Latest / Yaron Brook Show / Free Speech Attacked: NYT Lawsuit, Weak Democrats, Taiwan vs China, Estonia Resists |Yaron Brook

Transcript

Free Speech Attacked: NYT Lawsuit, Weak Democrats, Taiwan vs China, Estonia Resists |Yaron Brook · Yaron Brook Show

• 0:04
  Speaker 1: Fund ament of principles. I'll love readA last a little
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: self interest and individual wants. This is the book show.
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: Oh right, everybody, welcome to your one book show on
• 0:22
  Speaker 2: this Friday, September nineteenth, Guy Chemis Olmo Silver, I hope.
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: You had a great week and you're looking forward to
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: a fantastic weekend.
• 0:35
  Speaker 2: All right, let's I guess, let's let's get into it.
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: Let's see on second, Yeah, get to the news, and
• 0:50
  Speaker 2: of course we'll take your questions right after that. So
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: the headlines are still focused very much on on the
• 1:01
  Speaker 2: Jimmy Kimmel firing, if you will, and justifiably so. This
• 1:07
  Speaker 2: is a huge issue. It's not the issue of Jimmy Kimmel,
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: who cares. It's not the issue of human getting fired.
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: Who cares?
• 1:15
  Speaker 2: The issue that should be focused on is the fact
• 1:17
  Speaker 2: that the Trump at administration, un a bastly, completely upfront,
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: without any hesitation, is using government power to dictate speech,
• 1:29
  Speaker 2: to dictate.
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: What is allowed on American television.
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: In a way that I don't think any administration has
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: ever done. Now, others I'm sure have influenced, others, I'm
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: sure have.
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: Tried, and certainly we know that.
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: Biden tried to influence what was said on Twitter and
• 1:52
  Speaker 2: on other social media. But this is the difference. They
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: always did it in the hiding. They knew they were
• 1:57
  Speaker 2: violating their law. They knew what they were doing was wrong.
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: You they were violating their First Amendment. They knew if
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: it actually faced public and court scrutiny, they would lose.
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump just doesn't care.
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: He's quite happy to have his FCC chairman Bennan Carr
• 2:17
  Speaker 2: threaten media companies and basically curse them into doing the
• 2:23
  Speaker 2: Trump denover stations bidding publicly and what can happen. Who's
• 2:30
  Speaker 2: gonna sue? It's not going to go to courts. And
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: in terms of the public reaction, we'll get to the
• 2:37
  Speaker 2: Democrats and amentute. But Maggie is cheering. They love it,
• 2:39
  Speaker 2: and they think this is great. Finally, finally, conservatives are
• 2:44
  Speaker 2: standing up for themselves and using their power, their guns.
• 2:48
  Speaker 2: They're using their guns or government to force their agenda
• 2:53
  Speaker 2: down the throat of American businesses.
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: Tell it, this first Amendment? Who needs that? Who needs that?
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: What we need right now is to defeat the left.
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: I mean, you'll find it on my chat.
• 3:06
  Speaker 2: You'll find it among people who claim to be capitalists
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: who claim to be pro freedom and pro liberty, and
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: yet they hate the left so much. They's to hell
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: with capitalism, kill with liberty, kill with freedom.
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: As long as we.
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: Nail the Democrats, It's okay if we suspend the Constitution
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: for a little while.
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: Why not. The left will suffer so of the rest
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: of us, But they don't care.
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: As long as we're going after the left. That's the
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: main thing. Now, I have to give it. I have
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: to give credit. What credit is you? Ted Cruz is
• 3:49
  Speaker 2: against all this, which is surprising because CRUs has been
• 3:55
  Speaker 2: like towing the Trump line forever, and he had over
• 3:59
  Speaker 2: the last few week weeks have noticed him popping up
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: with some critical comments. You know, one thing to Ted
• 4:07
  Speaker 2: Cruz's credit, He's gone after Tucker. He's really gone after
• 4:10
  Speaker 2: Tucker Carson's anti semitism really hard. And that's good because
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: I was worried Cruis ed cuz as he appeared over
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: the last six seven ages drifting in the Magi direction,
• 4:23
  Speaker 2: I thought he was going to go Tucker direction.
