Latest / Yaron Brook Show / Free Speech vs Hate Speech; TikTok Corruption; Fed Failures; Gaza & Russia | Yaron Brook Show

Transcript

Free Speech vs Hate Speech; TikTok Corruption; Fed Failures; Gaza & Russia | Yaron Brook Show · Yaron Brook Show

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: M hm. Though radical fundamental principles of freedom, rational self interest,
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: and individual rights.
• 0:38
  Speaker 2: This is the Uran Brook Show.
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: Everybody, everybody, the book show. Uh, Tuesday the week. Tell
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: I'm still traveling. Uh, we'll have this one another, what
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: twelve days or so? Ten days or so something like that.
• 1:07
  Speaker 3: Anyway, let's jump right into the news. I'll remind you
• 1:13
  Speaker 3: to some questions. Uh, super chat is open, super chat
• 1:16
  Speaker 3: is available. I do have a bunch of questions from
• 1:19
  Speaker 3: who no sound? Who has no sound?
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: Uh?
• 1:27
  Speaker 4: One two three? Do you guys have sound? M? One
• 1:36
  Speaker 4: two three?
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: Audio is pretty soft? Sound is low? All right, let's
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: check this out. Sound is oh okay? Is that better?
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: One two three? All right?
• 1:54
  Speaker 5: What's going on?
• 2:04
  Speaker 4: One two three? One two three? One two three? Sound better?
• 2:09
  Speaker 5: Uh?
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: That alright? Yes? Good? Hi? Sound is low. Try screaming
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: into the mic a bit better. Let's raise the mic closer.
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: Is that better? One two three? All right?
• 2:27
  Speaker 5: Uh?
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: I think I think with the mic closer in and
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: I raise some of the stuff here. All right, it's
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: good now, all right. Anyway, I want to remind you
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: to ask questions and use the super chart to do it.
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: I'll add that we also have a bunch of questions
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: from yesterday that I will get to answering today, but
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: we need a fun today, so don't forget to support
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: the show today. Stephen Harper, Catherine, thank you for your
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: stickers in support. All right, let's jump jump in to
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: the news. Let's start. I mean, the thing hitting the
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: internet right now is Pam Bondy, Trump's attorney general. I
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: guess the United States government's attorney general, Pambody about free speech.
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: That is shocking to a lot of people. I mean,
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: this woman, I told you when she was nominated, when
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: she was approved, This woman is not qualified to be
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: Attorney General of the United States. She is a partisan hack.
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: She is a blind follower of Trump and nothing more
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: than that. She knows nothing about the law, about her job.
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: She is ignorant and not very smart. So here's what
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: Pam Bondi said in an interview on some Katie and
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: Something quote this free speech and then this hate speech.
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: And there is no place, especially now, especially after what
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: happened to Charlie in our society for hate speech. Right,
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: she continues, we will absolutely target you, go after you
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: if you are targeting anyone with hate speech. Now, will
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: somebody tell me the difference between this and the woke left.
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: Will somebody tell me anything different between this and what
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: the left argues all the time about hate speech, or
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: somebody tell me what's the difference between this and what's
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: going on in Europe which conservatives supposedly argue against. Hate
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: speech is not protected by the First Amendment, since when
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: it's exactly hate speech that the First Amendment is there
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: to protect. You don't need to protect niceties, You don't
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: need to protect people when everybody agrees, I don't mean
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: to protect people when people are polite. When you need
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: to protect people is when they see things that offend,
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: when they say things that are hateful to some What
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: does even hate speech mean? Does anybody you know how
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: to define hate speech? No? And I'd being critical and
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: many conservatives will be critical of the left position and
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: hate speech for years and years and years. And I've
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: done whole talks in the fact that hate speech is
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: an invalid concept, and of course hate speech speech is violence,
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: all tied together, all connected. So now the Trump administration
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: is adopting the woke left position on hate speech. They're
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: adopting the position of the Europeans on hate speech. Wow.
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: Now to their credit to their credit. Many people on
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: the right flipped out over this. Flipped out over this.
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: Richard Hannanya wrote, everyone who didn't like the term woke
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: right needs to watch this. They're not even changing the
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: words around. It's copy and paste. Except it's worse because
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: it's the Attorney General talking like this instead of a
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: woman studies professor. He's absolutely right. This is the attorney general.
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: She actually has guns in her hand. She actually can
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: destroy your life. She can actually, whether the courts have
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: hold it or not, she can destroy your life. In
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: the meantime, she is the government, she is force, she
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: is the police. So for the Attorney General to have
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: this view is a thousand times worse than some woman
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: studies professor, some kid on campus. So yeah, left right Now,
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: It's not just David Richard Hananio is very critical of
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: anybody in the right anyway.
• 7:08
  Speaker 6: But Chris Rufo, Chris Rufo who keeps claiming we need
• 7:13
  Speaker 6: to use the tools of government to you know, we
• 7:16
  Speaker 6: do our institutions and get rid of the left and do.
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: All this stuff, which sounds a lot like what Pambundi's suggesting. Maybe,
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: but even Chris Rufo, this is too far for him.
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: This is extremely concerning. He writes, the distinction is not
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: between free speech and hate speech, but between free speech
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: and organizing illicit activity, engaging in political violence, depriving others
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: of the civil rights, and committing tax on nonprofit fraud. Yeah,
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: I mean that's how he would like to go after
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: the cases where but yeah, he's not happy with her.
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: And it gets worse because Matt Walsh, Matt Walsh should
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: basically almost declared a civil war the other day. Matt
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: Walsh quote, there should be social consequences for people who
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: openly celebrate the murder of an innocent man, social consequences.
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: But there obviously shouldn't be any legal repercussions for hate speech,
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: which is not even a valid or coheman concept. There
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: is no law against saying hurtful things, and there shouldn't be. God,
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: this is the first time, maybe ever, that I actually
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: agree with Matt Walsh. He's absolutely one hundred percent right
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: on this, probably for wrong reasons, but that's a different question.
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: So yeah, the conservatives, even on the right right, are
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: getting it. Dave Reuben even right dyve unbelievably bad take
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: by Bondie worthy of immediate resignation of an Attorney General.
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: I agree completely. Hate speech does not exist. You can
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: say mean things about people. We have very specific limitations,
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: such as direct calls for violence, but amorphous hate speech
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: does not exist. Charlie would never want this, so yep,
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: people are really upset at Pambondi, and I wouldn't be surprised.
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: Then she goes on TV on Fox News Friendly, so
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: she's not gonna get harrassed there. But she goes on
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: Fox News and she says, if you want to go
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: and print posters with Charlie's picture for a vigil, you
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: have to let them do it. That is, the business
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: has to let the employees print cup posters of Charlie's pictures.
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: You have to let them do it. We can prosecute
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: you for that. If you don't. We have right now
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: our civil rights unit looking at that. So the government
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: is now going to force businesses to let its employees
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: use business facilities to organize prints, whatever political stuff that's new.
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: They're going to going to force them and if they
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: don't agree, they're gonna go after them for civil rights violation.
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: I mean, this woman is I don't think she's nuts.
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: I think she's just stupid. She's incompetent. She certainly should
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: not be Attorney general. And on this again, Matt Walsh
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: agrees with me. It's shocking today. Matt Walsh agrees with
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: me twice. This is what he says about this particular statement.
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: Get rid of her today. This is insane. Conservatives are
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: fought for decades for the right to refuse service to anyone.
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: We won that fight. Now Pam Bondi wants to roll
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: it all back for no reason. The employee who didn't
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: print the flyer was already fired by his employer. This
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: stuff is being handled successfully through free speech and free markets.
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: This is totally gratuitous and pointless. We need the Attorney
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: General focused on bringing down the left, doing terror cells,
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: not prosecuting Office Depot for god's sake. Yeah, they're upset
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: because because she's got nuts. She's gone nuts. I mean,
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: she's basically threatening to prosecute businesses who refuse to print flyers,
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: and that the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division is
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: looking into cases like that, particularly a case at Office Ego.
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: So yeah, she's there because she will do whatever Trump
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: tells her to do. She will aggressively go after Epstein, Epstein, Epstein, Epstein,
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: I think in this case, she'll you know, Gersa to
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: go after Jeffrey Epstein, and she will back off when
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: Trump tells her to back off. She will do whatever
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: Trump tells her. Now, remember, attorney general is supposed to be,
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: at least to some extent, an independent entity. It's supposed
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: to be the Department of Justice for the United States,
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: not for the president. Yet she views herself as an
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: attorney for Trump. And look, she's ignorant, and you could
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: tell she's not that smart by her attempt to kind
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: of justify herself. So she posts on Twitter of an
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: attorney general, Pamela Bandi an attempt to justify it, right,
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: and you know here here, you know, I'm not gonna
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: read you the whole thing, but she conflates a free
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: speech and then she says, okay, but it's it's it's uh,
• 13:23
  Speaker 1: you violate free speech when you call for somebod these
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: violent for violence, threats, assassinations. And then but then she
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: conflates that again with you know, here's what she's right.
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: She says, free speech protects ideas, debate, even descent, even descent,
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: but that does not and will never protect violence. Yeah,
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: that's true, But then she says, it is clear that
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: violent rhetoric is designed to silence others from voicing conservative ideals. Really,
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: violent rhetoric, violent rhetoric is completely completely protected by the
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: First Amendment. Free speech includes violent rhetoric. It does not
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: include threats, It does not include incitement to violence. But
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: talking violent terms is not a violent It is not
• 14:24
  Speaker 1: a reason to go after people. I mean, god, you
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: would have to. You have to rest almost every podcast
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: out there. And this idea that violent rhetoric is designed
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: to silence conservative ideals, as if conservatives never used violent rhetoric.
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: Have you ever listened to Matt Walsh or Knowles or
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: any of these guys. They don't threaten, they don't incite,
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: But did they ever use violent rhetoric? Absolutely, as do
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: I It's so even when she's trying to fix it,
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: she can't get it right. She you know, she goes
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: after she I mean, she doesn't understand the distinction. She
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: doesn't know the distinctions. And she's a partisan hack. She's
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: been hired to go after Trump's enemies. She will use
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: whatever means she has again, even if she arrests somebody
• 15:40
  Speaker 1: that ultimately will be exonerated by the courts. Because the
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: son a violation of the First Amendment, their lives are
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: likely to be ruined. She can do horrible, horrible things
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: to many, many people. And if you add her up
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: with kash Patel, I mean, at the federal level, law
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: enforcement in this country is an unmitigated disaster of incompetence
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: and complete and utter bias, complete another bias, complete dedication
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: to Trump rather than to the truth or to justice.
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: Oh God forbid to the law. Uh so, yep, you
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: cannot dox a contrivtive family and think you will be
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: brushed off as free speech. I don't know. Doxing is
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: doxing not free speech? Is doxing violence? I mean, doxing
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: might be really really inappropriate in any model and wrong,
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: but it is doxing actually violence? Are they really? Is
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: doxing punishable crime? She said she can't call for someone's murder. True,
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: you cannot swat a member of Congress. I don't know
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: what swat means. Do you guys know what swap means?
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: You cannot dos a conservative family? You can't. Yeah, I
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: mean doxing is not illegal, not in the United States
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: of America. So yeah, I mean she should resign tomorrow.
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: If we had a decent president, if we had a
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: president kid one aota about the rule of law, free speech,
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: he doesn't not even a bit. She would be fired tomorrow.
• 17:52
  Speaker 1: But this is a president. When he was asked about Bondi,
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: he was asked about Bondy by a reporter from ABC,
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: and he said, he was asked about hate speech. And
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: he said, well, you guys at ABC, you guys commit
• 18:09
  Speaker 1: hate speech against me. And that's why I'm suing you.
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: You know, just like I've sued all these other companies
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: that you know have gone after me hate speech, I'm
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: suing you all. Yeah, going after you. We're going after you.
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: I mean, this is a president who is going after speech.
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: Right now, he is suing the New York Times today,
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: he said the New York Times for fifteen billion dollars
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: for defamation and libel. Now, he called it one of
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: the worst and most degenerate newspapers in the history of
• 18:53
  Speaker 1: our country, becoming a virtual mouthpiece of the radical left
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: Democratic Party, accusing them of lying about your favorite president,
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: my family business, the American First Movement MAGA in our
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: nation as a whole. Now, I imagine if you can
• 19:10
  Speaker 1: sue any newspaper for lying about the nation as a whole.
• 19:20
  Speaker 1: It's a public figure. The standard for defamation is very high,
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: very high for a public figure. But he doesn't care.
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: The point is all it is is intimidation, right, He'll basically,
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: this is a way to say to the New York Times,
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: I'm going to keep after you. I'm gonna disrupt your business.
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna go after you do everything I can. And
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: the purpose of all that is to stop you from
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: doing your job. The purpose of that is to silence
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: your criticism of me and all the other you know, media,
• 20:03
  Speaker 1: CBS and others have settled with him. They've just written
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: him a check. And you know that as part of
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: that settlement. Okay, they're gonna downturn the criticism because they
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: don't want to be sued again. I have to settle again.
• 20:18
  Speaker 1: This president is the most anti free speak president of
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: my lifetime. I don't know enough about the history of
• 20:27
  Speaker 1: presidents before that, but this is this is just you know, horrific.
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: You know, he could sue me for calling him a
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: moron or for you know, saying his administration is corrupt
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: for fifteen billion dollars. You could sue me, and then
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: what I'd have to take all my money and defend
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: it against a lawsuit. I couldn't do the show. He
• 20:53
  Speaker 1: would silence me, affect him. So this is a silencing tactic.
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: This is a way to use his power as president,
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: his power as president to silence his opposition. It's about
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: as un American as a gad. It's worse than anything
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: Biden did visa VI free speech. I mean this, the
• 21:20
  Speaker 1: losses against the law, the law firms. It's unconscionable that
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: a president would be allowed to do this. I mean,
• 21:28
  Speaker 1: any one of these should be impeachable offenses. This is
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: all of this is much more significant than the impeachment
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: over the Ukraine phone call in now Wars twenty eighteen,
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: twenty nineteen. I mean, these things he should be impeachable.
