it

“really, it really made me question whether there's any there there. What does Eric Davis do?”

Eric Davis, you know, who he is, he's got the bushy beard and he's an age of disclosure and is part of the whole, you know, big low, you know, that whole awsap, a tip, I don't know if it's exact, it was a scientist, okay, but he was sort of time, because I think Eric Weinstein was asking these really hard questions like, okay, well, like, how many people are in this, you know, reverse engineering program and what is it? And I just found his answers to be very thin. So,

at the same time. There is a, like, yeah, I just, I definitely think there's a lot more than

they've revealed. I think my skepticism on the reverse engineering stuff, I mean, obviously this is a catastrophe, because they're just retrieving, it could be foreign, or there was retrieving something. The reverse engineering, I mean, if it's advanced tech, nuclear just took so, I mean, I'm just familiar with the history of nuclear, just so much effort to create nuclear energy and you'd have these huge, there's a huge enterprise, thousands of people. If they're

“not, I mean, that's why I kind of go, and I mean, a whole other form of propulsion, I mean,”

it's just really, it would require so many, so such a big bureaucracy, that's where I'm a little skeptical that that exists, because I don't know how you maintain a cover up that long, but I could be wrong. I mean, as, you know, as people have pointed out, they've maintained secrecy of a lot of things for a really long time, so it's not inconceivable, but well, especially when you're dealing with government contractors and military contractors, they've done a, I mean, they have a

long history of keeping a tight lip when it comes to all sorts of top secret projects that they're working on. I mean, it's weird because, like, if you look at the UAP Task Force, which was created by people that had, you know, it was like, comes out of, it all sat up in an A-tip and an UAP Task Force, and then they create era, which is much more like, but blue book was, which is their whole point is to debunk and dismiss. I think that's the whole point. It's just to say, we looked into and there's

nothing there, so then they, and they cherry pick the cases, like, they don't actually deal with stuff that they can't explain. That's what era's point is, but the UAP Task Force was people that seem genuinely interested in it, and they have potential explanations and three separate things. That means that they didn't know themselves, and so I would think that if you, if there was some reverse engineering program, then you would have a better idea than just three potential explanations.

But that's assuming they actually got access. The UAP Task Force people. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, because they open themselves up for if they do have access, then you open up those questions, misinformation, funds, mind, Congress, military contractors having access to these vehicles. I would imagine that's too messy. They get very mumbling. They get very mumbling at that point. I find we start kind of like, well, what is it, and how many people kind of, it's a lot of, like,

“you know, I mean, that's how I, that's how that was my interpretation of this. I think that it's,”

I'm much more with Jacques Valets view of the phenomenon, and I think that it that they don't know what it is. I think they have a lot more filters and videos showing just demonstrate this

incredible phenomenon, but I'm not sure that they know what it is, and I'm pretty skeptical that they

have a secret of reverse engineering program, just because I don't, I don't see how they, how they would have carried it out for this long, because just these theory, of course, is that it would date back to the 70 to the 50s. Yeah. And it just, there's just too many possibilities for too many deathbed confessions from people to reveal this knowledge. So, I don't you think you would keep a really close watch on anyone who had any access to any of these things, and that would

be very threatening to them. Like, Bobo Zarr. Yeah. I mean, I don't know. You believe Bobo Zarr. I do. Yeah. I don't know what he was working on, whether or not it was hours or something else, or what. Yeah. But I don't think he's a liar. He's at the same story forever. Well, then we should go demand the documents. I mean, that would be something where we just need to be like, look, these are the documents that we want, and it's on this, this place, these years.

Well, one of these are Bob's studies. You think some of the documents that he was shown were horseshit, and he thinks it's on purpose. He thinks that those fake documents that the fake narratives are hook, so that if somebody does spill the beans, they know exactly who would, who was doing it, because they could point to, like, maybe if you're involved in, you know, X program, they give you some bullshit narrative on top of the real truth, right? They'll make up some stuff. Right. That

way, if you really, well, the government told me, X, and you go, oh, okay, he learned it from this, he's a part of this program. Yeah. Now we've narrowed it down to 250 employees. Let's start scouring these people. It's kind of telling questions. Yeah, countertailors. Yeah. I mean, it seems like that.

So, you know, the MJ-12 documents. Yes. There's one of them that is this incredible document.

“I mean, just if it's a forger, it most people, I think, think it's a forger here. It's a hoax, whatever.”

It's so well done. It's the manual on extraterrestrial crash retrieval with different morphologies you've ever seen this? No. You've seen it's amazing document. Like, I spent a long rabbit hole, look, I would say most uphologists think it's fake. So, it's not even me. I was incredible about these show, like, you know, like the old books from the library, they'd show who checked it out, they had all these names. Uh-huh. Isn't it? So, then you kind of go, like, the only people, really.

I mean, it seemed like the level of sophistication to create this would have been the government.

it was just, this is called passage material to build a detects counterintelligence activities. Now, to another one, I can't quite figure out. I mean, it's just a lot of effort to, and why that narrow? I mean, another thing I was, people say is, like, well, they're using the UAP stuff

“as cover for secret weapons programs. And you're like, well, why would that work as cover?”

And they go, well, because then, then it's a way to distract attention. Also, why would that distract attention? Wouldn't that attract attention? You go, if you, as opposed to, like, within the military, like, look, we don't, this is, this is secret research, you know, that's really important in national security. We don't just pay attention. Instead of, like, oh, no, this is UFO, crash retrieval. So, don't pay attention to it. That seems like you're a recipe for creating more

interest in UFOs. Yeah. So, there's a lot of things that the government has done where you're, like, it's almost like assuming that is, by the way, that we know that, like, we know that the government, the U.S. Air Force did, you know, in the early 80s, make this guy Paul Benowitz, go crazy, who was seeing things over Curtland Air Base, and then this guy Richard Dody, you know, was-- How they make them go crazy? They would be feeding them all this information,

convincing them of an alien attack. And he basically ended up going crazy from it. It's this,

amazing story told by this, by this book, Morage Men, also documentary. And you look at

you kind of go and they go, well, it was to cover up a secret weapons program at Curtland Air Base. And it's like, it's like, I'm not even disbelieving it, but it's like, that's just such a,

“like, why would that be the best way to do that? And why would you be so sure that that wouldn't”

attract interest from people rather than distract it? So, there's a bunch of things that don't make sense. And so, even if it is all, you know, which is the skeptic view, you know, is that it's some combination of government disinformation, sci-fi, dreams, hypnosis, hypnogogic states, and then kind of the power of belief. You know, I just reviewed this new book on Barney and Betty Hill, where the author thinks that it was, that that really was a combination of her,

it was the stress of being an interracial couple, her nightmares, and then hypnosis, where they then confabulate this whole story. That's the basic skeptic view

is that it was sort of, but the government's involved in it. And that's always strange,

because you're like, "Why are the government involved in the Betty and Barney Hills?" No, no, in the UFO, in creating, in these UFOs, assuming that they did them J12, or some of the J12, but certainly in the case of, why would they have her any organizations? Why would they have anything, right? Why would they have, why would you be, why would you be doing, like, the thing with, like, the Paul Doddy and the Paul Bannerwitz, or the Richard Doddy and Paul Bannerwitz, is like, why,

“why was that the, I mean, it's just, why was that the best way, like, somebody is observed”

of strange activity of a curtlin' air base, and they discovered this. Why was that the right approach? I don't, I don't follow it. And you had AJ Gentile on who did the stuff on crop circles we saw, they saw military disinformation around those activities in Britain. So you see a lot of crop circle things weird, really weird, because you want to just write it off. I mean, I wanted to write it off. Oh my god, this guy's with boards, they're making designs, but then you see some of

the designs and how the, the wheat is actually woven and how they have these exploded nodes, almost like they're microwaved and they've examined these things and it seems like there's some energy that's created these things and also the sheer size and scale of some of these things with no footprints leading into them or out of them and just the geometric precision of some of them, they're, it's really weird. Like there's, of course, it's eyewitness accounts, it's hard to know

if they're being accurate, but people who flown over areas, where there's nothing there, flown back to hours later and there's these football field size, mandelbrot sets. Those are the Julius set over next to Stonehenge, was the one that the guy flew over and there was nothing there and there was a couple of hours later, there was the Julius set, which is a spectacular

that's incredible. Right. I'll tell you, it's even greater precision. That's what's really,

it's much precision you can get by folding over wheat, but when you look at it like from above and you know, you don't get to the, the micro, you, you're, you're looking at these things that like they really do scale in a fractal way. It's very fucking strange and difficult to reproduce. You would imagine something like that would take a long, fucking time to plot out and plan you would take multiple people, you'd have to measure and re-measure, you'd have to have some

some sort of tools and instruments, not just to fold over the, the wheat, but if you're going to interweave the wheat, like what is your method of doing that? And how are you doing it where, you know, this one is one dimension and then the next one is precisely three-fifths of that dimension. Next one is slightly, and they're fractal. Well, it gets really even weirder than that.

guy driving this guy, Paul Benoett's crazy. Yeah. Yeah. That book is written by Mark Pilkington.