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: He's standing up to Tucker. It's a good thing for that.
• 4:30
  Speaker 2: Anyway, Cuz, basically, you know, this is what he said
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: in his poscast yes podcast yesterday. Quote he says, we
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: can do this easier, we can do this the hard way.
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: This is what cars said. Uh, this is what the
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: head of the FCC said.
• 4:50
  Speaker 2: Right, and I gotta say, says Ted Cruz, that's right
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: out of Good Fellas I eat. That's a mobster line.
• 5:00
  Speaker 2: That's right out of our mafiosa coming into a bar
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: going nice ball. You have here, It's a shame if
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: something happened to it.
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: Now, that's perfect, that's perfect.
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: Kuz noted that he's no fan of Kimmel's and said
• 5:19
  Speaker 2: he is thrilled that he was fired over his comments
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: by Cook.
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: But then he said, quote, but.
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: Let me tell you, if the government gets into the
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: business of saying we don't of saying we don't say
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: what you and the media have said, we're going to
• 5:34
  Speaker 2: ban you from the airwaves if you don't say what
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: we like, that will end up bad for conservatives. How
• 5:42
  Speaker 2: about for Americans? How about for human beings? Okay, but
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: it's also bad for conservatives. So yeah, good with Ted Cruz.
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: I mean, I mean, very critical Ted Cruz since a
• 5:58
  Speaker 2: long time. I'm glad to see him wake up maybe
• 6:03
  Speaker 2: to his uh closer to his real identity. He used
• 6:06
  Speaker 2: to be a good guy, at least on some issues,
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: never a good guy.
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: In all issues.
• 6:12
  Speaker 2: But then he became a bad guy on most issues,
• 6:14
  Speaker 2: and now he's slowly becoming a good guy in some
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: of them.
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: It's very confusing to me.
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: At the same time, many other Republicans are like, hmm,
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: I used to be for free speech, but you know,
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: not the way of power. Maybe this free speech stuff
• 6:29
  Speaker 2: is a little overblown. Maybe it's too much. Here's Senator
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: Republican Senator Cynthia Loomis. She told she says, you know, an.
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: FCC license, it's not a right, it really is a privilege.
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: I want to throw up.
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: And then she says, under normal times, in normal circumstances,
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: I tend to think the First Amendment should always be
• 6:54
  Speaker 2: sort of the ultimate right and that there should be
• 7:00
  Speaker 2: almost no texting balances on it. I don't feel that
• 7:03
  Speaker 2: way anymore. Yeah, first, the man eh not sexy anymore,
• 7:11
  Speaker 2: it's not now I'm not that excited about anymore. I
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: think I'll switch. I think I'm in power over speech.
• 7:17
  Speaker 2: That that's the policy I'll adopt. That that's good for
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: the country, that's good, that's good.
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: In the meantime, Donald Trump on a plus one.
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: Is not agreeing with ten cruise at all at all.
• 7:33
  Speaker 2: It's like, no, right, he says, they give me only
• 7:40
  Speaker 2: bad publicity press. I mean they're getting they're not getting relations.
• 7:50
  Speaker 2: I think I would think maybe the license should be
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: taken away. And he said the decision about whether they
• 7:58
  Speaker 2: take the license away should be left of bending the
• 8:01
  Speaker 2: chief of CC. So yeah, when he was asked about
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: what about what you know now Kimo's gone, what about
• 8:11
  Speaker 2: Stephen Colbert at CBS and said, look, that's something that
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: should be talked about for licensing too.
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: We should look at that as well. Yeah, maybe we
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: should take CBS's license as well.
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: Await, don't worry Trump, your ally Ellison is taking over CBS,
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: so that that's clean air.
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: He says.
• 8:34
  Speaker 2: When you have a network and you have evening shows
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: and all they do is hit Trump, that's all they do.
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: If you go back, I guess they haven't had a
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: conservative on in years or something.