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: We'll get to the corruption in a minute, another impeachable offense.
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: But it really is really is amazing to me that
• 21:58
  Speaker 1: he gets away with it. Nobody, kids, nobody. I mean, yeah,
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: the Conservatives all get all riled up when Pam Bondi
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: is something really really stupid, But are they going to
• 22:09
  Speaker 1: be upset by all these lossuits by Donald Trump sitting
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: president SANCHI just a lossit or a private citizen, it's
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: a sitting president. Here's a question for you in terms
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: of free speech. And I'm not sure I know the
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: answer exactly to this, but you know, in terms of
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: how we exactly define free speech right, or how do
• 22:44
  Speaker 1: we exactly define excitement to violence? So this is this
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: is Hassan, This is a socialist guy, massive following, massive
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: following on the left, and this isn't a podcast. I'm
• 22:59
  Speaker 1: gonna just you what he says. He says, Yeah, kill
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: kill those motherfuckers and murder those motherfuckersy kill those you know, uh,
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: murder the murder them in the street, Let the streets
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: soak in the fucking red capitalist blood. Yeah, kill kill them? Now?
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: Is that protected speech? Right? Is that protected speech? If
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: he's just talking about capitalists in general? Is that incitement?
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: Probably it is protected speech. I'd be curious to see
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: how a Supreme court would rule about this. It probably
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: is kind of violent rhetoric. It is probably permissible unless
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: he's talking about a specific group, unless it's actionable, unless
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: he's talking about specific people. I don't know those people
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: back black clog, you know, go after them. So is
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: could he be prosecuted for that? And there are other
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: clips of him basically broadly speaking, advocating for violence, not
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: specifically not go kill him, not let's meet at three
• 24:29
  Speaker 1: o'clock and burn that down, but generally violent rhetoric associated
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: with destroying the capitalist world. I think, I think as
• 24:45
  Speaker 1: long as it's broad vague like that, as long as
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: it's not specific, it's protected speech. It's protected speech. But
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: by the way, put aside this feature second. Put aside,
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: if the speech issue was second, that is Hassan, that is,
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: you know, probably one of the most influential voices now
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: on the fall left. By the way, he was a
• 25:15
  Speaker 1: very condemnatory of the assassination of the assassin nation of Cook,
• 25:19
  Speaker 1: so which I found bizarre given given this, given you know,
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: let let let the streets be soaked in blood. Of course,
• 25:28
  Speaker 1: it's easy to say stuff like that when it's theoretical.
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: It's different when the streets get soaked with blood and
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: suddenly you realize whoa that could be? Me? So uh yes, uh,
• 25:53
  Speaker 1: this is who who the radicalizes. I mean, this guy
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: radicalizes many young people, many gen zs. This is who
• 26:03
  Speaker 1: is good friends with Mamdani, who's almost certainly going to
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: win New York. This is a major voice on the left,
• 26:14
  Speaker 1: major voice on the left, by the way, on what
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: is it? November thirteenth, November thirteenth, I'll be in Colorado Springs,
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: and I'll be debating one of the writers, one of
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: the editors I think at the Jacobian magazine. So a socialist,
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: a committed real socialist, will be doing a capitalism versus
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: socialism debate. This is the guy I debated, I think
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: in twenty eighteen or twenty nineteen on four different campuses.
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: Well this time we'll be debating on one campus. So
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: this will be a talk at the University of Colorado,
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: Colorado Springs. I hope if you're in the area, if
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: you're in Colorado, certainly IFI in Colorado, but even in
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: other places in Colorado, you'll come over. I'll need all
• 27:03
  Speaker 1: the support I get I can get. Even though it's
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: Colorado Springs, which is generally a conservative, religious, conservative place.
• 27:10
  Speaker 1: I'm not sure that I'm out of support me because
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: very religious. But it's a university, so you've got to
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: believe they will mostly be leftists there, so it would
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: be it would be great to get one of those,
• 27:23
  Speaker 1: one of those, get some friendly voices in the audience.
• 27:29
  Speaker 1: I will debate anybody you know, to the right of
• 27:37
  Speaker 1: Noam Chomsky pretty much, and anybody to the left of
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: Nick Foentis pretty much, or Tucker Carson pretty much. I'll
• 27:47
  Speaker 1: debate them to the extent right or left even apply
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: in those cases, but I'll debate them. So yeah, I mean,
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: I was approached here by the organizing by an organization
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: that's organizing this debate, the Steamboat Institute, as I said it,
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: with Color Water Spring November thirteenth, and it should be
• 28:07
  Speaker 1: it should be interesting. I've also I've also been contacted
• 28:13
  Speaker 1: by a leading conservative publication in the UK to do
• 28:19
  Speaker 1: some debates for them in London, probably early next year,
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: so I'm looking forward to that. So I like this.
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: I like the fact that there are quite a few
• 28:33
  Speaker 1: people out there left and right that are you know,
• 28:38
  Speaker 1: eager to have me come in debate represent capitalism, represent freedom,
• 28:42
  Speaker 1: represent that site. Also, you know, of course, I did
• 28:46
  Speaker 1: a lot of debates at the I did a number
• 28:49
  Speaker 1: of debates at the festival Let the Light Shine In
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: or something like that festival in Wales the summer with
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: hundreds of people participate, and those those were good. And
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: then there I debated, you know, mainstream academic leftists. All right,
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: back to the TikTok deal. I mean, this has to
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: be one of the most ridiculous stupid things in history. Again,
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: this is uh, this is a.
• 29:24
  Speaker 2: This is one of those where.
• 29:26
  Speaker 1: Trump is completely ignoring the law. We talked about that yesterday.
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: I won't even go there, this impeachable offense, just ignoring
• 29:34
  Speaker 1: the law that says that TikTok needs to be shut down.
• 29:39
  Speaker 1: But as we said, as I said yesterday, Trump and
• 29:42
  Speaker 1: the Chinese have come to some kind of deal around TikTok.
• 29:46
  Speaker 1: The TikTok will be somehow spun off. American investors will
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: come in and participate. Ar we call is going to
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: play some significant role here including UH it will continue
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: to house everything that is uh, you know, all the
• 30:05
  Speaker 1: all the it or serve as the cloud facility for
• 30:10
  Speaker 1: all the videos and everything else that happens on TikTok.
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: But that the fear always was that TikTok was using
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: a Chinese algorithm, and that even though the information was
• 30:23
  Speaker 1: stored on articles servers, the Chinese had a back door
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: and could basically access whatever information they wanted. The fear
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: was also that the Chinese were using the algorithm using
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: the algorithm to actually manipulate what Americans were seeing and creating,
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: creating descent in America, you know, creating uh, you know,
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: throwing oil on the fire of the left right split
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: in America, but also providing significant Chinese propaganda on TikTok
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: and using algorithm in order to spread it. And these
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: are the complaints, and this is why Congress decided to
• 31:09
  Speaker 1: shut it down, signed by the President, approved a Supreme Court,
• 31:15
  Speaker 1: ignored by Donald Trump. But then so now there's a deal,
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: and it turns out, it turns out in this deal
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: that TikTok is going to still use the Chinese algorithm.
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: It's going to lease it from Bitdance, the Chinese company,
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: and it's still going to use the same algorithm, still
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: be managed by Bitdance, although it was some supervision from
• 31:44
  Speaker 1: the parent American company that is going to be leasing
• 31:47
  Speaker 1: it from them. It's going to be something in between.
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: It's a licensing deal. At least that's what the Chinese
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: is saying that they get. This is going to be
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: a licensing deal, you know, uh, partially because Beijing wants
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: to be seen as exporting technology to the United States, right,
• 32:08
  Speaker 1: that's a big prestige thing. But it's uh, it's just
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: it's a complete seller. It's a complete seller best bestn't
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: the Treasury secretary, that's a Treasury ciccution, you said, I mean,
• 32:30
  Speaker 1: this is unbelievable that he said this. He said that
• 32:33
  Speaker 1: the spun off app would be controlled by American investors.
• 32:38
  Speaker 1: But notice this, but preserve some quote Chinese characteristics. So
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: Americans are going to provide the funding and China is
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: going to manage the thing. China is gonna run the thing.
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: China is gonna provide the algorithm. China is gonna brainwash kids,
• 33:01
  Speaker 1: China is gonna run things. I mean, we becoming China.
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: Or what is China winning? I mean economically it's a
• 33:10
  Speaker 1: basket case. But strategically on every single front that I
• 33:15
  Speaker 1: can see today, China is winning or America is losing
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: is a better quote. I mean Trump billed himself as
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: tough on China. Trump is like the weakest president imaginable
• 33:33
  Speaker 1: on China. And you will see when we get the
• 33:36
  Speaker 1: deal at the end of the day, when this deal
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: comes around, this will be an unbelievable deal that's good
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: for China anyway. It's it's gonna be interesting to see
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: what happens, and how what the details of this deal are.
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: But for for bestt to even say preserve some Chinese
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: characteristics without flinching and without embarrassing himself. I mean, we
• 34:12
  Speaker 1: just got a lot of either unbelievably incompetent, not very smart,
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: or just corrupt people in this administration saying whatever they
• 34:22
  Speaker 1: need to say in order to be in order to
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: be in order for Trump to to like them. Anyway,
• 34:33
  Speaker 1: We'll see, uh, you know. And of course the laws
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: says that if TikTok is going to continue, it has
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: to be fully divested from TikTok. But is this fully
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: divested from TikTok from I mean from the Chinese, Sorry,
• 34:48
  Speaker 1: from the Chinese. But is TikTok fully divested from the Chinese?
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: If it's leasing the algorithm, which is the heart of
• 34:56
  Speaker 1: the whole thing, how does that work? Is a licensing
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: deal with bit dance fully separate, fully divested? I mean,
• 35:12
  Speaker 1: I don't know. This is some crazy stuff, crazy stuff.
• 35:17
  Speaker 1: The good news is for Alico, which keeps us a
• 35:20
  Speaker 1: cloud deal, might be one of the investors in the
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: new deal. I'm still curious to see if the United
• 35:26
  Speaker 1: States government isn't invested in the new deal. But it
• 35:30
  Speaker 1: does seem like I think, as with this military shift
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: away from China and towards Latin America. Donald Trump wants
• 35:41
  Speaker 1: a good relationship with Chi. He likes Chi, you know,
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: he likes dictators, and he wants a good relationship with China.
• 35:49
  Speaker 1: And I think the shift is real. I think he
• 35:52
  Speaker 1: really strategically. We saw this in the document that the
• 35:55
  Speaker 1: Defense Department has drafted, which is as the United States
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: shift away from Europe and away from Asia and shift
• 36:04
  Speaker 1: totally to our own hemisphere. This is part of that.
• 36:08
  Speaker 1: This is part of completely surrendering, surrendering really the world
• 36:16
  Speaker 1: outside of maybe Latin America to China and Russia and
• 36:21
  Speaker 1: Europe if they want to take a piece, all right,
• 36:32
  Speaker 1: And why is the government negotiating this? So I know,
• 36:41
  Speaker 1: I'm going to say an ugly wood right now. But
• 36:44
  Speaker 1: according to the New York Times, big story in the
• 36:47
  Speaker 1: New York Times today, big story in the New York Times.
• 36:55
  Speaker 1: If this is true, and I'm gonna say if this
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: is true, because yeah, New York Times be biased and
• 37:00
  Speaker 1: so on, but it certainly lines up, is true, It
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: certainly factual, seems true. I haven't seen anybody really contradict
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: any of the factual evidence, and it certainly seems plausible
• 37:13
  Speaker 1: the cause of relationship that The New York Times is
• 37:17
  Speaker 1: asserting here. See here's the story. Sheikh Tarnun, who is
• 37:27
  Speaker 1: in charge of the you know Emiwodi Royal Sovereign Wealth Fund, Right,
• 37:37
  Speaker 1: he's the guy in charge of Yui United Arab Emirates
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: uh Solign Fund, which is big. It's it's oil money,
• 37:48
  Speaker 1: and it's it's sizable make a lot of big investments. Anyway,
• 37:53
  Speaker 1: at some point earlier this year, the sheikh decided to
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: invest two billion billion dollars billion in Binet's, a crypto
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: exchange using coins from a krypto company owned and operated
• 38:14
  Speaker 1: by two families, the Witcoff family. Yes, the Witcuff who's
• 38:21
  Speaker 1: going around in the Middle East doing negotiating and going
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: to Russia doing negotiating. The Whitcoff family, and I mean,
• 38:28
  Speaker 1: I'm sure you'll be shocked to hear the Trump family.
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: So here's a chic right in the midst of all
• 38:36
  Speaker 1: the stuff going on in the Middle East where Witcof
• 38:41
  Speaker 1: is shuttling back and forth and talking to regularly, is
• 38:45
  Speaker 1: investing in a company in a way that massively benefits
• 38:52
  Speaker 1: another company owned by Whitcoff's family and Trump's family two
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: billion dollars. So that's one side of this transaction. Why
• 39:06
  Speaker 1: would he do that? What can Trump give him? Well,
• 39:12
  Speaker 1: here's what he gives him. We know this because we
• 39:15
  Speaker 1: talked about this. I talked about this when it happened.
• 39:19
  Speaker 1: Right just about a month later, the Sheikh secures access
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: to valuable artificial intelligence chips in agreement with the White House,
• 39:31
  Speaker 1: an agreement which of course involved Steve Whitcoff, David Sacks,
• 39:39
  Speaker 1: and Trump. Sacks is Trump's AI and crypto zare but
• 39:48
  Speaker 1: basically a Trump administration exchange. You fund this thing we're doing,
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: and we'll give you valuable AH chips. Though we have
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: respected the Chinese from getting and you can buy as
• 40:06
  Speaker 1: many as you want. And this is the UE, granted
• 40:12
  Speaker 1: a moderate but it's still the Middle East, and there's
• 40:15
  Speaker 1: still we all chance that the stuff could land up
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: in China. Now it turns out that while all this
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: was going on, there was an official at the National
• 40:32
  Speaker 1: Security Council, a guy named fIF fIF f E I
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: t h A, a son of the neocon Fith. Although
• 40:41
  Speaker 1: I don't know that he's a neocon he's worked. This
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: is a second time in the Trump White House, so he's
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: probably not a neocon anyway. At the National Security Counter
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: so a Fith and a couple of others raised a
• 40:57
  Speaker 1: long bells around us. You know, he had returned.