“Mark Pilkington is one of two guys that claim to have created all the crop circles. The other”

guys, a guy named John Lundberg. Oh, right, right. AJ in his video about the crop circles accuses John Lundberg. Again, the, the, the, well, the circle makers, they have a website that they communicated. Yeah. He accuses him of being a British intelligence agent, AJ does, or at least he's strongly implies it. And, um, and, and part of that is because there was a bunch of weird stuff on the website about MI5 and the CIA, and then Lundberg went to school. This all very circumstantial. So,

I'm not defending them. I'm just saying what AJ said. Then Lundberg went to a school that shares a courtyard with, with an, with an, with an MI5 campus or an MI5 training area. I asked Mark, I have like a three, I have like three hours of interviews with Mark, um, who I'm really interesting, really interesting person. I asked him directly, if they had any connection to military intelligence,

“he said absolutely not. Um, it's hard to, which is what you would say. Well, of course, you're”

allowed to say it, if you are, but I'm not making any accusations, but yeah, I mean, he claimed that they made all of them. And, you know, there's some of them, have you ever seen the massive, there's one that was absolutely massive? Yeah, pull some of them up, Jamie, so we can get there's the Julia said that there's another, there's another one that's so big. It's really hard to see, but he said that he wasn't at that one. Yeah. That's the, that's the Julia said to gorgeous,

well, the big one right there is in the middle. That one. Yes. It just means these are enormous. Yeah, they're enormous. Go full screen on that. It's, they're so big. And, I mean, the amount of precision involved in them is kind of spectacular. Now, Mark denies that they have exploded nodes, and he denies that they're interwoven. AJ says that they are definitely interwoven and have exploded nodes. And there was an even an article in Science Magazine, which, you know, argues that

they were made by humans, but that they, they point out the, the exploded nodes. So yeah, maybe that's it. What's weird, too, is there's like, how did you do this? What's, what's the, where's the evidence of people trampling through this with equipment? No, it's all missing. Like, it's strange. And then also, no one's caught doing them. How about this? Here's the other one. I asked Mark about this and he didn't know about it. But, do you know the pie one? Yeah. There was apparently, I'm pretty sure

it's the first time that it was a visual explanation of pie. That's my understanding of it. Now, maybe maybe there's someone, I haven't seen anything earlier than that. But that's like on its own

is really amazing that that was the first time that they had created a visual representation of,

of pie. Yeah. Simply with like the, yeah, that's it. It's like there's another image that will show how it is pie. Probably that one right there. Yeah. And so that's a, extremely sophisticated, extremely comfortable. Right. I mean, imagine the type of intelligence, the you'd have to possess to pull this off and then not let anybody know that you did it. And it's just for funsies. Just for funsies in a field. Yeah. It's um, and then you know these MIT researchers went out

that's also part of it and they tried to do it and it just wasn't, it wasn't nearly as good. Yeah. What's this article? Well, you're good at it. Okay. Yeah. It is very fucking weird. Yeah. It's very weird. But the whole UFO thing is very weird. It, you know, the Jacques-Vallet books are very interesting and I've read three of his books so far and I've had them on a couple of times and the last time I had them on, I really wanted a deep dive and I read two of his books

right before he came on. And one of the more interesting things is the really old stories. Like the stories from the 1700s, the 1800s, where they lack the context of spaceships, the idea behind it, like none of that stuff exists. But yet you get almost, at least you could say, oh, I could understand how they would be describing it this way. But it's kind of the same thing that other people have been describing. This is in Bobway's story, a lot of these other stories.

It's kind of the same story over and over and over again, which makes you go, okay, well, what, does it have to be from outer space or is it possible that there is something here that is

“like far older than us that has somehow or another removed itself from our view?”

Or is it social contagion and people, I mean, I've always struck by it's always like the aliens

always are like all protect your environment and avoid nuclear war. It's like, oh, thanks, like we didn't know we needed to do those until you guys showed up. And it makes more sense as like you could see it as a, I mean, I got very into, I haven't interviewed her yet, but I'm about to, there's an anthropologist at Stanford named Tonya Lurman, and she's done this incredible work on

their agnostic on whether or not like those beings are real, like they're just like we're really

interested in like the culture and the psychology and the experience of it, but she had this, she, she was like, did her field work with magicians and witches in England, you know, like modern, you know, like modern, which is not magicians like magic tricks, but like the old, who's the famous magician? I can't, I can't afford it. No, no, the British one, Merlin, right? But like old style, right? But they were like, so she didn't really believe in it, but she,

“they were like, you have to practice witchcraft in order to do this. And she had like multiple”

anomalous experiences, one of them that she woke up and there was five druids in her room, back in into her and people like, is it a dream? And she's like, no, it's not a dream.

She didn't, in their instance, where they were trying to like conjure energies to like turn off,

to like shut down her watch. And she felt a huge energy surge through her and shut off her watch. And her point is that she thinks that the practice, she, we put too much focus on the beliefs, but she says like the practices themselves, I don't know if she would say conjure, I also interviewed Diana Pesulko on it, they would say more like reveal these different realities. So there are much more, it's a very interesting set of work because they're not, they're not trying to

answer the question of whether the druids were really in her room or not. I mean, the watch thing, you know, apparently definitely happened, but apparently definitely is a weird word if apparently to her, definitely. I know, you know, saying it's like show me, man. The conjuring thing is strange, because that's a recurring theme that you go outside and you have like these experiences where you say, I'm not afraid, comes show show yourself to me and given enough time with enough intention,

apparently things will appear in the sky. My favorite one is the, the black guy talking about Yahweh, who with the local ABC newscaster goes out and it's going to be when those ha ha, this guy thinks that he can conjure UFOs and they go out with them and he conjures an orb.

Do you ever see that one? No, that's like an incredible, that's like one of my favorite,

“where were those videos and the newscasters like he called literally a CM calling his, I think it's like an”

NBC affiliate or an ABC affiliate somewhere. Jamie can probably find it, but if it's literally calls his boss, the newscaster's like all the stories turned out a little differently than I thought. It's like one of my favorites. I'm sure you can say, oh, it's a balloon or whatever, but it like comes in and out. I mean, it's really and it comes right as he's calling it. That's the weird things. I've talked to multiple people that have actually done this.

Oh, people, it's kind of gone with these, you know, air quotes, experts. And they go out to some deserted area and you call these things. There's a second guy, white guy, that also does it in Reuters did a whole story on him, because apparently there's a whole bunch of people around that they saw it. And of course, Jake Barber, who's this farmer's, you know, contractor, helicopter pilot contractor for special forces announced that he was going to go and

conjure UFOs and bring one down. We met up with profit, Yahweh, Seer of Yahweh, do little park-off like need. We picked the day, we picked the time, and we picked the location. Everyone's going to think, "You're absolutely nuts." Well, I thought I was absolutely nuts. Until he says, he saw UFOs over the years, 1500 of them. He says the voice in his head told him to go public now, so we took him up on his offer,

and we scanned the skies, nothing but a few clouds. When the profits started praying for a sighting, I wasn't exactly convinced. I pray, oh, Yahweh, that you sent a sighting, so that they didn't know that I am not mentally ill. I am not a fault for something like those who seek to kill me, say I. Oh, people are trying to kill him? Oh, brother, look at their deals. You can barely see it, a white speck, then another sighting.

There it is, I got it, I got it, I got it, I got it. Photojournalist Jonathan Hawkins locks in on it. Let's take a closer look here. It's an orange fear that appeared at a nowhere. I call the boss with an unexpected change in my story. I'm to, I can see it, it clear as day, and in fact, it's bright. I can't change it. It's moving pretty fast. It's gone to Nellus Air Force Base. It was to be seen.

We called Nellus to see what these things might be. Guess what? They didn't call us back. But this thing started coming back toward us.

“Getting toward us now, I think. What? See, it's coming toward us. Oh, man! Oh, how did it look?”

It disappeared. It's going back up in space. Prof. Yahweh isn't concerned. He says it'll be back.

This is part of the charm of it. I love it because I don't think it's going to convince

any skeptics. But it's one of the few things in our world where it inspires a set of wonder and a set of awe. For those of us that struggle with our faiths, it's inspiring because it is sort of a spiritual, he calls himself Yahweh. There wasn't about gray aliens or whatever

“there's just something else. That's why I mean about why I'm more valet. His work explains all”

of this much better than the extra-trestrial hypothesis did. He's had that since 68. I think what he does best is not explain it. Yeah. There really isn't an explanation, but here's what we know. He calls it a control system, though, which is sort of like, as Diana was like, is that how is that different from God? Because he's a control system that his view is that there's a control system that's evolving human consciousness, and it will manifest different things,

or in relation to the humans over time. So he looks at the apparition, the Maria or St. Mary apparitions in Spain, and the airships of the late 19th century where people saw these things that look like, the Zeppelin's, even though they hadn't been invented yet. All of these things, he says, his view is the sort of being sort of produced in some relationship as well with our culture. That's valet's argument, and that sounds a lot like God in some ways. We say control system.

Right. What does that mean? Like, is it a higher life form that is monitoring us? Like, that's the secular version of religion for a lot of these people that are really interested in aliens. Like, that there's some advanced being that's making sure we don't fuck everything up completely. It's certainly for me. That's my interest. I mean, I, again, this anthropologist Lerman, you know, she says, you know, William James is this famous Harvard psychologist wrote a book

about the varieties of the religious experience in 1902, and he says, "Everybody wants to kind of

“be like, is it real or not real? Is this world just what we see?" And he says, "I think there's”

something more." There's not, so this very, you know, skeptic or debunker thing, which is like, "No, it's just got to be a, that thing's got to be a bird," or it's like, "Well, but it really, you haven't just, just calling it that," and as they point out, it's like, they showed up when they

wanted to. I mean, it's a pretty amazing, if it's just a coincidence, it's a really amazing one.