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: Somebody said, none of that's true.
• 8:47
  Speaker 2: But when you go back, take a look, all they
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: do is hit Trump.
• 8:51
  Speaker 3: They're licensed, they're not allowed to do that. They're an
• 8:55
  Speaker 3: arm of the Democratic Party. Uh, you know, and we're
• 9:06
  Speaker 3: going to take it. Rid Trump said, I think Rende
• 9:09
  Speaker 3: Carr is outstanding. He's a patriot, he loves our country.
• 9:12
  Speaker 3: He is a tough guy. So we'll have to see
• 9:16
  Speaker 3: in terms of who loses their license and who doesn't.
• 9:24
  Speaker 3: So yeah, Trump is no fan of thirst Amendment either.
• 9:29
  Speaker 2: And here's the thing again, he's not hiding this.
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: This is not done in some dark room, smoke filled
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: dark room, in the back of some bought This is done.
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: Why didn't the open.
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: Publicly stated on podcasts, on interviews, in press conferences.
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: Nobody's trying to hide what they're doing.
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: Christopher Folk constantly said, were to use whatever force the
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: government has in order to clean out these you know, legally,
• 10:01
  Speaker 2: he says, And yeah, they can take the license away.
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: That's legal. I don't think the Screme Court will like it.
• 10:08
  Speaker 2: But by the temp it reaches the Supreme Court, who
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: knows what I've happened.
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: So it's brazen, it's explicit. It out in the open.
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: They're telling you what they're gonna do. They're signaling in
• 10:22
  Speaker 2: advance because they're hoping. What they're really hoping is that
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: all these guys will get fired now. And they said
• 10:30
  Speaker 2: it what you know, they threatened a few times. Nobody
• 10:32
  Speaker 2: can pin it on them, Nobody can say it was explicit.
• 10:36
  Speaker 2: The courts can't overrule it. Really, who has standing anyway
• 10:41
  Speaker 2: to fother the lawsuit? So you know, the brazen explicit,
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: and then they're happy to take credit for it. And
• 10:51
  Speaker 2: that suggests that they're unafraid. They're not afraid of you,
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: the voter. They think you support us, not afraid of
• 11:00
  Speaker 2: the courts. They are suddenly not afraid of Congress. I mean, look, Trump,
• 11:06
  Speaker 2: according to Poles, granted, what are the polls now, according
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: to Poles, is as unpopular as any president has ever
• 11:13
  Speaker 2: been in history. He's the most unpopular president ever, more
• 11:16
  Speaker 2: unpopular than he was the first time, which was then
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: in historic Kali Loo more popular than Biden was. What's
• 11:25
  Speaker 2: he gotta lose? People don't like him anyway. We'll get
• 11:30
  Speaker 2: to it. Why he might win anyway, Why Republicans might
• 11:35
  Speaker 2: win anyway, even though they're so disliked.
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: But yeah, it's there are no consequences they and this.
• 11:46
  Speaker 2: Is to a large extent Congress, but not just Congress.
• 11:50
  Speaker 2: This is us, the people. Hey, so yeah, I mean, look, politically,
• 12:07
  Speaker 2: free speech is essential. It is a cornerstone when the
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: government starts censoring, when the government starts threatening you for
• 12:15
  Speaker 2: your speech. When the government starts censoring you, penalizing you,
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: I don't know, I'm doing green cards, potentially taking away
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: your citizenship because of speech.
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: We are in real trouble. I mean, in real deep trouble.
• 12:36
  Speaker 2: I rand you know thought that. You know, the main
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: way you knew you were kind of a nonathoritarian country.
• 12:44
  Speaker 2: The main sign that it was now time for a
• 12:47
  Speaker 2: revolution was when free speech goes away.
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: It is. It is that essential.
• 12:58
  Speaker 2: And this administration clearly there's no qualms about violating it,
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: about taking our right away.
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: Uh.
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: And we need to yell from the hooftops about it.
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: We really need to make a big deal out of it.
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: I don't know what else to tell you.