• 41:02
  Speaker 7: Feith had returned to the second term a Senior director
• 41:05
  Speaker 7: for Technology on the National Security Council, and he pushed
• 41:10
  Speaker 7: what he and his colleagues called the America First AI
• 41:13
  Speaker 7: Chips Plan, which would restrict FARN access to the most
• 41:17
  Speaker 7: advanced chips for.
• 41:18
  Speaker 1: At least a year. But Sheikh Tannhun wanted them now.
• 41:27
  Speaker 1: So in early April, just after Sheikh Tannun visited Washington,
• 41:33
  Speaker 1: d C. Trump fired six Security Council officials, including Faith.
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: And of course, this dismissal came after roughly a thirty
• 41:46
  Speaker 1: minute meeting between mister Trump and guess who, our favorite provocateur,
• 41:53
  Speaker 1: Luma Luma. Luma said who opposition mister fifth had to
• 41:58
  Speaker 1: do in part with his father's place leitical views when
• 42:01
  Speaker 1: he was serving in the administration of President George W. Bush.
• 42:04
  Speaker 1: She said it did not pertain to chips negotiations. Yeah, right,
• 42:09
  Speaker 1: She certainly wanted to be believed. Now, this is pretty
• 42:18
  Speaker 1: amazing Just more from the article. In May, mister Whitcoffe's son,
• 42:24
  Speaker 1: Zach announced the first of the deals at a conference
• 42:27
  Speaker 1: in Dubai. One of Sheik ted Nun's investment films would
• 42:30
  Speaker 1: deposit two billion into World Liberty Financial, That is, Whitcoff's
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: and Trump's investment film, a cryptocurncy startup founded by Whitcoff
• 42:38
  Speaker 1: and Trump's. Two weeks later, the White House agreed to
• 42:41
  Speaker 1: allow the UEE access the hundreds of thousands of the
• 42:44
  Speaker 1: world's most advanced and scarce computer chips, a crucial tool
• 42:49
  Speaker 1: in the high stakes raised to dominate artificial intelligence. Many
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: of the chips would go to G forty two, a
• 42:57
  Speaker 1: sprawling technology film controlled by Chief Sheikh Tarnun, despite national
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: security concerns that the chip would be shared with China. Yeah,
• 43:13
  Speaker 1: I mean you can. You can excuse this, you can
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: rationalize it. You can say, oh no, this is just
• 43:23
  Speaker 1: conspiracy theories this but this is these things happen. We
• 43:26
  Speaker 1: know that the event actually happened. We know of the firings,
• 43:29
  Speaker 1: we know of the sequence, we know exactly what happened.
• 43:32
  Speaker 1: We can see, you know, follow the money is often
• 43:35
  Speaker 1: the advice you get if you want to find out
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: what's going on, follow the money. Trump family, the Sheikh again,
• 43:47
  Speaker 1: probably the most corrupt US administration in our nation's history,
• 43:53
  Speaker 1: at least, you know, I don't know the nation's history.
• 43:56
  Speaker 1: Soon me in my lifetime. You think you think Hunt
• 44:00
  Speaker 1: that was bad? Oh my god, Hunter Biden was an amateur.
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: And this is already two of the first Trump administration.
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: Remember that his son in law got a two billion
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: dollar investment into his private equity fund, the first private
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: equity fund he'd ever raised, from the Saudis, right after
• 44:22
  Speaker 1: Trump left office. So yeah, no, no, you know, no
• 44:27
  Speaker 1: relations It had nothing to do with the fact that
• 44:31
  Speaker 1: Trump had been president and was very friendly to the Saudis.
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: There's no relationship between those things. This is just really unbelievably,
• 44:41
  Speaker 1: unbelievably corrupt, unbelievable corruption. When Trump was asked, so this
• 44:49
  Speaker 1: is a report, asks him, as he's heading towards the helicopter,
• 44:53
  Speaker 1: should a president in office be engaged in so much
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: business activity? Trump says, I'm not. My kids are running
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: the business. Where are you from? Your porter says Australian
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: Broadcast Corporation. Trump says, listen to this, you're hurting Australia
• 45:08
  Speaker 1: very much right now, and they want to get along
• 45:10
  Speaker 1: with me. Your leader is coming to see me soon.
• 45:13
  Speaker 1: I'm going to tell him about you. You said a
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: bad tone, You can get a nicer tone. Quiet. He's
• 45:26
  Speaker 1: not gonna backtracked from the corruption. He's gonna embrace it,
• 45:31
  Speaker 1: and he's gonna go after anybody who even has a
• 45:34
  Speaker 1: tone of criticism. This is your president, this is whom
• 45:39
  Speaker 1: many of you voted for. You cannot criticize him, even
• 45:44
  Speaker 1: if you're the media whose job it is, to a
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: large extent is to criticize politicians. So what they're there
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: for a criticism immediately elicits a threat. Oh, your Prime
• 45:55
  Speaker 1: Minister is coming. I'm gonna tell you how bad you are.
• 46:00
  Speaker 1: And you know I might condition corporation with Australia on
• 46:05
  Speaker 1: you getting fired or your network getting demoted or whatever,
• 46:09
  Speaker 1: your license being taken away from you. Remember this is
• 46:12
  Speaker 1: Trump who's threatened a number of times and seems like
• 46:15
  Speaker 1: they might actually do it. In terms of taking the
• 46:17
  Speaker 1: broadcast license away from ABC and NBC. CBS is now
• 46:21
  Speaker 1: owned by somebody right wing, and Barry Weiss is going
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: to be run the editorial staff of CBS News, So
• 46:29
  Speaker 1: he's pretty safe at CBS and he cut that deal
• 46:32
  Speaker 1: where they paid him a lot of money. But NBC
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: and ABC are not playing ball with him, so he
• 46:37
  Speaker 1: very well might, very well might try to take away
• 46:42
  Speaker 1: their license to broadcast. All right, let's see a couple
• 46:53
  Speaker 1: of things on the FED. So the feder will meet
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: tomorrow for two days to discuss the interest rate policy.
• 46:59
  Speaker 1: Monetary policy will broadly, they're likely to lower interest rates.
• 47:03
  Speaker 1: There'll be a vote. The vote will be split, it
• 47:07
  Speaker 1: won't be unanimous. I think there'll be three different parties
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: to the vote. There'll be those who want to keep
• 47:13
  Speaker 1: interest rates flat because CPI price inflation is still three percent,
• 47:20
  Speaker 1: which is higher than the FEDS target of two percent,
• 47:23
  Speaker 1: and they believe by keeping interest rates high, you know
• 47:26
  Speaker 1: CPI will come down. There were those who will want
• 47:30
  Speaker 1: to reduce the interest rates by half a percent. And
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: then now because supposedly, you know, employment is suffering, job
• 47:41
  Speaker 1: market is really bad, the economy might go into a session,
• 47:45
  Speaker 1: and they think by lower interest rates they will save
• 47:46
  Speaker 1: the economy and help Trump, and this is what Trump
• 47:50
  Speaker 1: wants more importantly, So there'll be some votes for decreasing
• 47:54
  Speaker 1: interest rate. For fifty basis points and then there'll be
• 47:57
  Speaker 1: Pal's view, which is to decrease interest rates by twenty
• 48:01
  Speaker 1: five basis points. I think power will win the day
• 48:03
  Speaker 1: at the end of at the end, but it will
• 48:05
  Speaker 1: be a split vote. Anyway, Trump was trying to get
• 48:10
  Speaker 1: Lisa Cook fired. She was. He fired her in an
• 48:15
  Speaker 1: effort to have her not be at this meeting. Lisa
• 48:19
  Speaker 1: Cooke will who by the way, I don't think he's
• 48:21
  Speaker 1: qualified to be at the Federal Reserve, but she is.
• 48:23
  Speaker 1: You know, she is there, and I don't think Trump
• 48:27
  Speaker 1: has the authority to fire her, but she's there. Anyway.
• 48:30
  Speaker 1: Lisa Cook will probably vote with Powell, so not the
• 48:34
  Speaker 1: way Trump wants. So he wanted her off, and so
• 48:39
  Speaker 1: he went to the Pelate Court to try to get
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: her to guide, to get them to accept his firing
• 48:47
  Speaker 1: of her so that there would be one less vote
• 48:50
  Speaker 1: in favor of only a twenty five basis points reduction
• 48:54
  Speaker 1: in interustrates. Anyway, the Appellate Court ruled against him in
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: an emergency ruling Monday. They ruled that President Trump cannot
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: remove Lisa Cook from the Federals Board of Governors before
• 49:13
  Speaker 1: this week's pivotal meeting. Two weeks ago, Trump announced that
• 49:17
  Speaker 1: he would be removing Cook of allegation as a mortgage
• 49:20
  Speaker 1: fraud after an investigation was launched by the Justice Department
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: following a refraval from the director of the Federal Housing
• 49:28
  Speaker 1: Finance Agency. Although it turns out now that the facts
• 49:34
  Speaker 1: on which the Federal Housing Finance Agency based it's before
• 49:41
  Speaker 1: were flawed. Now, so there's information now that's come out
• 49:44
  Speaker 1: that's in Lisa Cook's favor, even though no matter what,
• 49:50
  Speaker 1: this was not a big deal. This is just an excuse.
• 49:52
  Speaker 1: It wasn't a real justification anyway, She will not be voting.
• 50:02
  Speaker 1: On the other hand, good news for Trump his nominee
• 50:06
  Speaker 1: to replace a retiring Federal Reserve Board member, Stephen Miran,
• 50:12
  Speaker 1: who is his Economic council. He was confirmed by the
• 50:18
  Speaker 1: Senate today to serve on the Federals of Board, so
• 50:22
  Speaker 1: he will be there at the meeting to vote Trump's
• 50:26
  Speaker 1: white so Trump will have a representative on the board Miran.
• 50:31
  Speaker 1: This is very unusual for Miria to get this position
• 50:34
  Speaker 1: because he is still working at the White House. So
• 50:38
  Speaker 1: this is the anti fed independence, if ever there has
• 50:42
  Speaker 1: been one. He is both at the Economic advisor to
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: Trump and on the Federals of Board. At the same time,
• 50:51
  Speaker 1: so it'll be interesting. We won't know the vote, I
• 50:54
  Speaker 1: think on Wednesday on Thursday, but we will know the decision.
• 50:57
  Speaker 1: My guest is twenty five basis point reduction. Be surprised
• 51:00
  Speaker 1: if it's anything else. But it's of course it's possible
• 51:02
  Speaker 1: that they vote for fifty and appeased Trump, which is
• 51:08
  Speaker 1: always a possibility, all right. Luigi Mangione, Luigi Mangi. Remember
• 51:19
  Speaker 1: Luigi Mangani, who assassinated the CEO of United Healthcare was
• 51:25
  Speaker 1: today faced a judge today who reviewed the accusations against
• 51:31
  Speaker 1: him and actually threw out the two most serious accusations,
• 51:36
  Speaker 1: both of them claimed that he uh that he was doing.
• 51:42
  Speaker 1: He did what he did in order to terrorize employees
• 51:46
  Speaker 1: of the company and to terrorize the general public. So
• 51:49
  Speaker 1: he was being accused of first degree murder, which in
• 51:55
  Speaker 1: the State of New York only applies to very extreme cases.
• 51:58
  Speaker 1: State of New York, first degree moder murder can only
• 52:01
  Speaker 1: apply if the victim is a judge, a police officer,
• 52:06
  Speaker 1: a first desponder, or the killing involved a murder for
• 52:12
  Speaker 1: higher on intent to commit terrorism. And the judge ruled
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: that he none of those qualified, and therefore he will
• 52:22
  Speaker 1: be he will be persecuted under the second degree murder
• 52:32
  Speaker 1: charges instead of first degree motor charges. I always thought
• 52:35
  Speaker 1: first degree was pre meditated and second was a quiet passion.
• 52:39
  Speaker 1: But I guess that's not the way it is in
• 52:41
  Speaker 1: New York. So even though it's premeditated, clearly he is
• 52:46
  Speaker 1: going to face two moder charges, or he will be
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: one moder charge, but it will be a second degree
• 52:52
  Speaker 1: motor charge plus a bunch of weapons possession charges. It
• 53:00
  Speaker 1: turns out, you know, it turns out, so, the judge says,
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: the defendants of parent objectivist stated in his writings was
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: not to threaten, intimidate, or cause, but rather to draw
• 53:10
  Speaker 1: attention to what he perceived as the greed of the
• 53:13
  Speaker 1: insurance industry. Sounds a little sympathetic to the murderer, this is,
• 53:19
  Speaker 1: the judge. Sounds sympathetic. Philt Magnus writes. Apparently, political assassinations
• 53:28
  Speaker 1: in New York City are not threatening, intimidating, of course,
• 53:31
  Speaker 1: of course, of anymore as long as they perpetrator pens
• 53:37
  Speaker 1: a crazy anti capitalist manifesto about greed. There you go,
• 53:51
  Speaker 1: there you go. All right, let's see, all right, you know,
• 54:10
  Speaker 1: a quick update with regret of what's going on with
• 54:14
  Speaker 1: Russia and NATO. We talked about this a few days ago,
• 54:18
  Speaker 1: but the verbiage on of Russia is just escalating. So
• 54:21
  Speaker 1: something is going on here. They're not doing well in
• 54:23
  Speaker 1: the battlefield. They're gaining inches at a massive cost of
• 54:28
  Speaker 1: human lives. I mean, think about think about how many
• 54:31
  Speaker 1: lives have been lost to the Russians. They've taken well
• 54:36
  Speaker 1: over a million casualties. That is a death and you know,
• 54:41
  Speaker 1: real injuries, really bad injuries, over a million. I mean,
• 54:46
  Speaker 1: think about a Vietnam was a catastrophe for the United
• 54:48
  Speaker 1: States and sixty five thousand Americans died there. Hundreds of
• 54:54
  Speaker 1: thousands of Russians have died in Ukraine for Russia itself,
• 54:59
  Speaker 1: I think the numbers eighteen thousand Russians died in Afghanistan
• 55:04
  Speaker 1: and they left in defeat. Hundreds of thousands have died
• 55:10
  Speaker 1: in Ukraine and they're still fighting. I mean, the extent
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: of which this is a this war is a defeat
• 55:18
  Speaker 1: for the Russians is unbelievable in that the numbers in
• 55:22
  Speaker 1: terms of death of World War two like numbers, and
• 55:26
  Speaker 1: yet they're fighting Ukraine, which is a nothing militarily, was
• 55:33
  Speaker 1: nothing military and you can tell that Russia is super frustrated.