And so I think, for me, it's like, because I am a Christian, and it is hard to believe in an, in an all-powerful and all-good God, because he obviously allowed the Holocaust to occur, and allows terrible things to occur. But I love that, that's segment, and there's, I love there's another one I love right now. It's like a British woman in the '50s doing an interview about scene that she calls a Mexican hat UFO over her house, and the kids saw it, and she,

and everybody in the village made fun of her, and they ridiculed her, and she's like, but it's, you know, but it's, I saw it, and it was real, and it was like, it's like, those are like, or,

“those are spiritual experiences, I think. So I don't know that, like, I want the files released”

from the government. I'm also skeptical that it's going to tell us what it is, because I think at some level, we're not supposed to get more, much more information about what it is. I think it's something else is going on, or maybe it's having a positive effect. I think it's, I think one of the, sometimes we'll get really mad at UFO believers, like, skeptics get really like,

angry, like, how do they, you know, whatever they get so mad, and I'm always like, but like,

how often do you see them causing real harm or problems? I mean, we had one cult where they, you know, like a few people killed themselves, but for the most, they cut their balls off first. Yeah, it's great. So, you know, UFO, like, for those part UFO, people are ancient UFOs, are dreamy seekers, spiritual, and I think it's wrong to, I think it's lovely, and wonderful, and it reminds us of, you know, that we're small on the one hand, we're humble about our knowledge,

and there's just surrounded by mystery. I mean, you're so much of your career, and this platform has been to allow us to talk about things that are unexplained, and that, or over the explanations, don't really seem to explain it. There's something more, as William James was at, there's something more, and I think that the denial of anything more, this idea, oh, we know everything, and we know where the, I mean, we don't know anything. That's humor. It's just crazy.

But those people are silly. They're more silly than the believers, because this, this idea that like, look, if there is a, if you have a completely novel experience, like, say, if you are Commander David Fraver and you encounter this tic-tac shaped object that's hovering over something that appears to be a ship that's under the water, this thing takes off at an absolutely preposterous speed that is documented both in radar and visually and on camera, right? So they've got

in less than a second, which would require more energy than the entire United States produces

in a year in order to get an object to move that quickly. And it does that with no heat signature. Okay, if this is all true, just that alone. Now imagine you have this completely novel experience, and because I haven't had it and you haven't had it, Jamie hasn't had it. Well, it's very simple and

“easy to dismiss it. But if this happened, what do you, what, what do you expect the person to do?”

What do you expect a decorated pilot in the Navy, a guy who has a rock solid record, who is, there's nothing about him that screams that he's a coup horizontally ill. And when you talk to him, he's incredibly meticulous, very intelligent, very disciplined. His face, it looks like he had a spiritual experience. His smile on his face.

I went to the, when I was in Delhi, I went to the Jane Temple, and I went to the Hindu temple,

and I'm not Jane, I'm not Hindu. But I had a look on my face that reminded me, that sort of, that sort of like that starry eye, the look in your face where you've experienced the wonder and the awe of being alive, and we're on this planet, and we don't really understand it all, but it's beautiful, and it's okay. And I think that that's the spiritual, I mean, that's where it's like he's been touched by, I don't, you know, I'm not imposing this, but he's sort of touched by God

in some way, but touched by something, and it's not something extraordinary. Yeah.

“And the thing, look, I think the thing you read that environment, you're like that thing showed”

dominance in that environment. So in the one hand, it's showed a lot to be called a technological

world. If I lay my call a spiritual dominance, you know, so, but that's for me what's special about it,

and I think it's not going to go away, and I don't think we're going to get to the answer, I don't think, I don't think the government, how could the government, you know, I don't think they know, and even if there was some contact, I don't know if that would really tell you all the answers. Well, what I could imagine is that they have acquired, both eyewitness, video, radar, all the various sensors, data, and they've done this with multiple instances of these

things, and they are trying to assess what this is, and they have a long standing study of these things that would both be disturbing and confusing to a lot of people and disruptive to society. I'm sure you're aware of how to put off, and what happens with him during the Bush administration, where they brought him in, and they essentially told how to put up, now this is assuming how selling the truth, and I have no reason to think he's lying. They brought him in in a bunch of other

scientists, and a bunch of other thinkers, and said, I want you to create a chart on one side, list the positive aspects of disclosure, and the other side, what are the negative ramifications of disclosure? Government, religion, the finances, all the different things that can happen in the world, and the negatives outweigh the positives they decided not to disclose, but the premise that he was brought in with this was saying, we have acquired physical crafts that are not

of this world, we have biological entities that are not of this world, and we are a part of some sort of a back engineering program. We want to release this information, what would happen if we did, and their conclusion was chaos. Trump didn't seem to go through that checklist and go with the

“same answer. I don't think he got that memo, but also I think he ignores the memo from experts in”

general. Right. If he was an office, and that was the case, and they came to him, and some of like Tucker or someone that's influential to him could sit down with him and talk to him, and he thought it would gain their favor. He might just release it. I mean, it's a while, because of the one hand, it looked like it was spontaneous, but I mean, they had a Lord Trump, who's like someone that's like a trusted family member, who's like really competent, like they sent her in to

like take over the RNC and fix it and fire all the people. Like if they're, get their loyalists in there, she was out there talking saying that, you know, oh, the Trump is, I was hearing a lot of noise, but it wasn't from people that I trusted, so I didn't report anything on it, but I was hearing a lot of noise to that Trump administration was considering doing something, but you didn't know, I didn't know if it's circular reporting, but I have the Lord Trump thing was interesting, because

I don't think, I don't see her as sort of a, she's not just speculating or bullshitting, you know, she's a trusted, you know, trusted source for that. So she said that, and then Obama was asked about it, and then Trump made that announcement, so I don't know what they have planned. You know, we were pushing on the intelligence community privately to release the stuff, and it was going nowhere. The Obama thing was nuts, because the guy didn't have any follow-up questions. That was,

because I'm wild, you put it in a speed round, which is probably why he didn't know follow-up

“questions, and you think of it that way, but I mean, that's just a massive dropping of the ball.”

Well, you guys says aliens are real, how do you know, how do you know is the next question, right? It's right there. How do you know aliens are real? Well, yes, the day after then he said, oh, I just meant theoretically, and there's life in the universe. Well, why don't you ask that, so you catch them on the spot, instead of when it becomes this big viral moment, and everybody's talking about it, and then it comes up with a rational explanation for why he said that.

Yeah, I mean, and he told Obama told one of the late night hosts, I can't remember if his Kimmel or Colbert or somebody beat. He said they said something like, tell us what you know, and he said, I, you know, I can't tell you. There's things I can't tell you. So I mean, he obviously knows more than he said, but otherwise he would say there's nothing. And then Trump said that he knows more. It's very interesting, you know, I talked to Trump about it.

Yeah, he won't tell you shit. He kind of has a lot of things. Move around those of things. There's a lot of, it's very crazy. But you know, he won't tell you. And he said they weren't going to release the Epstein files, and that came out. So I just kind of go,

“you know, now I have a different, I don't know if you want to get into it, but I have a short”

different view of Epstein than I think I did. Well, before we get into that, you know, Tucker's thoughts on this whole UFO, UFO, UAP thing. He thinks they're like angels and demons

from the Bible. And he thinks that they've always been here. And, you know, I'm sure you're where

I've like the book of Enoch, the book of Enoch, which was one of the original biblical texts. It wasn't included in the canon, but just because of a few rabbis decided didn't drive with the Torah. And they found the book of Enoch along with the book of Isaiah as a part of the Dead Sea Scrolls. And when you find out that there was a biblical text that there was contemporary to books that did make it into the Old Testament, and that they talk about the

watchers who come from above and mate with humans and create this race of giant giants called the Nephilim who destroy everything and consume everything. And you're like, what the fuck is this? Like, what is this? And just stop and imagine if those rabbis hadn't excluded. Like, Wesley Hopp is great talking about the stuff. He's a real historian when it comes to, you know, really understanding the history of these biblical texts. And, you know, he's absolutely fascinated

by it. And he's like, yeah, it's kind of crazy that they just decided to not put that in the Bible. Imagine if they did. And part of when you're going to church, and they're going over the Old Testament, like, okay, this week we're going to go over the book of Enoch. And we're going to figure out who the watchers are. Like, what is that? Like, what is that story? The crazy thing that Wes Hopp told me was that the book of Isaiah that they found in the Dead Sea scroll predates the oldest version of the

book of Isaiah by more than 1,000 years. When they found it, they found out that there was a book of Isaiah that is 1,000 years older than the one they thought was the oldest one, and it is verbatim. It's verbatim from the one that's a thousand years later, which is kind of crazy. Wow. But then it's also in the same fucking caves as the book of Enoch. It's all together there in the

Dead Sea scroll. Amazing. And we've had this, we've been fed this story that sort of all of these

religions and myths from the past are all just false. Right. They're all just hallucinations. Right. They're all just lies. I don't believe that. It's really, it's really arrogant actually. Like, it's like, we've been around for, you know, humans are around for like millions of years, but the last 150 years is like, we really figured it all out. And we've figured out that all human knowledge

“before, you know, whatever, some recent time period is nonsense. Yeah, I think that's quite arrogant.”

It's very arrogant, but I all look, I'm a believer that history is far older than we think it is. And I think the more time goes on, the more that gets revealed. So when you're talking about something that's four or five thousand years old, I think really you're talking about a retelling of a far older story. And I think there's, it's very difficult when you're dealing with people that don't have an understanding of science. The written languages fairly new. It's an oral

tradition for generations before it's ever written down. So my question with all this is always like,

what were they trying to talk about? What were they trying to say? What was the original experience that someone documented in story? And then that story was relayed over and over and over again. Generation after generation until it's eventually written down and then they study it and take it literally. And then also translating it from erronec, which is the Dead Sea Scrolls ancient Hebrew,

story? Like what are they trying to document? What is this important knowledge that they want to share?