• 13:20
  Speaker 2: I mean, staying silent about this is dooming whatever movement,
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: whatever hope we have for a better future. It dos
• 13:30
  Speaker 2: it because it will kill all ability to speak. So, yeah,
• 13:42
  Speaker 2: somebody's accusing me of moving further left because I'm accusing
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: the Trump administration of.
• 13:51
  Speaker 1: Using the federal government to silence people. That's left. Now,
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: really that's left.
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: You're losing a plot, people, You really are losing the
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: plot that's called anyway, we'll leave what that's called aside,
• 14:17
  Speaker 2: all right, So this is a funny story. It's again
• 14:28
  Speaker 2: it's related to the free speech issue because one of
• 14:31
  Speaker 2: the ways, one of the ways in which the Trumpet
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: administration is trying to chip away at speech and trying
• 14:40
  Speaker 2: to destroy any kind of independent, independent journalism, biased, unbiased.
• 14:51
  Speaker 2: You know, there's no there's no issue of there's nothing
• 14:55
  Speaker 2: that says that journalism has to be by unbiased. But
• 14:59
  Speaker 2: one of the ways they want to chiboy at this
• 15:01
  Speaker 2: is not only taking the licenses away from broadcasters, but
• 15:04
  Speaker 2: the other way to do it is for Donald Trump
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: to just sue company after company after company after company
• 15:11
  Speaker 2: and use that that threat of lawsuit to intimidate the
• 15:17
  Speaker 2: media into treating him more quote fairly. I think the
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: media generally is way too soft on Trump.
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: I think the media should be much more.
• 15:27
  Speaker 2: Critical of Trump in a rational way from a perspective
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: of liberty and perspective freedom, perspective of capitalism. I think
• 15:37
  Speaker 2: the media has given him a free ride. I think
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: it's why he's back. But yes, so Trump sues all
• 15:48
  Speaker 2: these media companies, and we talked about this the other day.
• 15:51
  Speaker 2: That he had sued The New York Times for defamation
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: and all these other things and so on. And today
• 15:58
  Speaker 2: a judge through the case, or at least through this,
• 16:02
  Speaker 2: uh this out saying they'd have to resubmit their lawsuit
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: again in twenty eight days to do it. And so
• 16:11
  Speaker 2: let me read you. Let me read you what he wrote,
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: because it's it's it's really funny. I mean, I like
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: this judge, this judge, this judge a good guy. Anyway,
• 16:21
  Speaker 2: here's what you wrote. As every member of the bar
• 16:24
  Speaker 2: of every federal court knows or is presumed to know,
• 16:29
  Speaker 2: rule that requires that a complaint include quote a short
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: and plain statement of the claim showing that.
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: The pleader is entitled to relief. Rule AEI. This is
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: the rule helpfully adds that each.
• 16:46
  Speaker 2: Element of a pleading shall be simple, concise, and direct.
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: Some pleading isn't necessarily longer than others.
• 16:55
  Speaker 2: The defense likely depends on the number of parties and claims,
• 16:59
  Speaker 2: the compleat of the governing facts, and the duration of
• 17:02
  Speaker 2: scope of the pertinent events. But both the shorter pleading
• 17:06
  Speaker 2: and a lawndon pleading and a longer pleading must comprise quote, simple,
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: concise and direct allegations that offer a short and plain
• 17:16
  Speaker 2: statement of the claim. Rule eight governs every pleading in
• 17:20
  Speaker 2: a federal quote, regardless of the amount in controversy, the
• 17:23
  Speaker 2: identity of the parties, the skill or reputation of the council,
• 17:28
  Speaker 2: the urgency or importance real imagine of the dispute, or
• 17:32
  Speaker 2: any public interested issue in the dispute. In this action,
• 17:38
  Speaker 2: a prominent American citizens citizen, perhaps the most prominent American citizen,
• 17:44
  Speaker 2: alleges deformation by a prominent American newspaper publisher, perhaps the
• 17:50
  Speaker 2: most prominent American newspaper publisher, and by several other corporate
• 17:56
  Speaker 2: and natural persons, alleging only two counts of deformation. The
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: complaint consumes eighty five pages. Count Count one appears on
• 18:11
  Speaker 2: page eighty. Count two appears on page eighty three. Pages
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: one through seventy nine, plus part of page eighty present
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: allegations common to both counts, and to the defendant and
• 18:26
  Speaker 2: to all defenders. Each count alleges a claim against each
• 18:30
  Speaker 2: defendant and apparent. They each claim seeks seeks the same
• 18:34
  Speaker 2: remedy against each defendant. This is this is great. I
• 18:41
  Speaker 2: love the way these judges, right, You've got to they
• 18:44
  Speaker 2: just have a way of concise speaking. This is the
• 18:49
  Speaker 2: thing I love about the court system. Even under the
• 18:54
  Speaker 2: most generous and lenient application of rule eights, the complaint
• 18:59
  Speaker 2: is decidedly improper and impermissible. The pleader initially alleges an
• 19:06
  Speaker 2: actoral victory by President Trump in hisporic fashion by trouncing
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: the opponent, and alludes to persistent election interference on the
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: legacy media, led most.