• 55:38
  Speaker 1: They're super frustrated. It's like this war was supposed to
• 55:41
  Speaker 1: last a week, three weeks max. And it's you know,
• 55:46
  Speaker 1: going to be three years soon. No, it's more than
• 55:52
  Speaker 1: three years. Sorry, it's going to be four years in February.
• 55:56
  Speaker 1: And they've achieved very little, very little, and they're achieving
• 56:00
  Speaker 1: right now very little. Again. You'll hear of an advance here,
• 56:04
  Speaker 1: in advance there, but they're inches inches and now they're
• 56:09
  Speaker 1: trying to poke NATO out of frustration. They need a diversion,
• 56:15
  Speaker 1: they need to get the Russian people excited about something.
• 56:19
  Speaker 1: What you're seeing is escalating rhetoric, not only the drones
• 56:23
  Speaker 1: flying into Poland, escalating rhetoric about the fact that this
• 56:29
  Speaker 1: is a war with NATO or that a war with
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: NATO is coming. They said that if Poland or NATO
• 56:40
  Speaker 1: established an old fly zone over Ukraine, and if NATO
• 56:44
  Speaker 1: uses its aircraft to shoot down drones over Ukraine, that
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: means a war between NATO and Russia. Vedev also said
• 56:56
  Speaker 1: that he will go after any member of the European
• 56:58
  Speaker 1: Union that provides Ukraine loans backed by seized Russian assets,
• 57:04
  Speaker 1: and he will do so in all possible international and
• 57:06
  Speaker 1: national courts, threatening quote that in some cases Russia will
• 57:12
  Speaker 1: byposs bypass quote proceedings, which means use violence. So he
• 57:19
  Speaker 1: is suggesting violence and real war with NATO. And I
• 57:23
  Speaker 1: think this is all empty threats because they'd be eviscerated
• 57:26
  Speaker 1: by NATO, but it is. It is getting scary. I mean.
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: The other thing is that Ukraine is having incredible success
• 57:39
  Speaker 1: a targeting oil infrastructure all over Russia. I just read
• 57:44
  Speaker 1: that they actually just hit a military base, a Russian
• 57:50
  Speaker 1: military base on the Pacific Ocean, all the way in
• 57:55
  Speaker 1: eastern Ukraine, Russia, all the way the Cific Ocean. Their
• 58:02
  Speaker 1: reach is incredible. They've done some amazing smart attacks and
• 58:08
  Speaker 1: they are taking out as much of the oil infrastructure
• 58:11
  Speaker 1: that the Russians have as possible. At the same time,
• 58:17
  Speaker 1: Trump is doing nothing, all his threats against Putin a zero.
• 58:22
  Speaker 1: Putin has been emboldened since he met with Trump in Alaska.
• 58:26
  Speaker 1: He viewed that meeting as America's weakness. You know, Trump
• 58:36
  Speaker 1: is making demands of the Europeans he knows they won't meet,
• 58:40
  Speaker 1: so that he can use that as an excuse not
• 58:43
  Speaker 1: to do anything to Russia. Because at the end of
• 58:45
  Speaker 1: the day. He likes Putin. Putin's his friend. He doesn't
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: want a hood Putsin. He doesn't want sanctions in Russia.
• 58:53
  Speaker 1: He had my ass Putin, and maybe Putin has something
• 58:57
  Speaker 1: on him. We don't know. I mean, Putin's really only
• 59:03
  Speaker 1: real success right now, only real success is his complete
• 59:08
  Speaker 1: manipulation of Trump, his complete manipulations having Trump in his
• 59:15
  Speaker 1: his in his hand, in his pocket, or whatever you
• 59:17
  Speaker 1: want to call it. That's the only thing going well
• 59:20
  Speaker 1: for Putin right now. On the battlefield, it's going terrible.
• 59:28
  Speaker 1: All right. Finally, let's talk about the Gaza Strip. Before
• 59:35
  Speaker 1: we get to Gaza Strip. One other story about Israel.
• 59:37
  Speaker 1: It's interesting, I mean, sourceas are saying. Now, remember when
• 59:42
  Speaker 1: the attack on Katao happened, the White House said, we
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: didn't know about this. We only heard about it when
• 59:50
  Speaker 1: the misselves win. They we couldn't stop it. Even if
• 59:53
  Speaker 1: we opposed it, we couldn't stop it. Well, according to
• 59:56
  Speaker 1: his really sources, now the White House new and an
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 1: hour before the strike happened. Trump never argued against it,
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 1: never said don't do it. There were discussions between him
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 1: and Antonielle before the strike even happened, and including through
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 1: military channels. And political channels. So this idea that Trump
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 1: didn't know is bs Now it's a line that the
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 1: White House carries in order to appease the Qataris, in
• 1:00:32
  Speaker 1: order for the Katarist to think the Katarist to believe
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 1: that he wasn't involved so he can continue to be
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 1: their friend, and the ally, maybe they'll invest in his
• 1:00:41
  Speaker 1: cryptocurrency as well. Trump continues to say, no, he didn't
• 1:00:49
  Speaker 1: like it. He didn't like the attack. He was against
• 1:00:52
  Speaker 1: the attack, but he couldn't stop it because it was
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 1: too late. So just to fill you in, because we
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 1: talked about that last week about what Trump knew, who
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 1: didn't know, you know, But according to Israeli's quote, Trump
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 1: knew about the strike before the missiles were launched. First,
• 1:01:09
  Speaker 1: there was a discussion on the political level between the
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 1: Tenniel and Trump, but afterwards the military channels, Trump didn't
• 1:01:15
  Speaker 1: say no. Now, you know, again, it's not official. The
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 1: Tenda is not going to call Trump Palaia, but some
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 1: people within the Israeli administration are calling him alive. I
• 1:01:29
  Speaker 1: think as of this morning, Israel time is well launched
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 1: its major operation that it had indicated that it was
• 1:01:37
  Speaker 1: going to do into Gaza, City in the northern Gaza strip. No.
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 1: Gaza City is more populous area in Gaza. It is
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 1: at the heart of ware Tamas has been and is
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 1: it is. It is where there are still remaining whole
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 1: neighborhoods and buildings standing, where there were several hundred thousand
• 1:02:00
  Speaker 1: and residents still living there. Over the last few weeks,
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 1: Israel has told the residents to evacuate, huh, which is
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 1: not something an army committing genocide would do. Evacuate. We
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 1: don't want to kill you now, does it sound like
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 1: genocide to me? Anyway? Put that aside. So they asked
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 1: him about three hundred thousand gouzends have ready to evacuate
• 1:02:22
  Speaker 1: Gudza City and as of this morning, Israel has We've
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 1: seen Israeli tanks entering into Gaza City and the operation
• 1:02:35
  Speaker 1: to basically take over the city, to clear it from
• 1:02:38
  Speaker 1: every Hamas element, to destroy its terrorist infrastructure, including all
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 1: the tunnels that are in Gaza City, including under the hospitals.
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: That is the goal. The goal will ultimately for Israel
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 1: to occupy this territory until there's a different solution. There
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 1: are real risks here. Guzzus. The city is likely to
• 1:03:01
  Speaker 1: be heavily booby trapped by Hamas. So one of the
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: ways in which Israel will deal with the booby traps
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 1: is basically, if you destroy a building, then you don't
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 1: have to deal with the booby traps. And that's probably
• 1:03:14
  Speaker 1: the best way to do it. Flatten as many buildings
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 1: as you can, because if you enter a building to
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 1: try to clear it, you're susceptible to those booby traps.
• 1:03:23
  Speaker 1: And a number of Israel as well. It's taken quite
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 1: a few casualties when they have tried to go in
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 1: and click buildings. It's much safer to just knock the
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 1: building down, and this is why vacuation they fail, Evacuation
• 1:03:36
  Speaker 1: is so necessary. So it's gonna be it's gonna be
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 1: interesting to see this operation how it moves ahead. It
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 1: really does seem like with the Operation Qatar and the
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 1: entry now into Gaza City, it really does seem like,
• 1:03:53
  Speaker 1: you know, two years after the fact, that this government
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 1: is now serious about actually defeating Kamas and defeating the
• 1:04:02
  Speaker 1: Palestinians and Gaza and taking control over the place again.
• 1:04:08
  Speaker 1: This is what should have done been done in October
• 1:04:11
  Speaker 1: of twenty twenty three. This should have been done immediately
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 1: after October seventh. I don't know why it had to
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 1: wait for two years. I mean, I know why hesitancy, cowardice,
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 1: and hostages hostages. I guess the hostage numbers now are
• 1:04:31
  Speaker 1: small enough. The N'tannielle is willing to risk their death
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 1: in order to destroy Kamas. That is the only calculation
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 1: I think that ultimately makes sense. It is better two
• 1:04:45
  Speaker 1: years late than ever, There's no question. So I'm happy
• 1:04:48
  Speaker 1: they're doing it now. I wish they had taken out
• 1:04:51
  Speaker 1: the Katari Hamas two years ago, just like they did
• 1:04:57
  Speaker 1: they took out the leader of Haramas. If you remember,
• 1:05:00
  Speaker 1: they took out the exiled leader of Ramas in Iran
• 1:05:03
  Speaker 1: in his bedroom in a Revolutionary God for Islamic Revolutionary
• 1:05:07
  Speaker 1: God facility, which was one of the one of the
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 1: most stunning intelligence operations ever but all forgotten because of
• 1:05:16
  Speaker 1: the beepers and because of the Iran War and everything else.
• 1:05:19
  Speaker 1: But that was astounding that they could do that. The
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 1: Iranians should have known better at that point than to
• 1:05:24
  Speaker 1: attack Israel, because they should have known that the Israeli
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 1: intelligence is infiltrated into every aspect of their lives. So yeah,
• 1:05:33
  Speaker 1: we will be tracking I will be tracking this Gaza
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 1: City operation and let you know how it goes and
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 1: how it evolves. There was a major story in one
• 1:05:42
  Speaker 1: of these Raeli newspapers which I think was interesting, giving
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 1: credit for a lot of the Mossad intelligence, but not
• 1:05:53
  Speaker 1: just intelligence, actual action on the ground in Iran in
• 1:05:58
  Speaker 1: Tehran to female agents, two female agents who you don't
• 1:06:08
  Speaker 1: do the whole array of both the intelligence gathering and
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 1: also again sabotage and military action in Iran, you know,
• 1:06:18
  Speaker 1: including closing up and seducing I guess leaders within Iran.
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 1: It was the first time the role of females in
• 1:06:28
  Speaker 1: the Mossad has been really highlighted in this way, and
• 1:06:31
  Speaker 1: it is interesting enough. It's a plot line. It's the
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 1: plot line of a TV series that I think is
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 1: on Apple TV called Tehran, which is follows a female
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 1: Mossad agent in Iran working to assassinate I think the
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 1: defense the head of the Defense department or something like that.
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 1: So yeah, Tehran is worth watching. Of course, in Tehran
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 1: things don't go as well as they did in real life,
• 1:07:04
  Speaker 1: which is interesting. The TV show was more skeptical about
• 1:07:09
  Speaker 1: Mosad's ability to pull it off than reality. In reality,
• 1:07:12
  Speaker 1: Mosada is even better than what they're portrayed on TV,
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 1: which I don't think that's true of any other spy agency,
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 1: or call it. Call it that way. You know, Mosata
• 1:07:24
  Speaker 1: is unbelievable, really unbelievable. All right, let's see that I
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 1: think is the news for Tuesday, September sixteenth. All right,
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 1: So we will move to super chat and I will
• 1:07:43
  Speaker 1: encourage you to continue to ask questions. We have a
• 1:07:46
  Speaker 1: lot from yesterday and a few from today. We still
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 1: haven't met our first hour goal and we're into the
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 1: second hour, so please consider supporting the show with a
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 1: sticker or with a question. We'll answer all the questions. Today.
• 1:08:01
  Speaker 1: We were not really limited in terms of time, so
• 1:08:04
  Speaker 1: I will have the time to.
• 1:08:08
  Speaker 2: Go over it all and we'll go over.
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 1: All of it, and so you can ask more and
• 1:08:24
  Speaker 1: support the show more because we need to make our
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 1: second hour goal. All right, let's see. I also want
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 1: to tell you about our sponsors. We have three sponsors.
• 1:08:35
  Speaker 1: The Iman Institute is encouraging people to sign up for
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 1: the Ironmand live classes. These are courses they're going to
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 1: be offered online live, but you can take them recorded.
• 1:08:47
  Speaker 1: You don't have to show up live for class, but
• 1:08:49
  Speaker 1: you can if you want. You can take the classes
• 1:08:52
  Speaker 1: at your own pace. You can do homework if you
• 1:08:54
  Speaker 1: want or not. If you don't want, you can in
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 1: a sense ardit the classes determine the level of engagement
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 1: that you want. It's up to you.
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 2: Uh.