“And how screwed up with that get over the generations and generations of talking about it?”

But what ultimate truth is in there? Like I'm absolutely fascinated by the story of Jesus Christ because if you wanted to come up with a way that people would live that would absolutely be far more beneficial than just going on natural instincts and tribal behavior. And you would follow Jesus' teachings. Like I can't find a flaw in the way he tells you to live life. There's a lot of religions that involve torturing nonbelievers and raping infidels and being able

to do terrible things to the people that don't believe your religion. There's none of that in Christianity. It's all forgiveness. It's all treating your brother as your neighbor as if they're you.

Like it is a beautiful way to live life. Are you Christian?

Well I go to church. I have been for quite a while. Okay, so I've been doing it for the last three or four years. But that's not really an answer to the question. Well because I don't know.

“I think it's very interesting and I do believe that if you follow the teachings of Jesus Christ,”

you will live a better life. I really do believe that. And one of the things I talk about is like the people that I go to church with are the most fucking polite people I've ever met in my life. They're so kind and so nice and everybody lets you out of the parking lot. Everybody's like, you know, it's like the one point that it works. You know what I'm saying? Like if people are trying to find an idea, does that mean I believe people came back from the dead? Does that mean I believe

Moses, part of the Red Sea? Not really. No, it seems like that's most likely a story where people are telling it generation after generation after generation. But there's probably something happening. There's probably some truth to it. Then when you take into account some of the stories from the Old Testament, like the book of Ezekiel, which I'm absolutely fascinated by. Book of Ezekiel and his account of the wheel within a wheel and the fire flashing forth continually

and in the midst of the fire as it were gleaming metal, like what what the hell is that? Like what is that? Like what are these stories? And in the midst of this gleaming methods, the likeness of four living creatures? Like okay, they darted to and fro like the appearance of a flash of lightning. Okay, what is that? Like what are they? What were they trying to say? And what was the original experience that people documented that was so important? And it might have been a lot more similar

“to these UFO experiences. That's the point. Yeah, I think this is one of the things that Tucker”

goes back to. The the Christian story is so beautiful and so important. You know, Renee Gerard's view of of Christianity is really stopping the cycle of scapegoating. You know, scapegoating where, and I'm seeing it right now, it's part of the reason we've been pushing back against the moral panic on Epstein is that you scapegoat the thing, you know, traditionally literally wasn't good, but you scapegoat the person or whatever.

But originally was it go. It really wasn't go. Yeah, it was a go. Yeah, it really had to carry the sins of the community. Oh, you're sacrificing you. I think you would send it away to die or something. Oh, but over time he keeps going to scapegoat. Yeah. Yeah. Interesting. Yeah. And then it's a goat. But generally this is where the devil goats are everything. Goats get a bad rap. Goats are in your lobby, aren't they? Or those was your elk? No, you're a lot different. Yeah, but I mean,

so Christianity puts it into that. It says stop scapegoating. I mean, they scapegoated Jesus, really. I mean, you kind of go, the way the purpose of the scapegoating was to was for the community to unite the community and and scapegoat to put all of its sins on one thing and then kill it or get rid of it. And that was the way the community would restore unity. Christianity said, no, we're not going to do it that way. That's that's immoral. And so,

you know, he with the, you know, without sin to be the first cast of stone, Jesus wasn't saying

that prostitution was good or anything. He was saying that we should not be scapegoating, you know, you've got sins too. So don't scapegoat this person. That's a really radical moment in human history. And it really is what allowed humans to spread. It creates a universal. I mean, Christianity's the first universal, it's really universal religion. Maybe it's not the only. But it's a universal religion. It says everybody, you know, is a child of God. And it's, and it's evangelical. And once

other people to become Christian, that's very, that's different from other other religions. We're like, this is my God. I've got my own God here and we're the best and you suck and then make it very difficult to join. Yeah. And it's not to say that Christians, you know, obviously there was, you know, fighting the Muslims and there's some interesting revisionism there. But it's a beautiful

listen to the teachings of Jesus Christ, they're not following his teachings. So it's like,

that's just human behavior that they have tagged on to Christianity. So when people say Christianity is responsible for horrible atrocities, I say no, I say humans are because if it was actually Christianity, you would be following the teachings of Christ and there would be none of those things.

“I mean, antisemitism is not Christian. Right. So true Christianity is not that. So I think it's”

lovely and I hope there's a revival of some of it. I'm not sure there is. I think there is more now than before. There's a lot of young people that are getting into Christianity. I think it's good to, I think it's also, I mean, essentially with the, we're having a UFO thing, it's an awareness that there's a higher power. So one can sort of say, look, the UFO thing. It's not the same as Christianity,

whatever. But this awareness that like we're not, like there's something else going on. There's

something more. There's something higher than us than that. We should be humble in front of, in the face of this gigantic mystery. I think that puts us in a better mentality. It certainly does. And if anything, if he's not the son of God, if this was an actual historical figure, what an insanely wise human being who didn't have these thoughts that are inherent to all of us of vengeance and lust and greed, has none of these? So radical also, you've heard it said before that

“you should love your friends and hate your enemies. I say to you, you should love your enemies.”

I mean, that's just like the hardest. I'm not there. I think very few people are there. But it's certainly the right aspirations. Yes. Yeah, it's the right aspiration. And Tucker thinks that this whole UFO thing is somehow connected to the spiritual realm and that we're, well, because we've been told for so long that there isn't a spiritual realm. That spiritual realm is just a mental illness. Right. You know, it's like the Yahweh thing, he's like,

the problem of the people that tell you that are all mentally ill. They're all very unhappy. Like asus, like secular, like hardcore atheists are some of the most unhappy to press people, I know. I don't see like incredibly happy unless they do a lot of mushrooms. And those people tend to not be atheists anymore. That's the one weird thing. People that have had like intense

breakthrough psychedelic experiences. One of the first things to go, I mean, maybe there is a God,

like maybe maybe I don't know what I'm talking about because if I just experienced that and that's a real thing that you could have while alive on earth where you are confronted with divine wisdom and love and some weird strange form. And when there's a lot of people that believe that that's the source of a lot of religious experiences. And instead of alienating and making those things illegal, we should study them and make them a part of the religious experience because it's

probably what they were originally. Well, that's right. And so now that people are having spiritual experiences with UFOs, it's wonderful. And they should talk about them and kindle them. I think the thing about psychedelics that's so interesting is that my experience with them was that you become, you don't become so attached to your ideas and your beliefs. And so which is a big problem in our society is people that get too attached to their, their egos get attached to their

beliefs as opposed to like, oh, I thought that. I mean, I've made, I've made my whole career out of being wrong about things and then correcting them. But I think it, it's hard because that you do, it's really great quality. It's, oh, thank you. It's a very, but it's still, I hate it. I hate being wrong. And it's totally natural to hate it. But I do think like having a practice that makes you go, you are not your beliefs. There's something that you have an existence separate from,

right, the things that you wrote on your blog or your own ex. And don't be so attached to them. Right. Don't make them your identity. Yeah. And that it's, it's actually, there's something really quite, there's an awful part of when you feel like you've got something wrong. But then there's another part where you're like, oh, it feels good to get it right. And you feel clean. And that's like that's

“which, that's what we should be going for. But it does require for me being humble about my limitations”

before some higher power is really an important place to begin. Because if you think there's no higher power or the, the other one is like souls. We don't talk about souls enough. A new friend of mine at the university was talking about how important it is to really, to care for your soul and to care about other people's souls. That's one of the things that Christianity is so good at. The you have something divine inside of you connected to something divine outside of you and that your behavior is

effected, it's treatment. And when you tell people that you're just, you know, a meet suit and you're just warm food. And your life doesn't matter. And that it's all just, you know, random and pointless. That's a terrible story. It makes people feel terrible. But when you kind of go know you, there's one of the most beautiful, I loved all the Charlie Kirk videos that went out after his death

there doing the only fans. Did you see that one? And they're just scribing, they're trying to shock him and saying just really kind of crude things about their sexuality and how it, like the sex they have,

“it doesn't matter to them. And he was like, I just don't believe that I think you have a soul.”

I think God has a purpose for you. What a much lovelier way to engage somebody. And it wasn't a, you didn't feel like he was morally condemning them. Right. He was actually saying God loves you. And so for me, Christianity brings, if that is the part of Christianity, I think, is so special. But it is hard. I mean, one of the things that the anthropologists that I really need to just talking about, she says, it's, it's, the more the God, the more different the God is from humans,

the harder it is to believe in them. And so people like Christians, in particular,

she would talk about their, even evangelical ones are always complaining about not believing enough

and not having enough faith because it is so hard because you have the Holocaust prom, the prom of evil. Why if the God is all powerful and all good is he allowed in the Holocaust? Why do you love Hiroshima? Why, you know, these terrible things. And part of the answer for Christians has been, well, because he wants us to exercise free will, and to be in touch with our better sides, and to realize our potential as, as moral, moral humans and moral souls. And that's a, that's a

pretty good answer. But it is, I, if I'm, I was glad to hear that her say that people struggle with it, because I certainly do as well. Well, I, I mean, I think everyone struggles with it. I'm just, I'm really fascinated by it. I'm fascinated by it because when I go to church and I listen to

them talk about the various passages in the Bible, my mindset is always like, what was the real

experience? Like, what are we missing out of these tales? What are we missing out of these recounting of these experiences? What, what happened? I don't think it was nothing. I really don't. I mean, there's something real to it. And, and it, again, it works. That's the, that's the main one for me. It's like, you want to live a better life? Like, if you live as a Christian, you'll have a better life. You'll have a more love-filled, more wonderful life. That's real. And this idea that,

oh, it's fairy tales. Is it, if it's a method for life that gives you a more rich and loving and peaceful life? Isn't that better for everybody? Isn't that a real thing? That's a real thing. It's, there's no way you can know whether or not any of the stories in the Bible happened exactly

“as described. We can't know. So you have to have this leap of faith to lead it. You know,”

when it gets weird, like Jesus comes back on a white horse like, hey, slow down, you know, like revelations, spoke of revelations is weird. But it's what's really weird. Some of these people think that what's going on in Iran is to light the fire to bring to have Jesus return, to light the signal fire. Like, did you hear those recursions by that, uh, these non-commissioned officers that went into these briefings, combat briefings? Oh, no.