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: Notoriously by The New York Times. The pleader alludes to
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: quote the halicon.
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: The helicon days of the newspaper, but complains that the
• 19:31
  Speaker 2: newspaper has become full throttled mouthpiece of the Democratic Party,
• 19:36
  Speaker 2: which alleged allegedly results in the derangement deranged endorsement of
• 19:42
  Speaker 2: President Trump's principal opponent in the most recent presidential election.
• 19:47
  Speaker 2: The reader of the complaint but labored through allegations such
• 19:50
  Speaker 2: as quote a new journalistic low for the hopeless compromise
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: and tarnished gray lady. Unquote, the reader must endure an
• 20:00
  Speaker 2: allegation of quote the despair, the desperate need to defame
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: with a partisan spear rather than report with the authentic
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: looking glass, and an allegation that quote the false narrative
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: about the Apprentice was just a timper of the defendants
• 20:17
  Speaker 2: melting iceberg of falsehoods unquote. Similarly, in one of the
• 20:23
  Speaker 2: many often repetitive and laudatory towards President Trump but superfluous allegations,
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: the plead of states the Apprentice represented the cultural magnitude
• 20:36
  Speaker 2: of President trump singular brilliance which captured the zeitgeist of
• 20:41
  Speaker 2: our time. I hope you're finding this as entertaining as
• 20:46
  Speaker 2: I am, because I am finding this amazingly entertaining. I mean,
• 20:50
  Speaker 2: this is Trump being called out for his you know, ridiculousness,
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: is you know, is.
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: Just anyway is ridiculousness.
• 21:02
  Speaker 2: The complaint continues with allegations and defenders of President Trump's
• 21:06
  Speaker 2: further and the acquisition acquisition of the Trump's wealth, with
• 21:12
  Speaker 2: a protracted list of many properties owned, developed, or managed
• 21:15
  Speaker 2: by the Trump organization, and a list of President Trump's
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: many books, with a long account of the history of
• 21:21
  Speaker 2: the Apprentice, with an extensive list of President Trump's media appearances,
• 21:25
  Speaker 2: with a detailed account of other legal actions both buying
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: against President Trump, including an account of the Russian collusion hoax,
• 21:32
  Speaker 2: and incidents of alleged lawfare against President Trump. And with
• 21:36
  Speaker 2: much more persistently alleged in abundance floyd and in innervating detail,
• 21:48
  Speaker 2: innovating detail.
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: There's a wood for it. Even assuming that each allegation
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: in the complaint is.
• 21:56
  Speaker 2: True, of course, that is for a jury to decide,
• 21:58
  Speaker 2: and not pertinence.
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: Here.