• 1:09:07
  Speaker 1: These classes are going to be starting in October. They're
• 1:09:12
  Speaker 1: gonna there are three of them. In the Philosophy of Objectivism,
• 1:09:15
  Speaker 1: which is just a straight course on the philosophy, the
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 1: philosophy through the Fiction, which goes through the fiction and
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 1: how the fiction illustrates the philosophy and a course on work,
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 1: which I think Don Watkins is teaching. The other two
• 1:09:31
  Speaker 1: heavy involvement of on cargate. These are excellent courses for
• 1:09:36
  Speaker 1: anybody interested in deepening their understanding of the philosophy and
• 1:09:40
  Speaker 1: anybody kind of with questions about work in Korea. I
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 1: think the course is really really valuable, the course on work.
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 1: So I encourage you to sign up, and you could
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 1: do so on inrand dot org slash start here, Iran
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 1: dotag slash start here and click on the Iron Rand.
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 1: It's live and you can get a ten percent discount
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 1: on the rate. I'm not sure what the right is,
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 1: but you can get a ten percent discount, and all
• 1:10:08
  Speaker 1: you need is a discount code twenty five YBS ten.
• 1:10:14
  Speaker 1: Twenty five YBS ten, that's a discount code to get
• 1:10:18
  Speaker 1: a ten percent discount. Hand a Shot Wealth Management Office
• 1:10:21
  Speaker 1: product product that can significantly save you money on capital gains.
• 1:10:28
  Speaker 1: It will actually allow you to defer massive amounts of
• 1:10:34
  Speaker 1: capital gains well into the future and thus save you
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 1: a huge amount of money. If you do the math,
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 1: you can see how much can be saved just by
• 1:10:44
  Speaker 1: the deferbo. You can get a lot of insight into
• 1:10:47
  Speaker 1: this product and see if it's something that suits you.
• 1:10:51
  Speaker 1: But also I think you should watch this anyway because
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 1: I think it's super interesting and a lot of you
• 1:10:54
  Speaker 1: will find it interesting. Is my interview with Robert Handershot
• 1:10:58
  Speaker 1: on on my YouTube channel. If you go to the
• 1:11:05
  Speaker 1: playlist for sponsors, the playlist for sponsors, uh and yeah
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 1: you can. You can listen to that and see you
• 1:11:17
  Speaker 1: can go then to hand a Shot Wealth, hand a
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 1: Shot Wealth h hand a Shot with two Tea's hand
• 1:11:23
  Speaker 1: a Shot Wealth dot com slash ybs and uh sign
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 1: up to have a discussion with somebody from the company
• 1:11:32
  Speaker 1: to see if this is a product that's suitable for you.
• 1:11:34
  Speaker 1: No hearts out just does it work for you? It
• 1:11:38
  Speaker 1: doesn't it work for you? Nwick, thank you, Thank you
• 1:11:42
  Speaker 1: for the support. Really appreciated. Enerwick did a stick out?
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 1: YouTube can do a sticker, It's easy. And finally, Alex Epstein.
• 1:11:49
  Speaker 1: Alex Epstein is the world expert, world expert on all
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 1: things to do with climate change, energy, fossil fuels, the author,
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 1: the author a fossil future, and and uh, you know,
• 1:12:05
  Speaker 1: a real influencer when it comes to energy policy in
• 1:12:07
  Speaker 1: the United States today, a big influencer within the Republican
• 1:12:10
  Speaker 1: Party and even within the Trump administration. So I encourage
• 1:12:15
  Speaker 1: you to follow him and read his stuff. If you
• 1:12:17
  Speaker 1: want to know what's going on in this world of energy,
• 1:12:21
  Speaker 1: he's the guy. If you want to become a better
• 1:12:23
  Speaker 1: communicator about energy, he's your guy. Alex Epstein dot substick
• 1:12:28
  Speaker 1: dot com, alex Epstein dot substack dot com. Follow Alex.
• 1:12:32
  Speaker 1: He's phenomenal. And finally, if you want to support the
• 1:12:37
  Speaker 1: IRN Books show on a regular sustained basis, because this show,
• 1:12:42
  Speaker 1: this show is made possible by you, couldn't exist without you.
• 1:12:46
  Speaker 1: You are all the fuel that makes this show possible.
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 1: Without the financial support you provide. There is no yourn
• 1:12:53
  Speaker 1: book show, there is no you'reon Brook show, So please
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 1: support it to sustain its existence. And your best way
• 1:13:11
  Speaker 1: to do that is to make it come up is
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 1: to make a monthly subscription. You can do that on Patreon,
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 1: on PayPal Patreon, I think is easier Patreon dot com
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: and then patreon dot com. Oh, PayPal dot com, and
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 1: then put your one book show and yeah, become a
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 1: monthly supporter of the show. And that that that is
• 1:13:33
  Speaker 1: the best, the best now in the meantime, right now, today,
• 1:13:37
  Speaker 1: right here, we need thirty six more dollars to make
• 1:13:41
  Speaker 1: our first hour goal and two hundred and eighty six
• 1:13:44
  Speaker 1: dollars to make our second hour goal. So think about it.
• 1:13:49
  Speaker 1: Can you help get a sto where we need to be?
• 1:13:52
  Speaker 1: Can you provide a trade here? Value for value? All right,
• 1:13:58
  Speaker 1: let's see Alexis. Alexis says, can these morons realistically bite
• 1:14:07
  Speaker 1: past the First Amendment? Probably not in the sense that
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 1: it'll be thrown on in courts, But can you I
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 1: said this before, can you really harass people? Can you
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 1: really disrupt people's lives? Can you scare threaten people like
• 1:14:28
  Speaker 1: Trump is doing with the media, threatening it all the time. Yes,
• 1:14:33
  Speaker 1: can you withdraw the broadcasting licenses for NBC and CB
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 1: and ABC? Probably, could you get away with it? Probably,
• 1:14:42
  Speaker 1: FCC has that power, so they can get away with
• 1:14:48
  Speaker 1: a lot. But if they literally arrest somebody for hate speech,
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 1: that'll be thrown out by this courts won't stand. But
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 1: they can do a lot in the gray areas and
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 1: where government has just power to just inflict real damage
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 1: on private parties who they are unhappy with. The problem
• 1:15:16
  Speaker 1: with the mixed economy and mixed economy just gives government
• 1:15:19
  Speaker 1: this power over private enterprise that is really in many
• 1:15:22
  Speaker 1: respects unlimited. Christas, the government can destroy you by dragging
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 1: you for years in courts where you may have to
• 1:15:31
  Speaker 1: pay a fortune and lawyers, but they have unlimited resources
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 1: from taxes. Absolutely true. Even if you are exonerated, you
• 1:15:39
  Speaker 1: are truly lost. Yes, I mean people are like that.
• 1:15:44
  Speaker 1: People are being bankrupted by having to defend themselves in court,
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 1: you know, let's say irs court, even if they win
• 1:15:50
  Speaker 1: in the end. So it's very difficult the government. Can
• 1:15:55
  Speaker 1: you know, Giuliani invented the idea that you could throw
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 1: rico claims against financial malfeasance, and Rico they confiscate your property.
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 1: They confiscate, they freeze your assets before the trial, before
• 1:16:14
  Speaker 1: you even proven guilty, and thus they destroy your business
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 1: before you even go to court. I mean, the government
• 1:16:25
  Speaker 1: is brutal. Force is brutal. Force is the initiation of
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 1: force is evil, and the government wields force. There are
• 1:16:33
  Speaker 1: very few limitations sadly about force. Dave Dean, thank you
• 1:16:39
  Speaker 1: for the sticker. Twenty dollars. Really really appreciate that. Mary Ellen,
• 1:16:42
  Speaker 1: thank you for the sticker. Let's see who else did stickers?
• 1:16:45
  Speaker 1: Enric I said, I think William, thank you, and let's
• 1:16:51
  Speaker 1: see Nick, thank you, and Thumb even Harper Catherine, thank
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 1: you guys for stickers. You too can help the show,
• 1:17:05
  Speaker 1: which just like three bucks, like mamby Elean did a sticker,
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 1: and it all adds up. It all adds up only
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 1: only thirteen bucks away from our first hour goal, which
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 1: would be great. Not you have a y'all go with them?
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 1: Why do people want mindless ness and outrage? They want
• 1:17:24
  Speaker 1: to be animals? Being a human being is too hard.
• 1:17:28
  Speaker 1: Being a human being requires thinking, It requires effort, it
• 1:17:32
  Speaker 1: requires responsibility, it requires Yeah, it's hard, and there's a
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 1: sense in which I don't think they think in these terms.
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 1: But there's a sudden comfort, laziness in being mindless, in
• 1:17:50
  Speaker 1: being an animal. You just follow the tribe, do you know?
• 1:17:56
  Speaker 1: It's easy and people people have always been and still
• 1:18:02
  Speaker 1: are attracted to that, attracted to not living really as
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 1: a human being. It's sad, it's what a waste and
• 1:18:13
  Speaker 1: they usually inflict a lot of harm on the rest
• 1:18:15
  Speaker 1: of us. It's the anti conceptual mentality I'm man talked about.
• 1:18:21
  Speaker 1: It's the missing link, the people who don't rise to
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 1: the conceptual ability, and they're the ones making it hard
• 1:18:32
  Speaker 1: for the rest of us. Now as being a human
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 1: being too hard, it's not too hard, but for some
• 1:18:38
  Speaker 1: people it's hard enough, or they've never learned. They've never
• 1:18:44
  Speaker 1: taught themselves. They've never been taught of the upside, of
• 1:18:48
  Speaker 1: the benefit, of the wonders, of the happiness, of the achievement,
• 1:18:52
  Speaker 1: of the success of actually engaging, thinking for yourself and
• 1:18:56
  Speaker 1: engaging and living. That's a massive failure of educational system,
• 1:19:05
  Speaker 1: among others. Test up, do you think people can actually
• 1:19:09
  Speaker 1: suffer from TDS? Is not an anti concept? Yeah, it's
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 1: certainly an anti concept. Doesn't exist, There's no such a thing.
• 1:19:16
  Speaker 1: Are there people who are emotionalistic when it comes to Trump. Yes,
• 1:19:22
  Speaker 1: and you want to call that Trump do agents and refine.
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 1: But when you include in that people who rationally critique him,
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 1: who have consistently over the years critiqued him and been right,
• 1:19:38
  Speaker 1: then the concept loses all meaning. So the people out
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 1: there all the time who respond to everything emotionally. If
• 1:19:49
  Speaker 1: there's TDS, there's also biten derangement syndrome. And Kamala has
• 1:19:55
  Speaker 1: doragement syndrome. And I don't know anything derangement syndroome, anything
• 1:20:00
  Speaker 1: any stance that somebody else takes that's you know, derive
• 1:20:03
  Speaker 1: from emotionals. I mean, you don't like you call it
• 1:20:05
  Speaker 1: a derangement syndrome. Not very useful or helpful. But uh yes,
• 1:20:21
  Speaker 1: I think it's an involid concept and it's a way
• 1:20:23
  Speaker 1: to stop a debate in discussion. Right, Oh, you've just
• 1:20:26
  Speaker 1: got drump derangent sydom. What are you even supposed to say? No,
• 1:20:29
  Speaker 1: I don't define your terms. I mean anybody who uses
• 1:20:33
  Speaker 1: that accusation is not worth engaging with. Oh it's Tuck
• 1:20:40
  Speaker 1: a derangement syndrome. Interesting, all right, Roland, another week in Florence.
• 1:20:57
  Speaker 1: That's another week of me being jealous in enjoy your
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 1: time there. You should be jealous. Absolutely, thank you. That
• 1:21:06
  Speaker 1: is my goal for another week. We'll see Michael ass.
• 1:21:11
  Speaker 1: Have you been to Iceland? Thought, could we theoretically get
• 1:21:14
  Speaker 1: through objectivism, get enough objectivists to invade in the next
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 1: twenty years due to their unsuspecting nature? No? No, have
• 1:21:34
  Speaker 1: you ever been to Iceland? I have? I have been
• 1:21:38
  Speaker 1: to Iceland. I've been to Iceland once. I give a
• 1:21:40
  Speaker 1: talk and I give a couple of talks there at
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 1: the University in Iceland. It is it is too cold
• 1:21:51
  Speaker 1: for an objectivist invasion. We value life too much. It's
• 1:21:56
  Speaker 1: too cold, it's too barren fall for a tourists. It's
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 1: a gorgeous place. It's really beautiful. I mean, if you
• 1:22:04
  Speaker 1: like rugged waterfalls, mountains, fjords. I mean, has everything, hot springs,
• 1:22:11
  Speaker 1: but it's cold. I was in October and it was cold,
• 1:22:16
  Speaker 1: colder than Michigan, and it's barren. I mean. The reason
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 1: there are only two hundred and fifty thousand people in Iceland,
• 1:22:25
  Speaker 1: it's because in the entire world of eight billion people,
• 1:22:30
  Speaker 1: there are only two hundred and fifty thousand people who
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 1: can tolerate that cold and isolation and darkness and ruggedness.
• 1:22:42
  Speaker 1: That's it. Two hundred and fifty thousand. Yeah, it's very
• 1:22:45
  Speaker 1: windy and the wind makes it like much much much
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 1: colder cold, too cold for objectivism. Where there's an important value,
• 1:22:56
  Speaker 1: warmth is an important value. Put it out. We're not
• 1:22:59
  Speaker 1: escu we're objectivists. There's a T shirt for you. Alexi says,
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 1: how's the Thatcher show prep going? Or did you forget again?
• 1:23:09
  Speaker 1: I did not forget. The problem is add its scheduled
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 1: on the weekend of the eighteenth, and now I have
• 1:23:15
  Speaker 1: something else scheduled on the weekend of the eighteenth, so
• 1:23:18
  Speaker 1: I probably won't do a show that weekend, so I
• 1:23:20
  Speaker 1: have to figure out when I'm going to do it.