Yeah, okay. There's one of them because I saved it because it's so cookie that I read it and I was like, wait, what the fuck did they say? Because it's, it's so crazy. That tend to be anti, my, my knee jerk is anti-apocalyptic because I don't see apocalyptic movements doing a lot of good in the world. So yeah, that's probably better off. Most of, I think a lot of Christians have ignored the book of revelations. Um, I, yeah, I think focusing too heavily on that particular

book is probably leads to bad alcohol. Okay. So this was the story that I read. This was in Yahoo, I can also in this to you, Jeremy, so you can get this, uh, so we could put this up on the board. Did you find the thing? Okay. Here are just a tell our troops that this was all part of God. Now, this is like I would go, this is a combat readiness briefing. Or just to tell our troops, this is all part of God's plan. And he specifically referenced numerous citations of the book of

revelations referring to Armageddon and the imminent return of Jesus Christ. He said that President Trump's been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to earth. And they said that the guy was saying this had a giant smile on his face which made it all the weirder like like see if you could find that in there. Does it say that? No, it's not in that particular article. Oh, this is just someone familiar. Something someone

complained about. Oh, yeah, a bunch of people can find it. There's actually like a lawsuit. Yeah, it really was freedom law. You risk like the whole self of feeling prophecy with that one.

It's well, it's all. What are you? Wait a second. What are you doing? What machines,

what weapons do you control? Uh, yeah, there's a lot of fucking religious coos. So it's not just and also that is not how Jesus Christ would handle it. Let's go bomb me,

“Ron, that's how Jesus is going to come back. Like, do you think you would tell you that's the right way to do it?”

Like, how do you interpret that? Do you interpret that? Jesus, Jesus, Jesus. Like, how did you interpret that in the text? Okay, uh, before we, so we're, we're deep into this show. So the

Yeah, I've changed. I think it's been a bunch of times with the files.

“I will say I think I did do a piece. Well, I do think that the shrimp is a code word for, for”

young women. I'm pretty sure about that. What do you think pizza's a code word word? Well, that was okay. So then I did, I had, I had, I had those articles about code words and the absteen files. And I did the shrimps. And then I had some stuff about pizza and grape juice in there about grape soda. And my co-author Alex was like, dude, you can't go, if you can't go full pizza gate. You know, like, you got to, you got to, like, so we kept it out. And then the times mentioned the pizza thing. So I wrote some on

X about it. But I didn't take it down because I was like, I don't really know this one. I mean, what we were, we were to me out of the pizza one was where his neurologist was like, take your

erection dysfunction pills. And then we'll go out and get pizza in grape soda. And I was like,

that is creepy, you know, as hell. Yeah. So, but I, I don't, the shrimp one, I'm like 95% I mean, young women because you just see how they talk about it. And I think I proved it in my piece. There's other ones like who were like the jerky is like cannibalism and whatever. It's like, well, it didn't help that the restaurant owner was like, the restaurant's name was like

“cannibalism. Yeah. But I'm skeptical that that's what that was. So, well, you would be”

skeptical unless you a part of some of these fucking bizarre satanic rituals. And then you would go, oh my god, it's real. Like, there are, look, people have sacrifice people, right? Can we agree to that in, in the industry? Yeah, sure. Of course. And there have been satanic rituals throughout history. Can we agree to that? Sure. Okay. So, there has been cannibalism in history. We agree to that. Okay. Unfortunately, a lot, actually, there was a lot. Yeah.

Why wouldn't we think they're talking about that? We don't want to believe it, right? Is that what it is? No, we don't want to believe that these people, these multi-millionaires and billionaires that go to this island and engage in all this crazy shit, aren't doing something like child sacrifice or cannibalism? Well, let's start with the, let's start with the thing that I think a lot of us thought it was, which is that it was an

“intelligence community sex blackmail operation. That's what made it for me a story. I mean, a creepy guy”

doing creepy things. There's just, that's, we call that a dog-wise man story. You know, what makes it a man-by-dog story is like, is that you kind of go, wow, it's like massage and CIA running a honeypot. I mean, that's the premise of Whitley Webb's two-volume book, one nation under blackmail. But when you look at it, like, we don't see that. We see, we see one case where Epstein emails himself, something that sounds like it's in the voice of the Bill Gates

Science Advisor Boris Carson, I believe, is the name. And in it, they talk about, oh, you know, it's the famous email where he says, oh, you know, I got STDs. It says, you got STDs from Russian hookers or from Russian women, and then you try to slip antibiotics, or you want to meet a slip antibiotics, and will end his drink, and will end it like, yeah, asked her about it was awful.

It doesn't, like, that's not, it's weird what that is. So first of all, it's not a clear word. We're

just talking about emails. Right. Right. So who knows what was said, just from the email, we know that there are at least implies that he's got dirt on people, and that he is exercising is doing something with this dirt that he has on Epstein or on Bill Gates or other. So we're very limited in the amount of data that we possess, right? Because we just have emails between him and other people. Inside those emails, we find a lot of creepy shit. We find that one

description where he was talking to this woman, where she said, I'm doing a, um, doing investigating a story about an island where they bring children for sex, and he goes, she almost had a heart attack when I told her that person is me. Well, he was talking about the rumors and gossip about him, but he wasn't saying that he's bringing children to his island for sex. But that is what he said. But if you look at them, they're talking about me. No, no, no. She said, I'm doing a story

guy who brings children to his island for sex. And he says, she almost had a heart attack when I told her that person is me. The person that I might have been charitable. I'm not, well, you're being charitable because that's not what the text says. With the text says is someone's bringing children to an island, I told her that person was me. He didn't say, I told her that's a bullshit rumor. I let her know that's not true. But that's very much in his style. I mean,

look, look, let's back up to the intelligence. But wait a minute, why would you, why would you dismiss, we can pull it up and look at it. I just think, um, I think what we see from the files, and I think Mike Benz has sort of pointed out the ways in which Epstein might have been a contractor,

any evidence that he was doing much for the intelligence community, if at all. But you're only

getting emails and only half of the emails, right? So there's only three million emails that

have been released. There's another three million that the FBI possesses that they're not really sent, right? 100% is possible. So we're making something there. Why would you draw any conclusions based on only 50% of the data? And then if there is 50% of the data that hasn't been released, why is that way worse? Because this stuff is fucking nuts. Like this, this is nuts. Like, take your erection pill so we can go get grape soda. Okay. What? And it's weird. This lady is

investigating a place where they an island where they bring children for sex. I told her it was me. What? Well, we should put that one up. I want to look at that one. Okay. I mean, here you're talking

“about, um, you're talking about. So first of all, I think the picture is of a guy that is fully”

in charge of his life. And he's doing, he's like, he's, like, amazing at getting people to love him and care about him. People call him as their best friend. In Florida, clearly, he was abusing girls and was, you know, busted for that. I think he's really because he's a pervert. I don't think I didn't see, I don't see blackmail coming out of that. And then you get to later. And you've got, okay, you've got the Bill Gates thing, which doesn't even appear to be from Epstein. It appears to be

for Boris. And remember, Boris, the science advisor wanted Gates to pay for, like, a bigger apartment for him in New York. It appeared to be part of him threatening Gates to get something for that Boris wanted. So maybe Epstein was advising him on it. But I mean, to have a, the other thing I'm struck by these emails, Joe, is that there are so many different attorneys, people of the FBI, people in the Eastern District, the Southern District, the Florida Southern District, they would all have to be

in on it. And I'm skeptical because, why would I have to be in on it? Well, because they would, they're in these, I mean, they're reviewing the information, they're trying to bring, you know,

they're trying to bring action against them. We're like, what depends on who are the powerful

people that are implicated and what kind of influence they have over what gets released and what doesn't get released. Clearly, names were redacted that are powerful people that are not victims. So that shows you, right there, that there's some influence. But there's a reason to do that. Why? Because they're not guilty. Okay. What about the one where the guy says, where Epstein says,

“I like the torture video. So why do you do it? Do you think that someone did find the torture?”