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: This or this suggests nothing about the truth of the
• 22:02
  Speaker 2: allegation or the validity of the claim. But it just
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: is only the man of the presentation of the allegations
• 22:07
  Speaker 2: in the complaint. Even assuming at the trial the plaint
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: of offers evidence supporting every allegation in the complaint and
• 22:14
  Speaker 2: that evidence is accepted by the jury as fact, and
• 22:18
  Speaker 2: even assuming that after finally melting the defendants alleged iceberg
• 22:23
  Speaker 2: of falsehoods, the plaintive prevails for each reason the legend
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: the complaint, even assuming all that a complaint remains an
• 22:34
  Speaker 2: improper and impermissible place for their tedious Listen to this
• 22:39
  Speaker 2: for the tedious and for the tedious and burdensome aggregation
• 22:46
  Speaker 2: a prospective evidence for the rehearsal of tedious tendacious argument,
• 22:53
  Speaker 2: or for the protracted recitation and explanation of legal authority
• 22:59
  Speaker 2: purityative supporting the plaintiff's claim the claims stay full of relief.
• 23:05
  Speaker 1: As every lawyer knows, knows, always presumed to know.
• 23:08
  Speaker 2: A complaint is not a public form for vituperation and invective,
• 23:15
  Speaker 2: not a projected platform to rage against an adversary.
• 23:19
  Speaker 1: Adversary.
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: A complaint is not on a megaphone for public relations,
• 23:24
  Speaker 2: or podium for passionate oration at a political rally, or
• 23:29
  Speaker 2: the functionally equivalent of hyde park speaker's corner. A. Oh,
• 23:39
  Speaker 2: come on, David, that was English, beautiful English. Now some
• 23:42
  Speaker 2: words I can't pronounce. But that's me, that's not him.
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: This is really good. In other words, this bs eighty
• 23:50
  Speaker 2: five pages of just boisterous, you know, or praising of
• 23:55
  Speaker 2: Trump and accusations against the New York Times.
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: It's not a complaint. Here's what a complaint is, she says.
• 24:03
  Speaker 2: A complained is the mechanism the fairly, precisely, directly, soberly
• 24:07
  Speaker 2: and economically inform the defendants in a professionally constrained manner,
• 24:12
  Speaker 2: consistent with the dignity of the adversarial process.
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: Of the nature and content of the claim.
• 24:20
  Speaker 2: A complaint is a short plaint, direct statement of allegations
• 24:24
  Speaker 2: a fact sufficient to create.
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: A plausible claim.
• 24:29
  Speaker 2: For relief and sufficient to permit the formulation of an
• 24:34
  Speaker 2: informed response. Although lawyers receive the motor crum of expressive
• 24:39
  Speaker 2: latitude completing the claim of a client, the complaint in
• 24:42
  Speaker 2: this action extends far beyond the outer bound of that latitude.
• 24:50
  Speaker 2: I mean, this is a great judge because what this
• 24:53
  Speaker 2: is judges basically saying, you can call him hot totyan,
• 24:57
  Speaker 2: but that just reveals your your bias and again your
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: kind of trump mindlessness syndrome. What does judges arguing for
• 25:10
  Speaker 2: is objectivity. What's this judges arguing for is the facts
• 25:15
  Speaker 2: and owning the facts. You want to complain, fine, give
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: me the facts, present the case to the point succinctly objectively.
• 25:27
  Speaker 2: Don't spend eighty eight pages praising the defendant, be asking
• 25:32
  Speaker 2: about his TV show and so on. This is an
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: intellectual This is a judge. This is objectivity. This is
• 25:41
  Speaker 2: our court system. This is why I still say our
• 25:44
  Speaker 2: court system is the last bastion of liberty and freedom.
• 25:50
  Speaker 2: Stop this subjectivism, stop this spewing of emotion, lay it out,
• 25:56
  Speaker 2: lay out the facts four pages, eight pages.
• 25:59
  Speaker 1: You don't need eight eight eighty eight pages.
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: So that is that is the last hope we have
• 26:10
  Speaker 2: in this country's judges like that. But but yeah, so
• 26:20
  Speaker 2: he struck it down. It has to be written in
• 26:23
  Speaker 2: twenty eight days. Good for this judge. Somebody said on
• 26:26
  Speaker 2: the chat that he is a Trump appointee. I didn't
• 26:29
  Speaker 2: have time before the show to check that, to check
• 26:31
  Speaker 2: who pointed it. I don't care who appointed it. The
• 26:33
  Speaker 2: reality is I like it because he's direct. And that's
• 26:38
  Speaker 2: the other thing about judges generally, they tend to be direct.