• 1:23:23
  Speaker 1: But no, it's on my calendar for that weekend. I'm
• 1:23:25
  Speaker 1: moving on my calendar to somewhere else, so it won't
• 1:23:28
  Speaker 1: be exactly on her birthday, but I will. I will
• 1:23:31
  Speaker 1: try to do it around that time. But I do
• 1:23:35
  Speaker 1: remember it's calendar. It's written down. That always helps my
• 1:23:39
  Speaker 1: memory when things are written down. As for prep, yeah,
• 1:23:45
  Speaker 1: I'm behind on prep, but that's part of the course.
• 1:23:47
  Speaker 1: I'm always behind on prep. Liam. Are we already in
• 1:23:52
  Speaker 1: a quasi fascist dictatorship. No, we're not in a dictatorship.
• 1:23:56
  Speaker 1: It's just not a dictatorship yet. If next year's elections
• 1:24:01
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty six elections are called off, or if the
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty eight elections are called off, then when the dictatorship.
• 1:24:07
  Speaker 1: But we're not. We're in a quasi fascist economic system
• 1:24:12
  Speaker 1: right where the government is heavily involved in the economy.
• 1:24:15
  Speaker 1: But yeah, we're not in dictatorship. Let's not exaggerate the
• 1:24:19
  Speaker 1: state we're in. Why is Lex Fiedman ghosting you? I
• 1:24:23
  Speaker 1: don't know that he is, but he might be because
• 1:24:27
  Speaker 1: you know, I might him make him uncomfortable because of
• 1:24:30
  Speaker 1: the strong, uncompromising stances that I take, where he tends
• 1:24:36
  Speaker 1: to want to find middle ground. I think the Israeli
• 1:24:40
  Speaker 1: Palestinian thing. He came to my talk at the University
• 1:24:42
  Speaker 1: of Texas on Israel. They might have turned him off.
• 1:24:47
  Speaker 1: He might have thought I was too aggressive. I don't know,
• 1:24:51
  Speaker 1: although if he's followed me, he probably knew that already.
• 1:24:56
  Speaker 1: But I don't know that he's ghosting me. I mean,
• 1:24:57
  Speaker 1: he might just be busy. He might just not answer
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 1: emails because he only answered emails to a few people
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 1: and he's just super busy, and he's busier than he's
• 1:25:07
  Speaker 1: ever been. I don't know. I'm not assuming the worst.
• 1:25:10
  Speaker 1: There's no reason to Crypto fanatic Nick Foyantis said the
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 1: Jews are greater threats to the US and Iran o Islam,
• 1:25:19
  Speaker 1: and Trump should army Iran with nuclear weapons because it's
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 1: the only way to stand against Jewish global dominance.
• 1:25:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:25:25
  Speaker 1: I mean, that's Nick Prentis. It's meaningless, it's stupid, it's ignorant,
• 1:25:31
  Speaker 1: but it's Neck Frentis. This is how he gets his
• 1:25:33
  Speaker 1: groper army or whatever you want to call it, all
• 1:25:36
  Speaker 1: wiled up and excited. The anti Semitism is essential to
• 1:25:43
  Speaker 1: his appeal. James, how come evil is so good at
• 1:25:49
  Speaker 1: finding flaws in the good. Shouldn't these people be completely incompetent. Well,
• 1:25:55
  Speaker 1: I mean they're incompetent in dealing with nature and dealing
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 1: with reality, and yet they know people, they know particularly
• 1:26:04
  Speaker 1: flawed people, because they are themselves flawed. They understand flawed people.
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 1: I mean Elsee too is a good example. His understanding
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 1: is people. He doesn't understand nature, doesn't understand reality, couldn't
• 1:26:15
  Speaker 1: build anything, but he can exploit people's weaknesses because that
• 1:26:19
  Speaker 1: he understands he's his weaknesses are their weaknesses, and he
• 1:26:22
  Speaker 1: understands that the oriented towards people, not towards reality or nature. Michael,
• 1:26:33
  Speaker 1: to reach the level of depravity of celebrating October seventh
• 1:26:36
  Speaker 1: of Charlie Cook's murder requires training, some type of conditioning
• 1:26:42
  Speaker 1: from evil college professors. Yes, there's no question. It has
• 1:26:46
  Speaker 1: to come from real passion. It has to come from
• 1:26:52
  Speaker 1: a real disintegration of any kind of value system. All
• 1:26:56
  Speaker 1: you care about, all you can see, all you can
• 1:26:59
  Speaker 1: believe in, is this intersectionality oppressor, oppressed. It comes from
• 1:27:05
  Speaker 1: a diet that they are fed in the university of
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 1: oppressive actions. Murders, genocides, killing, wars, all that present the
• 1:27:20
  Speaker 1: West as evil and bad and horrible, and the oppressed
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 1: nations as victims and good and beautiful and noble, you know,
• 1:27:28
  Speaker 1: so like noble savages. And the professors just keep on
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 1: homping that an example, f the example, f the example
• 1:27:36
  Speaker 1: after example, and it also it violence becomes just that's
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 1: the way people deal with one another. Right, that's the world.
• 1:27:43
  Speaker 1: There's no other way to deal with one another other
• 1:27:45
  Speaker 1: than violence. It's a zero some world in that sense. Again,
• 1:27:48
  Speaker 1: the right and the left are very similar. It's a
• 1:27:50
  Speaker 1: zero some world. The only way to advance is through violence.
• 1:27:55
  Speaker 1: There for those who have advanced must be those who
• 1:27:59
  Speaker 1: committed the most violence. And they're for the other bad guys,
• 1:28:03
  Speaker 1: and it's okay to be violent against them. The Dudo bunny,
• 1:28:08
  Speaker 1: they don't kill you because you're a Nazi. They call
• 1:28:13
  Speaker 1: you a Nazi, so they can kill you. Yeah, I
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 1: think that's right. But I don't think they even know
• 1:28:25
  Speaker 1: what the word means, what the concept means. I think
• 1:28:30
  Speaker 1: they thought it around because they know it's really really
• 1:28:32
  Speaker 1: bad and they want to label anybody they don't like
• 1:28:35
  Speaker 1: it's really really bad. And then if you keep doing
• 1:28:38
  Speaker 1: that and you associate the Nazis with pure evil, then
• 1:28:44
  Speaker 1: you kind of weaken resistance to violence. And look, most
• 1:28:49
  Speaker 1: of the people will call you a Nazi. Most of
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 1: the people who call you a Nazi are not going
• 1:28:55
  Speaker 1: to kill you too cowardly or they don't really want violent.
• 1:29:00
  Speaker 1: They just do it to fit in. But all it
• 1:29:02
  Speaker 1: takes is one, Like we saw what Charlie Cook's murderer.
• 1:29:06
  Speaker 1: All it takes is one and then they jump and
• 1:29:08
  Speaker 1: supported that person and hopefully they lose their jobs. Christian,
• 1:29:17
  Speaker 1: how is Mexico being able to raise its minimum wage
• 1:29:20
  Speaker 1: without a significant negative impact on employment. Mexico's minimum wage
• 1:29:23
  Speaker 1: policy is being used as a model for success by advocates.
• 1:29:29
  Speaker 1: You know, I don't know how they do it. I
• 1:29:32
  Speaker 1: don't know. I don't know much about the minimum wage
• 1:29:39
  Speaker 1: in Mexico. But my guess is that they're doing two things.
• 1:29:45
  Speaker 1: One is they're raising the minimum wage slowly at about
• 1:29:51
  Speaker 1: the pace in which productivity is increasing, so that the
• 1:29:55
  Speaker 1: effects a minimum Right, So this is the rate of
• 1:29:59
  Speaker 1: which wages would grow anyway. Right, minimum wages zero, I say,
• 1:30:04
  Speaker 1: But that doesn't mean anybody owns zero other than interns.
• 1:30:08
  Speaker 1: So wages are going to creep up, even the wages
• 1:30:11
  Speaker 1: of the least productive. They're going to creep up with productivity.
• 1:30:15
  Speaker 1: If you can set the minimum wage at a level
• 1:30:19
  Speaker 1: that does not disrupt unemployment very low and then keep
• 1:30:23
  Speaker 1: raising it with productivity, it won't create unemployment or create
• 1:30:28
  Speaker 1: very little. And that brings me to the second point,
• 1:30:31
  Speaker 1: which is how do you know it hasn't had a
• 1:30:34
  Speaker 1: negative impact on employment? That is, you don't have an
• 1:30:37
  Speaker 1: alternative world in which minimum wage doesn't exist and where
• 1:30:43
  Speaker 1: maybe more Mexicans employed, maybe more young Mexicans employed. Now Again,
• 1:30:49
  Speaker 1: I don't have in front of me, and I don't
• 1:30:51
  Speaker 1: have the knowledge of what unemployment rate right now is
• 1:30:54
  Speaker 1: in Mexico, what it is among young people, what it
• 1:30:57
  Speaker 1: is in the poorest areas, and what the minimum wages
• 1:31:01
  Speaker 1: relative and how it's changed relative to productivity. You'd have
• 1:31:05
  Speaker 1: to get all of that data in order to be
• 1:31:07
  Speaker 1: able to analyze it. But I do know one thing,
• 1:31:11
  Speaker 1: and that is the laws of economics don't change once
• 1:31:13
  Speaker 1: you cross the border to Mexico. So they're doing something
• 1:31:19
  Speaker 1: that is not disrupting supplying demand. All right, clog when
• 1:31:29
  Speaker 1: you pass God, when you pass would you want the
• 1:31:33
  Speaker 1: tombstone next time? Random Lina Peacock. Then in a few
• 1:31:36
  Speaker 1: hundred years, when the three of you are super famous,
• 1:31:39
  Speaker 1: people can give homage to you all at the same time. No,
• 1:31:43
  Speaker 1: I mean that would be unbelievably potentious of me. I
• 1:31:47
  Speaker 1: don't consider myself at the level of Randon Lina Peacock,
• 1:31:52
  Speaker 1: you know, and I don't consider myself that special. I
• 1:31:55
  Speaker 1: mean special, but not that special. No, I think it
• 1:31:59
  Speaker 1: would be unbelievable. I mean, Iran was a genius. Lena
• 1:32:02
  Speaker 1: Peacoff was was was her genius student who who did
• 1:32:07
  Speaker 1: for her work, you know, preserved their work and made
• 1:32:11
  Speaker 1: sure that it it, you know, it, it got the
• 1:32:15
  Speaker 1: respect that deserved and the treatment it deserved. And then
• 1:32:19
  Speaker 1: made sure that by writing Opah that it was self perpetuating,
• 1:32:25
  Speaker 1: and by founding the institute, and and by doing and
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 1: by promoting the books, and by doing a lot of
• 1:32:30
  Speaker 1: different things making sure that her books would would go
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 1: on perpetunity. None of my achievements, none of what I've done,
• 1:32:40
  Speaker 1: rises to that level. I mean, and I don't know
• 1:32:43
  Speaker 1: that anybody's ever going to. I don't know that I'll
• 1:32:47
  Speaker 1: ever be a famous person in that sense. Iran and
• 1:32:51
  Speaker 1: Lena Peacoff will be, and uh maybe I'll be remembered
• 1:32:54
  Speaker 1: as one of their first CEOs of DINMNI student a
• 1:32:58
  Speaker 1: public commentator maybe into the future. But I don't know.
• 1:33:04
  Speaker 1: I don't know. I do think, you know, I when
• 1:33:14
  Speaker 1: I die, you know, I think the simplest thing is
• 1:33:17
  Speaker 1: to is to cremate and and you know, spread the
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 1: ashes somewhere. I have no real interest in a grief
• 1:33:27
  Speaker 1: site and a tombstone and anything like that. I you know,
• 1:33:31
  Speaker 1: what happens after my die. I died, I don't really care.
• 1:33:34
  Speaker 1: And I I don't. The only value of it is,
• 1:33:38
  Speaker 1: I'd say, is what my children and what my wife
• 1:33:41
  Speaker 1: if I died before her want. That's the only consideration
• 1:33:44
  Speaker 1: I would ever if they want to, they want a
• 1:33:46
  Speaker 1: place to go to right to commemorate my life or
• 1:33:50
  Speaker 1: something like that and find. But other than that, I
• 1:33:52
  Speaker 1: have no interest in it. And if you guys demand it,
• 1:33:56
  Speaker 1: we want to celebrate you on whatever. I just don't
• 1:34:00
  Speaker 1: think in terms of legacy in that sense, Michael, to
• 1:34:07
  Speaker 1: mistake feeling for thought will only exacerbate emotional difficulties and
• 1:34:11
  Speaker 1: cause more potential for violence. Yes, I mean, if you
• 1:34:16
  Speaker 1: think that decisions should be made through emotions, you will
• 1:34:21
  Speaker 1: fail in life. That will only create more frustration, more resentment,
• 1:34:26
  Speaker 1: more envy, and more mistakes, violence being one of those,
• 1:34:31
  Speaker 1: and the envy, resentment, hostility will generate ultimately violence. Yep, Wes,
• 1:34:40
  Speaker 1: thank you, thank you for the fifty dollars. Really really
• 1:34:43
  Speaker 1: appreciate that that brought us a little a little closer
• 1:34:47
  Speaker 1: to our second hour goal. Well into that second hour,
• 1:34:51
  Speaker 1: you know, we'll see if some of you can help
• 1:34:53
  Speaker 1: us get to that goal. All right, I mean, use this, yeah,
• 1:35:00
  Speaker 1: one hundred and sixty eight dollars to the second hour goal,
• 1:35:05
  Speaker 1: Clark says, do you think Donald Trump actually cared one
• 1:35:07
  Speaker 1: iota when Charlie Cook passed? I don't think he would
• 1:35:10
  Speaker 1: care if his wife or kids died. He will use
• 1:35:13
  Speaker 1: any loss's marketing material. You know, I don't know. I
• 1:35:18
  Speaker 1: don't want psychologize him to that extent. I think as anarcissist,
• 1:35:23
  Speaker 1: he probably doesn't care that much about others. But I
• 1:35:26
  Speaker 1: you know, I don't want to speculate about how much
• 1:35:28
  Speaker 1: he cared about anybody's wife, kids or this. He definitely
• 1:35:34
  Speaker 1: used it for good marketing, which is very good at Raymond.