Why would you redact the name of the person who sent you a torture video if you're not trying to protect a powerful person? Yeah. That's the sultan. Is that right? Okay. But that was someone had to just figure that out. I mean, the redactions are so obvious. That's, no, no, that's evidence that you're trying to protect a powerful person. Well, but they didn't, though, in a lot of cases. But they did right there. Yeah. I mean, the redactions, they were making them. I mean,

they was like, they were trying to say that a powerful people's name. Yeah. But I mean,

I mean, look at, like, we're in the midst, I mean, literally the people that are being canceled for this. Like Peter Tia, these people are like victims of, of, were in the middle of a complete, you know, you know, moral panic. I mean, we're now, it's like me to version two. I mean, people are having to leave boards. I mean, look, these are people I don't like. I'll just be honest, like if part of me hesitate because I don't like Larry Summers. I don't like Bill Gates. I don't care

about Sarah Ferguson. You know, I didn't say anything. Then they came for Peter Tia. You know, it's a little bit like, like, Peter Tia, like, he didn't do anything wrong. And he just, like, lost his job with CBS and, you know, he's sort of now they're under this cloud and people go, oh, but he was in the hospital and his wife was, or he was with, obviously his wife is in the house. We don't, like, what are we doing here? Like, we're getting involved in Peter Tia's, like,

personal life. And so, but he has to get fired for that. I mean, it's gone way too far. Sarah Ferguson had a step down even though, you know, she said, I mean, like, these people, I don't like them. Like, these are not people I agree with or think they're behaviors. But I don't see, so they're not guilty of crying. I don't see. They're not, yeah, they're not, like, they were like, they were all making a big deal out of, like, well, so first of all,

let me just say, I'm glad they released the file. Tighten that thing, Doug. I think they keep moving that way. Let's go around. Every time we do it at bumps, that's what you got to do. I think, like, I think like, you know, they, I mean, I'm glad the files were released. There was definitely problems with the redactions. There was also a case where the members of

Congress were trying to get stuff redacted. Names got redacted of people that, like, I know in one case, there were people that were getting licenses for guns that had nothing to do with absteen on a list. In another case, other people's names were revealed who were not, you know,

“guilty of anything. So that's why you, you protect those people. I think we, you go,”

everybody, the logic right now is that anybody who had any interaction with absteen had to

Okay, but a lot of these people were hanging out with them and doing business with them after he was arrested. So this is all. Okay. So then, so then, you know, it was very public.

“Okay. Okay. So then, so then, what is our view of people that do the crime and serve the time?”

I mean, the left, the left you have been stopped by there. He didn't serve any time. Do you serve, he served a year? Okay. He did not go to jail for a year. You know, he didn't house arrest. Yes. It was a very sweetheart deal. And the prosecut, was it the prosecuting attorney or whoever it was, was told that he was intelligence. And this is why they were given one of the stores. That was a, that was a, by the way, that's, I looked into that. Yeah. Yeah, that we looked into that one.

And that was, I'm heard second hand. So we don't even, that wasn't even heard from a cost to

directly. Someone said that they heard a cost to say that they told the Vicky Ward and I believe her source is anonymous. Yeah. So that's a week. And, you know, like, I mean, when Mike Benz was in here, and Mike has done a deep dive. This he sort of like, look, at best, you get absteen tied up with intelligence with the Iran conscious stuff. Right. But he wasn't, I mean, there's two things to see here that, with his relationship with the intelligence community, he was at best a contractor

financier, which means he's not an important player in deciding covert clientists and operations. It was the, it's, you know, the head of state said he killed cold fusion. I mean, he said, he, he killed ponds. His, his work on cold fusion. I mean, I don't know, does it. Did he? I mean, I, cold fusion. They keep doing it. Right. They keep doing it. I haven't done it yet. Well, car, I know Carl paid the founder, the brother of, but he stated that

he killed cold fusion research because he cut off funding for it. Yeah. He, but there was, I mean,

“manipulated people. I don't know that. Well, I mean, he say, killed it. Why would he kill it?”

Because it didn't work. Or maybe it did work, and it's problematic that it does work, because it kills all these people that all this all other money and various energy modalities. I just, I mean, I go fusion is like a whole, I mean, the idea that we have a secret that we've secretly tapped cold fusion and are hiding it for some reason. Or that he was on the way to breaking through to cold fusion, and then they killed all of his research. Or, but why? You don't think that

could be done because there's so many people that have money in all these other types of energy. I just don't buy that you could. First of all, that technology is super difficult to get nuclear

vision was this enormous undertaking. Huge numbers of people that the fusion stuff was always,

the cold fusion stuff is really fringe. I mean, it was like, we're going to be in the lab and doing, but are you're not a physicist or how do you know that? Well, I mean, I interview a lot of physicists and talk about it. I mean, the big fusion projects are incredibly difficult. They keep announcing advances on them. They can't get them. Cold fusion is not even considered a mainstream fusion project. So to assume that there's some secret, and I just think this is why

I have a problem with the whole reverse engineering thing, because I just kind of go, you'd have to have so many people working on it and covering up for such a long time. I don't know how you get away with that. Well, what if he was on the verge of a breakthrough, but this guy steps in and stops funding and put some leverage on the university. Clearly, he had dirt on a bunch of people that were at high levels of many universities. That's why a bunch of these guys had to step down.

“Didn't the head of Harvard step down? I think it's exaggerated. Didn't the head of Harvard step down?”

Because of him? Wasn't there a connection between Jeffrey Epstein? Well, it mean Larry Summers, he had to step down, because he made those remarks about women, as president, and then he just had to step down as professor. I say this genuinely, someone that is not Larry Summers fan, I don't think, I think it's ugly, what he did. It's terrible. He was trying to get advice from Larry Summers about how to bed a Chinese economist, and they were gross, and they're emails, and it's terrible.

But I don't think that you lose a job at Harvard over that. I don't think that Peter T. He should lose his job at CBS over that. We're going to be too interested in that. I see what you're saying. But what I'm saying is clearly he had influence over some very

high and powerful people. He also exaggerated his influence. He took a lot of credit for Santa Fe

Institute, which was a lot of other people. He's really interesting and smart. He gave a thing to band and talking to band and about it. That was really interesting. But he was also Steve Pinker, talked about him as a Kabitser, like a kind of a bullshitter, and he was like, we also saw on the files and he really overlooked. We saw how he made his money. He needed to get the Roths. He needed to get a deal with the Department of Justice for his client, Ariana de Roths

Child. He hires Katherine Rumler, who was Obama's White House Chief Council, and she goes and makes a deal at the Department of Justice, $45 million for the Roths Childs, $10 million for Katherine Rumler, $25 million for Jeffrey Epstein. Everyone's like, where did his money come from? Doing deals like that. You realize, I mean, one of these succession actually had a little subplot about it. There's a few people in the world that do these crazy high-level deals,

some tiny percentage. Epstein was operating. I think the thing we didn't realize is that when

you read the files, is the levels of which Epstein was operating. His social and emotional intelligence is just off the charts, which is often rare among somebody that's that good analytically, someone that really understands investments in the economy to be. He was a master manipulator, so I don't think it's fair to say to people you had an association with him after he's convicted of this crime. Rich guys, look, we have a totally separate system of justice

for rich people. I think we've known that for a really long time. It's terrible. I condemn it.

“We should find solutions to it. That's what Epstein used to get out of it. I don't see any evidence”

that intelligence helped him. We got other problems. The victims Virginia Jafri. She claimed that she had sex with Dershowitz. She then goes, oh, I was wrong about that. I mean, there's a lot of those victim testimonials that are untrustworthy. You get yourself in a situation where you start to put some of them probably prostitute. Yeah. That's the other one. We found a 14-year-old girl girl who's been trafficked on the streets. She turned 15. The process of us reporting on it. We're

covering these PIs. They get the police involved. The police go get her. She's orphaned. She goes and backs and live with her aunt. She's back on the street, voluntarily back on the street. Nobody wants to talk about it. It's like you go rescue people and they're in that world. So these situations are much more complex than I think the final thing on Epstein that kind of made me question is that

“I like a lot of other people how to assume that someone murdered him. But you start looking at the”

evidence for that. Look, maybe they're more will come out. And even this last round last few days or some new things that people point to. But they actually are not actually evidence of it. They said, you know, Epstein's brother's attorney or Epstein's brother's examiner said that that he broke his high-oed bone and the high-oed bone is not usually broken. And in hangings, only in strangulations actually is broken and hangings, particularly for older people. Broken and three places.

Yeah. And that's like, and it's low on his neck. Yeah. And that happens. Also, the lady who is the guard deposited money into her, I saw that. And that isn't, what does that mean? Okay. Well, there was also Googled his name before he's got it. All that's totally okay. But it's like, let me say why are you dismissing? I don't understand why you're dismissing this because if you're going to pissing it, I'm saying, well, hold on, you are. But hold on, you are because if you do

have a guard and also in this guard acquires several payments, she made several deposits. One of them was $5,000, just ten days before he died. And then the cameras are cut. Okay. And then they

mysteriously don't pay attention to the cell of one of the most important defendants of any case,

any gigantic public case involving enormously famous public figures. And then this guy hangs himself boys on suicide. Now remember, he tried to commit suicide. I understand why you're not letting me finish on suicide because that alone is weird. That alone is weird that the cameras are cut, that there's no video of it. The whole thing is weird. You don't think it's weird? Well, I don't think it's weird that this guy that he just finds way to hang himself in this cage. I thought I had that same story.

I was like the cameras are cut. The security guards are asleep. All those things are true. All those things are true. It's also true that the cameras went out a long time before that night, it didn't just go out that night before. Security guards fall asleep at night all the time.

“He attempted suicide. I believe 18 days before. 18 days before he said that his roommate tried to kill him.”

Did you know that? Do you know his roommate was a cop that had killed four people in contract killings? His cop roommate, his cellmate, was a murderer. He was a guy who was a drug dealing cop who had killed four people in contract killings. And that was his fucking jail me and 18 days before he said that guy tried to kill him. But he said that's he's there. Look at that guy. That is his fucking cellmate. Why would you put a guy who's one of the most high-profile defendants in any case

ever in a cell with a hired killer who's a giant gorilla like this huge fucking jacked Italian guy. But he wasn't in the cell with him that night. He was a guy who 18 days before Epstein said tried to kill him. But Epstein tried to kill himself. I don't think there's any doubt about that, right?