• 1:35:40
  Speaker 1: I think this is like a full part question. My
• 1:35:43
  Speaker 1: friend is in a game development club and many of
• 1:35:46
  Speaker 1: the people don't do basic due diligence or lazy or irrational,
• 1:35:51
  Speaker 1: so he will pand it to them by appreciating their
• 1:35:54
  Speaker 1: minor efforts before criticizing, because they don't accept direct criticism. Therefore,
• 1:35:59
  Speaker 1: he conclude that sometimes appeasing bending to people's irrational emotion
• 1:36:05
  Speaker 1: works or is the right move. In principle, it has
• 1:36:08
  Speaker 1: to be destructive. Right move in then uses in principle
• 1:36:14
  Speaker 1: it has to be destructive. Print of all, it has
• 1:36:21
  Speaker 1: to be destructive because of its appeasement of irrationality. But
• 1:36:26
  Speaker 1: at first glance it appears to be effective. However, I'm
• 1:36:30
  Speaker 1: having trouble fleshing it out thoughts. So, yes, a lot
• 1:36:38
  Speaker 1: of things on first glance seem like they work. Pragmatism
• 1:36:42
  Speaker 1: often works, and a lot of it depends on what
• 1:36:46
  Speaker 1: you define as work. Like this little appeasement of the
• 1:36:50
  Speaker 1: irrational means he can get some stuff done, but he'll
• 1:36:56
  Speaker 1: never get anything great done. You'll never get anything substained done.
• 1:37:01
  Speaker 1: These people will never help him achieve anything of significance. Yeah,
• 1:37:07
  Speaker 1: they'll make it, make little things possible, little stuff, but
• 1:37:12
  Speaker 1: he will never live up to his potential. Imagine if
• 1:37:18
  Speaker 1: he surrounded himself with capable rational people, and I'm assuming
• 1:37:24
  Speaker 1: he's smart and ambitious, think about what he could achieve then,
• 1:37:29
  Speaker 1: and think about what he's achieving now. So the appeasement
• 1:37:34
  Speaker 1: of irrationality is going to lead to a suboptimal life,
• 1:37:39
  Speaker 1: to a life of underachievement. And it means you're constantly
• 1:37:44
  Speaker 1: dealing with these people, which erodes your own rationality, toroads
• 1:37:49
  Speaker 1: your own confidence, it eroads your own sense of life,
• 1:37:54
  Speaker 1: it erodes the fun of living. So in so many dimensions,
• 1:38:00
  Speaker 1: this is destructive. It's destructive because you're not living up
• 1:38:02
  Speaker 1: to your potential. It's destructive because you have to deal
• 1:38:05
  Speaker 1: with irrational people, and it's exhuding. You have to think
• 1:38:09
  Speaker 1: about all the energy spending on that instead of building,
• 1:38:11
  Speaker 1: instead of creating, instead of making stuff. And then finally,
• 1:38:19
  Speaker 1: some of them might backstabbing him the future, steal one
• 1:38:22
  Speaker 1: of his ideas. You don't do something nasty, because that's
• 1:38:26
  Speaker 1: the nature of irrationality. So I get it that he
• 1:38:34
  Speaker 1: might be a you know that he might have to
• 1:38:37
  Speaker 1: do this right now. But if this is the strategy,
• 1:38:43
  Speaker 1: if they're really irrational, if they really this is the
• 1:38:48
  Speaker 1: modus of barandi, this is the way they're going to work,
• 1:38:50
  Speaker 1: and this is the future, then he is destroying his
• 1:38:53
  Speaker 1: own future by dealing with it now. It could be
• 1:38:57
  Speaker 1: that he's just using it as a tactic to to
• 1:39:01
  Speaker 1: get them to open up. But if they're truly you asked,
• 1:39:04
  Speaker 1: that's really what they are, then you just shouldn't deal
• 1:39:06
  Speaker 1: with them, because ultimately you're wasting energy and you're not achieving,
• 1:39:12
  Speaker 1: and you're you know, you've only got one life. I
• 1:39:14
  Speaker 1: keep saying, right, gott to make the most of it. Michael,
• 1:39:21
  Speaker 1: how hard is it to have drones of security monitoring
• 1:39:25
  Speaker 1: roofs during events. These assassins are way too easy of
• 1:39:29
  Speaker 1: a time pulling these things off. Yeah, I mean, I
• 1:39:31
  Speaker 1: don't understand it. I certainly the Secret Service in the
• 1:39:34
  Speaker 1: Trump case, man was that a blunder. I mean, some
• 1:39:38
  Speaker 1: people lost their jobs over it. But it really is irresponsible,
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 1: and yeah, it should be. They should be drones in
• 1:39:45
  Speaker 1: the air, particularly for the president or or a leading
• 1:39:48
  Speaker 1: candidate for the presidency. There should be drones. Now, somebody
• 1:39:52
  Speaker 1: said that Charlie wasn't even wearing a bulletpoof vest and
• 1:39:57
  Speaker 1: so the whole ricochet story is not true. Again, I
• 1:40:00
  Speaker 1: don't know, I have no firstand information, but yeah, I
• 1:40:06
  Speaker 1: mean it's not clear why there not more competent of
• 1:40:13
  Speaker 1: these things and using drug technology for example, not to
• 1:40:19
  Speaker 1: every jongo with him. Is the lack of gun control
• 1:40:21
  Speaker 1: laws why Charlie Cook is dead? No, I don't think so.
• 1:40:24
  Speaker 1: I mean, look the rifle that was used as a
• 1:40:27
  Speaker 1: hunting rifle. I don't think any gun control laws are
• 1:40:30
  Speaker 1: such that would exclude hunting rifles. His parents used to
• 1:40:33
  Speaker 1: take him hunting. Hunting was a family thing that they did.
• 1:40:38
  Speaker 1: I think almost all gun control laws allow for hunting rifles.
• 1:40:44
  Speaker 1: There are lots of countries you allowed to have hunting rifles. No.
• 1:40:48
  Speaker 1: I mean, look, Charlie Cook is dead because of the
• 1:40:53
  Speaker 1: kind of culture we have that accepts violence and the
• 1:40:58
  Speaker 1: attitude some people par million the left have towards speech
• 1:41:02
  Speaker 1: is violence. And therefore what was done to Charlie was
• 1:41:05
  Speaker 1: the act of justice. Supposedly it's ideas, and it's his psychology,
• 1:41:12
  Speaker 1: the murder of psychology, the fact that he was a
• 1:41:14
  Speaker 1: sick kid, not sick in terms of mental illness, sick
• 1:41:19
  Speaker 1: in terms of completely corrupt mind, corrupted by bad ideas.
• 1:41:28
  Speaker 1: Whether he did it for attention, notoriety, or for the
• 1:41:32
  Speaker 1: cause for whatever, it's sick. And then do we have
• 1:41:37
  Speaker 1: a culture where that works, where that gets you what
• 1:41:41
  Speaker 1: you want? Not you have a you algorithm. We're forcing
• 1:41:45
  Speaker 1: all homeless mentally ill people into psychiatric facilities and passing
• 1:41:48
  Speaker 1: stricter gun control measures have prevented the deaths of both
• 1:41:51
  Speaker 1: Ukrainian Gola and the bus and Charlie Cook. I don't
• 1:41:55
  Speaker 1: think it would have prevented Charlie Cook's death. It would
• 1:41:59
  Speaker 1: have probably prevented the Goal's death. And I don't think
• 1:42:02
  Speaker 1: you could force all homeless mentally ill people into psychurity facilities.
• 1:42:07
  Speaker 1: You can't do that. They have to be you have
• 1:42:10
  Speaker 1: to show that they constitute a threat, which includes a
• 1:42:13
  Speaker 1: lot of mentally ill people. So a lot of mentally
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 1: papers should be in institutions. And I think the guy
• 1:42:19
  Speaker 1: who killed the Ukrainian goal easily could have been determined
• 1:42:24
  Speaker 1: to be a threat and should have been institutionalized if
• 1:42:27
  Speaker 1: the law permitted that. The law right now does not
• 1:42:30
  Speaker 1: permit that. And that's true Blue states and red states.
• 1:42:33
  Speaker 1: So this is not a Republican democratic issue. Republicans want
• 1:42:36
  Speaker 1: to make it such, but it's not. John Trump pardoned
• 1:42:43
  Speaker 1: January six rioters who wanted to murder politicians and cops.
• 1:42:48
  Speaker 1: Is it fair to accuse Republicans of pretending to care
• 1:42:51
  Speaker 1: about speech in the wake of Charlie's passing when in
• 1:42:53
  Speaker 1: reality there is bad, if not worse than the left. Yeah,
• 1:42:57
  Speaker 1: I agree with you completely. Is the best example. He's
• 1:43:02
  Speaker 1: freed murderers, he seed people who beat up policemen. One
• 1:43:07
  Speaker 1: person who is shown on the video to yell kill
• 1:43:11
  Speaker 1: the police, kill the police has now got a position
• 1:43:15
  Speaker 1: in the Trump administration. So absolutely it's fair to accuse
• 1:43:22
  Speaker 1: Republicans are pretending This is the difference. They think their
• 1:43:27
  Speaker 1: speech is just because the left is such a despicable enemy.
• 1:43:33
  Speaker 1: The left is so low the communists, after all, that
• 1:43:38
  Speaker 1: it's okay to talk violence against them, but not okay
• 1:43:42
  Speaker 1: to talk violence against good family people, religious people who
• 1:43:48
  Speaker 1: you know, represent this country or whatever. You know, that mythology,
• 1:43:52
  Speaker 1: that's ultimately their argument. If you're tech conservatives, we're going
• 1:43:58
  Speaker 1: to go after you. If you attack leftists, that's okay
• 1:44:03
  Speaker 1: because they deserve it. That means they don't care about
• 1:44:07
  Speaker 1: free speech, not as an absolute thank you, John, all right, Michael,
• 1:44:17
  Speaker 1: the point of the left labeling speech as violence was
• 1:44:20
  Speaker 1: always to justify violence against speech. I mean maybe, but
• 1:44:27
  Speaker 1: they also have these massive rationalizations, theoretical philosophical rationalizations on
• 1:44:34
  Speaker 1: why speech is violence, because what they want is not
• 1:44:37
  Speaker 1: necessarily to shoot people. What they want is to silence people,
• 1:44:42
  Speaker 1: to intimidate people, and they want to guilt people into
• 1:44:48
  Speaker 1: self censoring. And they have whole philosophical theories about white
• 1:44:56
  Speaker 1: that is right, And it's interesting to people who come
• 1:44:59
  Speaker 1: up with the series are not the people who then
• 1:45:01
  Speaker 1: commit the violence. That the people just stand in the
• 1:45:04
  Speaker 1: background applauding it and encouraging it and teaching it and
• 1:45:09
  Speaker 1: kind of brainwashing the kids to do it, not literally brainwashing.
• 1:45:12
  Speaker 1: But Michael, if your actions don't produce a victim, it's
• 1:45:17
  Speaker 1: not a crime. Yeah. I think that's right. It shouldn't
• 1:45:23
  Speaker 1: be a crime, shouldn't be a crime. It is a
• 1:45:24
  Speaker 1: crime today. Lots of victimless crimes exist today, but crimes
• 1:45:30
  Speaker 1: criminal action requires a victim. Equal to reality, it is
• 1:45:38
  Speaker 1: worth debating Marxist communist street peaches or is it a
• 1:45:41
  Speaker 1: complete waste of time, especially if I don't have a crowd. Yeah,
• 1:45:45
  Speaker 1: if you don't have a crowd, it's a complete waste
• 1:45:47
  Speaker 1: of time, one hundred percent. The only reason to do
• 1:45:50
  Speaker 1: it is to draw a crowd and to have the
• 1:45:53
  Speaker 1: crowd listen to your arguments. Here's a tip for people
• 1:45:58
  Speaker 1: who attend debates within an objective speaker. You get up
• 1:46:03
  Speaker 1: there in the Q and A, and so many of
• 1:46:08
  Speaker 1: you ask the lefty or the conservative, whoever, the non objectivest.
• 1:46:15
  Speaker 1: You ask them questions. Got your questions as if they're
• 1:46:20
  Speaker 1: going to go oh shit, if yeah, if I knew that,
• 1:46:24
  Speaker 1: I wouldn't be a socialist. Instead of asking the objectivist
• 1:46:32
  Speaker 1: the questions, asking him questions so that he can spend
• 1:46:36
  Speaker 1: more time articulating the positive objectivist position. The Q and
• 1:46:42
  Speaker 1: A is a great opportunity for you to help the
• 1:46:46
  Speaker 1: objectivist on stage get into because in the debate you
• 1:46:52
  Speaker 1: don't have a lot of time to speak. So what
• 1:46:55
  Speaker 1: you want to do in the Q and A is
• 1:46:57
  Speaker 1: maximize your guy's speaking time. By asking him questions, they
• 1:47:03
  Speaker 1: give him an opportunity to articulate more of their objective's
• 1:47:05
  Speaker 1: position instead of got you questions the other side, which
• 1:47:11
  Speaker 1: most of them are pretty good at deflecting. I'm not
• 1:47:14
  Speaker 1: sure you've done much. The real point is to get
• 1:47:17
  Speaker 1: the positive out there, and to get the positive out there,
• 1:47:22
  Speaker 1: give the good guy on stage the opportunity to articulate it.
• 1:47:29
  Speaker 1: Just a thing on debating Hopper Campbell two part question
• 1:47:34
  Speaker 1: Part one. The assassination of Charlie Cooko is a grotesque
• 1:47:36
  Speaker 1: violation of the way a free society conducts itself. No
• 1:47:40
  Speaker 1: matter how bad his ideas were, we benefit from their
• 1:47:43
  Speaker 1: public articulation Part two for the simple reason the bad
• 1:47:48
  Speaker 1: ideas only reinforce good ideas as long as anyone is
• 1:47:52
  Speaker 1: willing to think, and if no one is, then no
• 1:47:56
  Speaker 1: amount of butchery will save us. Yeah, I agree, completely, absolutely,
• 1:48:01
  Speaker 1: It's a gootesque violation. Bad ideas should be outed, they
• 1:48:07
  Speaker 1: should be argued against. And if you can't convince the
• 1:48:10
  Speaker 1: people the bad ideas are bad ideas, then we're lost anyway.