I don't know if there's, I don't, I've never seen him say it, but I do know that he said that guy

tried to kill him and they found him unresponsive 18 days before. He said that guy tried to kill him. And couldn't even lie about that. I was trying to get money. Couldn't even lie about that. Video outside

about that? He's in jail because he doesn't want to die. He's already saying this guy's trying

to extort him. He's already saying this guy's trying to get money from him. And this guy is a

“known killer. He's killed four people in contract killings. How did you not know about that?”

I will say it's possible. How did you not know about that? I did know about that. You knew about the guy being a contract killings. I knew I knew that story, but I mean, he didn't have a soulmate at the night of his, of his death, right? He, that was one of the mistakes they made is that because he was on suicide watch, he was supposed to have a soulmate, didn't have a soulmate. I think that looked, I know, but 18 days before he did have a soulmate, 18 days before he said that guy tried to

kill him. But 18 days before he tried to commit suicide. That's my understanding. I don't know if that's true, though. I don't know if that's true. I don't know why they would put him in jail with a contract killer. Well, I mean, how many, who's in that jail? Aren't the people in that jail pretty rough? His cellmate is a contract killer. Why would he be in a cell with a cop who's a contract killer? I mean, aren't there a lot of the night Jeffrey Epstein claimed to sell May tried to kill him.

New documents reveal Jeffrey Epstein claimed. His cellmate tried to kill him in an incident before his death. Yeah, but we don't, okay, but we don't know if that's true. Okay. Yeah. Why are you dismissing it? I'm not dismissing it, Joe, look, you may be, but if you look at the evidence, we're going to dismiss it. No, I'm saying I was confident. It was a homicide and now I know that we will wear of this. Yeah, of course. All that's your way that he tried to kill us. Of course. You wear that he said that.

Well, how can we never brought it up before? You seem shocked when I brought it up.

Well, because, because my understanding is that it was a suicide attempt 18 days ago. Okay. But if he said this guy tried to kill him 18 days before, why didn't you take that into consideration? No, it is. I mean, I'm just saying that was more like, no, I just don't seem like you took it into consideration. No, I mean, you're looking to dismiss it. I didn't know. I, my view earlier was that it was a homicide because the highway bone doesn't break when you have hangings. He said you didn't want to commit suicide.

The video went out. The security guards are asleep. I mean, this was a, there was a huge investigation of this by the inspector general. So the number of people that would have had to been involved in this conspiracy and cover up is very large. And it's a large number of people who are in this job for to be due gooders. And so I'm very, I mean, that's, look, maybe they're okay. So maybe there was some evidence of not in the job to be due. Oh, yeah, they are. Sometimes they're in the job to be due gooders.

Sometimes they're influenced by very powerful figures that want a particular result.

Does that not happen? But we underestimate it. Does that not happen in the real world? It does, right? And wouldn't you imagine if you're dealing with multiple billionaires that may be compromised by the evidence that this guy's going to relay in a trial that that would be one of the times that they would want to exert that kind of influence? It's possible. And like, in our piece, we wrote, it's possible. But I think at this point, we don't know. I don't think we have the evidence

either way. And, and that's for me. That's the change. I went from, I think it was a homicide to now. I don't know. I didn't understand that he committed suicide 18 days before. No, no, no. He didn't commit suicide. We should check that we should check. He should sell mate tried to kill him 18 days before.

“That's what he said, right? They found him unresponsive. He said, my sell mate tried to kill me.”

Yeah, but how do we know that? Why would we think that? Okay. And then was it reported that it was an attempted suicide to try to dismiss the fact that his sell mate was trying to kill him? Because they wanted his sell mate to kill him. We don't know. But you can't dismiss that. This psychologist thought he was suicidal. They, you know, I think, miners, he could have lied about the room. He didn't want to have a roommate. That's like why, and they didn't have a roommate.

I didn't have a roommate who was a fucking contract killer. Well, it was a sociopathic cop who killed four guys. But if you're a, if you're a contract killer, and you're in Epstein's cell, why would you want Epstein to die in yourself? Because you want to kill him because people are going to give you like extra cigarettes at the commissar. Do we have any evidence? Who's fucking knows? No, but who fucking knows? We don't know. Is it guy who already kills people? And he's in jail forever.

He's going to be in jail forever. So for that guy, you say, would you kill a guy for me? Like that it's not even much of a stretch. It's not much of a stretch that Epstein would have killed himself. It's not much of a stretch that that guy killed him either. If he's telling the truth, that there was a report 18 days before that that guy tried to kill him. We just don't know.

“I mean, that's what we certainly don't know. But I don't understand why you would want to make the”

conclusion that he tried to kill himself. It's not the, and then this guy who's a contract killer was not actually trying to kill him. When he said he was 18 days before. Well, Joe, I mean, I don't, please don't miss represent. I'm saying I don't know. And that the change for me is going from really looking like a homicide to really not knowing, because there's some evidence that I had not considered before that. Right. You know, the guy who did the autopsy was the guy from that autopsy

the one his brother authorized because he didn't think he had an autopsy. He was a medical exam. He's

also famous for, he's also paid. Psych conducted a post suicide watch report, Epstein denied suicideality and stated I have no interest in killing myself. And that it would be crazy to take his life, although he was depressed and unhappy about his current legal situation. He was told he will remain on psychological observation in the near term. He said, look, and he's even there. He says, he says he didn't recall. He got the marks on his neck. So he didn't blame that on. But no,

no, that's, that's here. But the other details from the other report said that he complained that the guy tried to kill himself. That the, his cellmate rather tried to kill him. Can you go back? Okay, we can find that again. But I don't think, but Joe, I think the, I don't think that you've got it. Okay, I don't think you've got it. I don't think you've got the, I don't think you've, I don't think we've

nailed the, the case that it was a homicide at all. Well, I'm not saying that I know. Yeah.

But I'm saying, okay, so then we agree. We don't know. Yes, but you're dismissing a much major factors of him. I'm not dismissing a cell with a contract killer. Him saying 18 days before the guy tried to kill him. Then finding one responsive that someone tried to strangle him 18 days before. Yeah, but I mean, there's just, you can make a case either way. Is my point. You can make the case that he was, he was murdered. He was murdered. He can't, but at a certain point in time when enough

circumstantial evidence that's fucking weird. Like the cameras being down the guards being asleep. But the cameras were down, I think, I don't want to, don't call me an exactly, but they weren't down like that day before or something. They were down for a while before. And the security guards fall asleep all the time. What did you find about the roommate trying to kill him?

I mean, this is the refist. It's like they're reported. I was trying to find his, but this is

this uh, report right here. He's found in the fetal position playing on the floor snoring. Website told officers that taglyony cellmate had tried to kill him and that had been harassing him. Taglyony claimed he had been asleep and woke up to see EBS team with a string around his neck. Right. Does that make fucking sense? Well, yeah, actually, but Joe, just to send you a gun and try to kill him. And if EBS team, but so, and the result of this is that EBS team doesn't have a cellmate, right?

“So EBS team doesn't want to have a, if you want to kill yourself, you don't want to”

sell mate. So if you interpret the same guy, you can interpret the same amount of fact. If you want to go God of God to go back and finish the job, you shut the cameras off and you open the cell and you let this guy kill him. But that's what the cameras off when they shut the cameras off, though. Who doesn't matter. There's no video that's there's been edited. The one video they show of the outside of the cell, a minute's missing from it. There's a lot of weird shit to it, man.

I agree, but it's not the where you should arrive on. In my view where the facts lead you, is that we don't know. And so that's, well, that's it doesn't say then, just saying that's safe. Well, no, but it is kind of fucking weird that he's in his cell with a contract killer. Kind of fucking weird that he made a complaint that the contract killer tried to kill him 18 days before. Not if you're trying to get it. Did they remove that guy from his cell? Is that what happens?

He did. Yeah, he's by himself, obviously, the 90 kill himself, or it was killed. Or was killed. And find the, did you find the email where he's talking about the lady on the island, was she saying that we brought children to an, that someone brought children to an island? Remember, he's faced with life in prison. He loved his decadent, he didn't stick life. There's plenty of motivations from to kill himself rather than live in prison the rest of his life.

“Right. And remember, and like I think it was like a day or two before he lost his bail appeal.”

So he got to get on bail. He didn't get on bail. He wasn't going to be stuck there. The, the psychologist didn't believe him. She thought he was suicidal. And, and so that, the art, so one way you interpreted is that they messed up. They, they did a bad job. They, they should have, they should have known that he was suicidal. And they should have had a roommate there. They, the guards should not have fallen asleep. They should have fixed the video camera.

I was against that, you know, such a high profile defendant. And you're not watching them. Look, a fucking hawk. I would imagine a guy like that would be in protective custody with, you know, no fucking shoelaces, no, no way to hang himself. I think you overestimate our prison system. I would think that you would do your very best in this case to make sure that this guy is watched. They didn't, they bring him to jail. I mean, they didn't. They, they should have had a

roommate in a cell and they didn't. Well, they put him in a fucking sound with a killer. So it seems a little bit more than that. But that you, when you said that way, you make it sound like the killer was in the cell the night he was killed. I make it sound like this killer was in the cell with him when

“he said the killer tried to kill him. Right. But, or he, that's how he killed him. It's not a little weird.”