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 1: Jonathan says, free market means free from government, free from coursion,
• 1:48:23
  Speaker 1: free from force, and so me free from the arbituary
• 1:48:27
  Speaker 1: whim of a president or the arbitrary rim of a
• 1:48:30
  Speaker 1: secretary of filling the blank. Yes, free if only people
• 1:48:37
  Speaker 1: understood that, understood what it meant. Liam Cook. Cook was
• 1:48:47
  Speaker 1: the cause of his own death in the sense that
• 1:48:49
  Speaker 1: the mysticism he preached demands of violence respond in persuade
• 1:48:54
  Speaker 1: to the persuasion he practiced. I would never say that
• 1:49:00
  Speaker 1: he caused his own death. Even by that argument. The
• 1:49:04
  Speaker 1: fact that he was a mystic is not a causal
• 1:49:08
  Speaker 1: link to somebody else's own mysticism led him to do it.
• 1:49:16
  Speaker 1: I wouldn't phrase it that way. James Tyler says, use
• 1:49:22
  Speaker 1: logic to establish context and thereby achieve objectivity. Yes, you
• 1:49:25
  Speaker 1: should always establish context, and you should always lose logic.
• 1:49:31
  Speaker 1: That is what it means to be objective. James. It's
• 1:49:36
  Speaker 1: not red versus blue anymore. It's humanity versus insanity. Yeah, yeah,
• 1:49:42
  Speaker 1: if only people understood that it's individualism, is collectivism, reasons
• 1:49:47
  Speaker 1: and versus reason versus irrationality. On every dimension, it's it's
• 1:49:52
  Speaker 1: it's egoism versus altruism. But you know this ghost to epistemology,
• 1:49:57
  Speaker 1: reason versus irrationality, and and really the primary existence versus
• 1:50:03
  Speaker 1: the primacy consciousness really at the end of it. So
• 1:50:07
  Speaker 1: it's all there. It's certainly not read versus Blue Michael says.
• 1:50:13
  Speaker 1: Candice Own has discovered, has uncovered through careful research, that
• 1:50:19
  Speaker 1: the Jews are actually behind Charlie Cook's death. I know, chucky,
• 1:50:24
  Speaker 1: I know, but yeah, yeah, no, the research is thorough.
• 1:50:30
  Speaker 1: It's definitive, there's no question about it. Indeed, you know,
• 1:50:35
  Speaker 1: through meticulous research, Canvas has found that every problem in
• 1:50:39
  Speaker 1: the world, every single one, is actually because of the Jews.
• 1:50:46
  Speaker 1: And she understands the cause of relationship between those. Part
• 1:50:51
  Speaker 1: of the course, She's not the only one. It's all
• 1:50:54
  Speaker 1: over the internet. The Jews did it, James. After the
• 1:50:59
  Speaker 1: assessment asians, super check gets very restrictive of words we
• 1:51:03
  Speaker 1: can use. Is this a bad business strategy? YouTube is
• 1:51:06
  Speaker 1: treating its users like children? Yes it is, but you know,
• 1:51:12
  Speaker 1: there were a lot of there was, there's being over
• 1:51:13
  Speaker 1: the years a lot of clamoring for social media to
• 1:51:16
  Speaker 1: you to to to treat they users as children, and
• 1:51:23
  Speaker 1: a political class demands that, and our intellectuals demand that.
• 1:51:27
  Speaker 1: You know, personal responsibility, responsibility over your own mind is
• 1:51:31
  Speaker 1: the one thing people fear and don't want the most. Michael,
• 1:51:37
  Speaker 1: Anti Semitism is contantly reaching levels not seen since Adolf
• 1:51:40
  Speaker 1: started writing a book about a struggle he was having. Yes,
• 1:51:44
  Speaker 1: it's it's really really bad right now. It's really really bad.
• 1:51:48
  Speaker 1: It's on the left, huge on the left, it's big
• 1:51:52
  Speaker 1: on the right, and it's and it's it's not a
• 1:51:56
  Speaker 1: good sign for the culture as a whole. Eneric, Thank you,
• 1:52:00
  Speaker 1: I appreciate the support. Loan the Center. How to keep
• 1:52:05
  Speaker 1: the pronunciation straight? Alex Epstein rhymes with iron, Jeffrey Epstein
• 1:52:10
  Speaker 1: rhymes with obscene. Yeah, I mean if I could remember that,
• 1:52:14
  Speaker 1: then I'd get it right every time. Tessa says, I'm
• 1:52:18
  Speaker 1: jealous too. You don't have to be jealous. Just come
• 1:52:21
  Speaker 1: to floor and spend a little time here. James G.
• 1:52:26
  Speaker 1: How do white nationalists use events like Charlotte to their advantage?
• 1:52:32
  Speaker 1: Is there a way, especially in the South, to treat
• 1:52:35
  Speaker 1: people's individuals, not race. Well, how do they use events
• 1:52:41
  Speaker 1: like Charlotte. They use it by showing the camaraderie and
• 1:52:46
  Speaker 1: the energy and the passion that they all had, by
• 1:52:50
  Speaker 1: showing a US president to kind of winked at them
• 1:52:55
  Speaker 1: and gave them permission. I know that's very controversial, but
• 1:52:58
  Speaker 1: he did. It's by you know, making a whole issue
• 1:53:05
  Speaker 1: of the monuments, which is why they were in Charlotte, right,
• 1:53:10
  Speaker 1: So taking down of a statue of robbery elite and
• 1:53:13
  Speaker 1: again they're republicly established, have now completely agrees with them
• 1:53:17
  Speaker 1: about the monuments, and indeed, son of the monuments are
• 1:53:20
  Speaker 1: being re established on the command of the Secretary of Defense.
• 1:53:27
  Speaker 1: So I think that's how they take advantage of it.
• 1:53:29
  Speaker 1: I think they couldn't have without the Trump and Trump
• 1:53:32
  Speaker 1: accolades and Trump people around Trump basically viewing them as
• 1:53:37
  Speaker 1: part of their tent and viewing them not positively. Not yeah,
• 1:53:42
  Speaker 1: these around people, but yeah, I mean it's like what
• 1:53:45
  Speaker 1: he said right now, there's no hatred, there's no violent
• 1:53:52
  Speaker 1: speech on the right. It's only the left. There's no
• 1:53:57
  Speaker 1: right wing political violence. Uary doesn't exist. The killing of
• 1:54:01
  Speaker 1: the Minnesota senat this doesn't exist. The killings over and
• 1:54:08
  Speaker 1: over and over again over the years. Mass killings motivated
• 1:54:12
  Speaker 1: by right wing ideology don't exist. Only the left is violent.
• 1:54:15
  Speaker 1: The right is not. Why if you really dig deep,
• 1:54:19
  Speaker 1: because the right is just the right's causes, the right cause,
• 1:54:23
  Speaker 1: and that message generally is a message the the white
• 1:54:29
  Speaker 1: nationalists really latch onto and really embrace. Think of the
• 1:54:34
  Speaker 1: fact that our secretard defense today is a Christian nationalist.
• 1:54:38
  Speaker 1: It's not quite a white nationalist, but close. James says,
• 1:54:46
  Speaker 1: since you are foody, have you ever eaten highland cow
• 1:54:50
  Speaker 1: beef at yak or yak meat? I have been hearing
• 1:54:54
  Speaker 1: both the delicious embdits for your hearts. No, I haven't,
• 1:54:58
  Speaker 1: But look any any a wild raised meat animal is
• 1:55:09
  Speaker 1: going to be healthier for your heart. They'll have less fat,
• 1:55:12
  Speaker 1: they'll be leaner, and they'll probably have more Omega three's
• 1:55:16
  Speaker 1: or better balance between omega six and omega threes. And
• 1:55:19
  Speaker 1: as a consequence, this is why you know range free
• 1:55:23
  Speaker 1: chickens or uh, you know, grass fed beef is considered
• 1:55:30
  Speaker 1: better than beef that's raised with feed. That is, that
• 1:55:35
  Speaker 1: often changes the balance of nutrients in the meat and
• 1:55:40
  Speaker 1: in the fat that you consume. But no I've never
• 1:55:43
  Speaker 1: had them. I'm curious, although you know, I like fat.
• 1:55:48
  Speaker 1: Fat gives the meat flavor, and a lot of this
• 1:55:51
  Speaker 1: lean meat is not that interesting, like caribou or deer
• 1:55:57
  Speaker 1: or stuff like that. Often it doesn't taste that good
• 1:55:59
  Speaker 1: because it's just too lean. It doesn't have any flavor.
• 1:56:02
  Speaker 1: The fat is what gives it flavor. James says, you
• 1:56:06
  Speaker 1: spent time outside the USA, So does it make you
• 1:56:09
  Speaker 1: think of living somewhere else part of the year or
• 1:56:13
  Speaker 1: moving all together? Any country contenders? I mean, right now,
• 1:56:18
  Speaker 1: I live part of the year outside the United States.
• 1:56:21
  Speaker 1: I live. You know, Last year I spent six weeks,
• 1:56:26
  Speaker 1: eight weeks out of the US straight, six of them
• 1:56:29
  Speaker 1: in Barcelona, two in Israel. This year I'm spending eight
• 1:56:33
  Speaker 1: weeks out of the US. I think we did basically
• 1:56:39
  Speaker 1: three weeks in Portugal and five weeks in Italy. So
• 1:56:44
  Speaker 1: my plan is every year, as long as I can
• 1:56:47
  Speaker 1: physically and monetarily, as long as I can to spend
• 1:56:52
  Speaker 1: like eight weeks maybe a little bit more, maybe a
• 1:56:54
  Speaker 1: little bit less in somewhere in Europe every year. And
• 1:56:59
  Speaker 1: now I don't have any contenders for moving full time.
• 1:57:04
  Speaker 1: There's no way, there's no place that appeals to me
• 1:57:07
  Speaker 1: full time. I am an American. I want to fight
• 1:57:09
  Speaker 1: for America. I want to be in America. There are
• 1:57:12
  Speaker 1: many reasons why I love America. If I had to leave,
• 1:57:15
  Speaker 1: I don't know where I would go. I couldn't stomach
• 1:57:18
  Speaker 1: living in a place like Spain, even though I don't
• 1:57:20
  Speaker 1: mind spending a few weeks there. The way too leftist,
• 1:57:23
  Speaker 1: the way too you know, leftist in a variety of
• 1:57:27
  Speaker 1: different ways. Generally, Europe is too far to the left
• 1:57:32
  Speaker 1: for me to like living here and tolerated day to day.
• 1:57:35
  Speaker 1: There are other things that are really good about it,
• 1:57:37
  Speaker 1: culture and music and things like that, Argentina and the
• 1:57:43
  Speaker 1: Malay If he's successful and if he wins, I can't
• 1:57:49
  Speaker 1: really see myself spending long periods of time in Asia
• 1:57:53
  Speaker 1: New Zealand. New Zealand has its appeal. I don't know
• 1:57:58
  Speaker 1: if I could go spend a you know, maybe maybe
• 1:58:01
  Speaker 1: move there. But I think I'm gonna live and die
• 1:58:06
  Speaker 1: in the US. I think this is where I'm going
• 1:58:08
  Speaker 1: to be again. Things could change pretty quickly. If things
• 1:58:12
  Speaker 1: in Washington, DC change pretty quickly, or if you know
• 1:58:16
  Speaker 1: your speech is gone, then I can't do my job
• 1:58:18
  Speaker 1: in the US, so we'll see, but for now I'm
• 1:58:22
  Speaker 1: going to spend most of the year every year in
• 1:58:24
  Speaker 1: the US. All right, guys, thank you, Thanks all the
• 1:58:31
  Speaker 1: super Shadows. Really really appreciate it. Thank you to everybody listening.
• 1:58:36
  Speaker 1: Don't forget to like the show before you leave. Click
• 1:58:38
  Speaker 1: that like button doesn't cost you anything. They all click
• 1:58:41
  Speaker 1: it for you. And don't forget to share if you
• 1:58:46
  Speaker 1: want to share, don't forget to. Yeah, keep engagement going now.
• 1:58:55
  Speaker 1: I expect to have shows tomorrow day, Friday. No show
• 1:59:01
  Speaker 1: on Saturday. I don't know about Sunday, and I don't
• 1:59:05
  Speaker 1: know about Monday. We'll see and then Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Fightay.
• 1:59:08
  Speaker 1: Next week no shows. There's a possibility that I will
• 1:59:12
  Speaker 1: not be able to do shows the rest of this week.
• 1:59:17
  Speaker 1: Family emergency possibilities. So if I'm not I'm not on air.
• 1:59:23
  Speaker 1: I'll try to do a show as soon as I can.
• 1:59:26
  Speaker 1: But if there's no show tomorrow, then something is going on.
• 1:59:31
  Speaker 1: You know, nothing bad for me, nothing, you know nothing
• 1:59:35
  Speaker 1: about me, but a family emergency is going on and
• 1:59:38
  Speaker 1: I can't I can't do a show. So but hopefully
• 1:59:43
  Speaker 1: that doesn't happen and I'll be on tomorrow. But there's
• 1:59:45
  Speaker 1: a chance. So I'm just giving you a heads up.
• 1:59:47
  Speaker 1: But let's assume that I will see you all tomorrow.
• 1:59:53
  Speaker 1: I think it's at tomorrow's late. Tomorrow is going to
• 1:59:56
  Speaker 1: be late. Tom's more like four pm East Coast time.
• 1:59:59
  Speaker 1: Four pm, Kristin, see you tomorrow, Bye everybody. M hm