Why didn't the guy do it then? Why didn't it work? Well, he probably choked him unconscious and thought he was dead and he survived. They found him unresponsive. Or he tried to kill himself. And then when they

It's possible. Yeah. So find that email where he says that it's him. I'm trying to.

I don't have access to the files right now that the thing I was using is going. Yeah. It's gone. Ian Carroll's app was really good. And it is taking a downbook as they're making a public.

“That was only in the game. Jamie, Jamie, I was thinking through that too and that's how I got to tell”

me if that tabs open. You guys have moved around. So if you kind of go. So for me, if I go, if I go, we don't know if it was a homicide or suicide. The intelligence community work was appears to be of a long time ago and he was a contractor. We don't have any other evidence of a sex blackmail operation other than that email. Now, there is one of the thing that I thought was one for the theory that he's a blackmailer is that we have emails of him putting cameras and

clean Xboxes. Hidden cameras and clean Xboxes with motion detectors. Was that in order to

engage in a blackmail operation? Yeah. Or was it just a blackmail to blackmail people? Okay. Your friend told me about the projects he's doing researching a really bad guy gets children for sex sent to his island. She almost fainted when I told her that person is me. That seems pretty clear. I think, no, no, I think he's saying that she's writing a story. It was about him, but I don't think he's admitting that he's bringing children to his island

for sex. I don't know about you, but if I was sending an email and I was talking about someone researching someone who's sending children to an island for sex, I would also include that I

“let her know that that was bullshit. Well, she ends up coming in and meeting with them, right?”

You've seen the follow-up to this? No. So she ends up coming to meeting with her and I don't know if you like, give us her money or something or funds her, but it's like, yeah, I mean, well, look, without justifying, I mean, I think that after 2008, there's not, I don't think there's any evidence, and I could be wrong. There's not a lot of evidence that anybody under age came to, you know, that Epstein abused anybody under 18. And I'm not defending, abusing women over 18,

but that did seem like a pretty big change. Epstein associate found dead in Paris, prison, so after he said he was going to flip. Ah, shocker. Weird, maybe he got sad too. Well, maybe he's one of the co-conspirators. I mean, people kill themselves a lot. You know, psychopaths also kill themselves a lot. Also, people get people killed because they're going to flip. It's possible, and it's just, we would just need evidence for it. Yeah. So this is really,

“if you're going to kill somebody, you should probably make it so that there's not a lot of evidence,”

right? Yeah. How did you find it dead? Did he kill himself? He hung on a cell. Yeah. He'll have a lot of sheets in there, hung himself. Hang himself. Yeah. How are we going to order it? So then it's like, they should make the sheets out of the theory would be what that bill gates hired a contract holder to say that, or who did it then? Who knows? Yeah. Well, who knows what, who knew what about what and when? But I don't think it's the intelligence community because we're

not seen. I just, we're not, I mean, Mike came in here and you guys talked for a long time and Mike's not suggesting, well, there's no evidence that it was. I mean, we don't have like clear cut. He did this and they killed these guys because of that. Right. Don't have that. Right. Yeah. So, I mean, but we also don't have 3 million files. We also, like, the things that we don't, he doesn't need blackmail to make money. Well, he also doesn't need blackmail in order to be

able to get people to do things and influence them. And if you have video of people fucking people and doing things that are not supposed to be doing and you're giving them drugs and you got them on this island for these wild parties, they're more inclined to do things that would do stuff for you. I mean, it's possible. I mean, I'll tell you. I mean, FBI confiscated a lot of films and videos.

They had that. I was always very suspicious of that. The fact that he's time at hidden cameras

and missionaries is very bad. Well, that was the narrative before that there was thousands of arrows, hours rather of horrible videos. Yeah. Right. So it's possible that there was, now I don't know that I would be visitor describe a bathroom reminiscent of James Bond movies hidden beneath the stairway lined with lead to provide shelter from attack and supplied with close circuit television screens and a telephone. Both concealed and a cabinet behind the sink wrote the times the townhouse

now reportedly owned by wexners, even more mysterious protégé Jeffrey Epstein. So yeah. So this is even before his arrest. Yeah. And also the other part of the thing with this, remember when Jeff Bezos was blackmailed and he was just like, yes, he was like, I'm just going to, well, that was just love letters to enlarge his interest. They were pretty racy. Yeah. But I mean, it was still, it was private, personal things where he was sending him to a woman he loved. It shows the risks

brother. Yeah. Right. So, but Epstein, I mean, in other words, if you use it, like if you actually like use your blackmail, I think it's very hard then to maintain your reputation as somebody.

Now, maybe it was sort of hovering, never articulated. He was attracting people. I mean,

what's so striking about it is he's attracting people to him. He's got all this bony me. Oh, come hanging out with Chomsky and a Hudbrook and all these people. It's like a really good time.

“You know, I think then being like, I'll have blackmail material on you. You need to do. I mean,”

he's getting people to do what he wants them to do for money, you know, for for feeling like good vibes, being in on some Israeli peace talks. I don't then see him going around. And maybe that look, again, like I totally, maybe I just haven't seen the evidence then he's going around being like, all I have blackmail material on you, you have to do what I want. He got Clinton he probably got, why do you think he's filming everybody then? That is, he could be a pervert.

I mean, just plenty of evidence of perversion, right? Oh, the ranch. Investigators of finally

look into Jeffrey Epstein's New Mexico ranch. Federal authorities apparently never searched the

property, but now state authorities will reopen a 2019 investigation about time. New Mexico. That's great. It's great. I went on Twitter how to, or X has a very long, I was reading it earlier and got bored, but it's very long about the, the link with the lottery. Oh, yeah, how they won the lottery. That's weird. Wait till that, if that's accurate. It's weird, I agree. That one's very easy. I mean, Michael also points out that he was least this incredible mansion in New York by the

State Department, but then the State Department like sued him. So it's, you know, they're like he rec, if he was like, really less wexner, give him a house in Manhattan. And then it will didn't that in the big, how the, that was the, this was a previous mansion. The people that give it them fucking ranch. What about that thing? I told you about someone found that the person who noticed that $10 transfer of the house conveniently filmed like the best 9/11 footage.

And that those are the 3 million, like the timing of those missing files is right around the

“2001. I mean, yeah, I'm here. Yeah. I mean, we, I think that what the files are important is that we saw”

he's able to make his money as a high level fixer. We saw people were really into him, people loved him. He was magnetic. He's able to get people to do things that he wants without using that as a tool. And we're not seeing, I just don't see where, I don't think we're seen any signs or footprints or any of that of engaging in blackmail. We have the camera. We don't have half of the files. Yeah. What we have is weird. The, the grape soda, the shrimp, the pizza

references, the jerky, all that stuff. This lady saying that there's an island where a bad guy's bringing children for sex. She almost fainted when I said that person's me. All this stuff is kind of fucked. Well, right? Yeah, you admit it's kind of fucked. The shrimp's one they're definitely talking about what they're objectifying. Children for sex. I think that's kind of fucked. I think it's, I think that he was, I mean, my interpretation of it is that yeah, he's freely admitting on an email

that he's trafficking children. I find that difficult to believe that you would put that, I mean, if you're going to say that it doesn't put the blackmail stuff in email, but he's going to put it in an email that he's bringing children to the island. I mean, I think he's being sarcastic there.

“I think he's saying, oh, that guy is me. Like, that's what they say about me. Why wouldn't you elaborate?”

And said, I mean, if you're sending the person you send it to, the person he sends it to you knows that it's not true. I mean, I think that person works for him, right? Masha is that one of the women that he had. I just, I don't think that's him saying I'm maybe. Yeah, maybe. All right, we got wrapped this up in the else. I got one, I got someone gave me a video. I thought I could share it with you guys. What are you a foe video? Oh, wait, do we, how are we making a video? And every sash with a

kind of to Jamie? Yeah, you get air drop it to is it compelling, more compelling than y'all ways video? You don't like the y'all way of video? That was kind of interesting. It's all right, it's fun. Is it compelling? All right, I mean, you guys will decide or not, hear us on it, too. Okay, that's just something. Yeah, I was curious about, but oh, I was just, you know, Elon, you think you think Elon knows more than he's last on about UAPs? Yes. How is, how do you know that?

Well, because he works with NASA, if he knows something, he knows something. Also, some people told me that he knows something. But don't you ask him privately? He don't tell me shit. Okay, I got a big mouth. I asked somebody that was high up in his operation. Yeah, we were, we were on the record, but I won't reveal who they are what they said, and they go, I said, you guys must be, I was like, it's basically, you guys must just like have to, don't you have to edit out like UFOs that you get,

government. That was all they said. Good. All right, let's say, play this. I don't know.

“Just play. What am I looking at? This is her, this is her video in here. I think she shows, I think she's”

zoomed in. I don't know what we're looking at. It's here in Texas. What are you looking at, lady?

Okay. It's like most UFO videos. It's just a dog. No, let it get better. It gets better.

30 seconds, guys. Okay. I'm just sure. Right thing. All right. It looks like it's, um, you know, her,

“is she your friend? She's my friend. Is that? She and talk scared. I think she's not, no, no, she's not.”

And this is like a not far from here. It's somewhere in Texas. I think she's zoomed in at the end. No, no. Well, we still got 10 seconds for it to get good. Oh, my god. Oh, she doesn't, I

“thought she had, uh, which once she showed me, she zoomed in on it. This is disappointing. We probably shouldn't”

just cut that all out. All right. Let's wrap it up. Thank you, sir. Appreciate you having me, Judge. All right. Bye, buddy. You're right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.