• 26:41
  Speaker 2: They don't they don't mince woods.
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: They I mean some judges, not all of them.
• 26:48
  Speaker 2: But and it puts, it puts any you know, it's
• 26:51
  Speaker 2: the only place where people seem not afraid of Trump.
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: Like everywhere else, people are terrified of him.
• 26:58
  Speaker 2: Businessmen are terrified of congressmen are terrified from other politicians, terrified,
• 27:03
  Speaker 2: other leaders of other countries terrified. The only people who
• 27:06
  Speaker 2: seem to be willing to stand up to Trump and
• 27:09
  Speaker 2: call it.
• 27:09
  Speaker 1: I would even say Democrats are terrified of Trump.
• 27:12
  Speaker 2: The only people actually willing to call it, to tactically
• 27:16
  Speaker 2: state you know you're am or this is nonsense, or
• 27:21
  Speaker 2: this is completely distorted and perverted are judges.
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: And they've done it on several of his cases.
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: And but some some not to any names, of course,
• 27:37
  Speaker 2: will justify, will attack anybody who attacks Trump, and defend
• 27:41
  Speaker 2: Trump no matter what he does, even if you shoots
• 27:43
  Speaker 2: somebody in the middle ofary of the avenue, even if
• 27:46
  Speaker 2: he uses the power of the state to get rid of.
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: A comedian in late night television.
• 27:53
  Speaker 2: Democrats are way too weak in in attacking Trump's So
• 27:58
  Speaker 2: let's talk about that. Trump is probably the least popular
• 28:07
  Speaker 2: president we've had. According to the polls, people don't like him.
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: Is policies are not popular. Tais are not popular. Even
• 28:15
  Speaker 2: the immigration roundup not popular. Immigration right now is more
• 28:19
  Speaker 2: popular than ever. And the reality is that you don't
• 28:25
  Speaker 2: hear that many voices criticizing, not on the issues, not
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: on a steady, regular, kind of fundamental basis. Yeah, they
• 28:36
  Speaker 2: take pot shots here and there, Suddenly a late night
• 28:38
  Speaker 2: television the comedians take shots at him.
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: Probably they're the best.
• 28:44
  Speaker 2: The newspapers, Yeah, the headlines are tilted in the direction,
• 28:48
  Speaker 2: but they're not systematic about it, and they, you know,
• 28:52
  Speaker 2: they're not articulating the cause and effect of the disastrous
• 28:56
  Speaker 2: policies he's put into place.
• 29:00
  Speaker 1: And the Democratic Party itself is mute. You just don't hear.
• 29:05
  Speaker 2: Them right now, they're debating whether they shut down the
• 29:07
  Speaker 2: government of a government funding or not, and there wabby
• 29:12
  Speaker 2: They're terrified of the consequences.
• 29:14
  Speaker 1: They're terrified they get blamed for it.
• 29:16
  Speaker 2: They're trying to position themselves to the midterm and they
• 29:18
  Speaker 2: don't know how they should win in a landslide midterms.
• 29:23
  Speaker 2: The opposite midterm elections, the opposition party usually does very
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: very well, and given how unpopular Trump is, they shouldn't.
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: They should crush Republicans in the midterms. And yet they
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: don't seem to have any confidence at all. There just
• 29:42
  Speaker 2: seems to be a particularly among i'd say the centrist Democrats.
• 29:48
  Speaker 1: They seems to be very little.
• 29:49
  Speaker 2: Energy, very little passion, and nobody has kind of made
• 29:56
  Speaker 2: a mark, made himself known, or put himself out there
• 30:00
  Speaker 2: as the guy who's going to go after Trump. Maybe
• 30:03
  Speaker 2: maybe what's his name, govern f California. Maybe Gavin Newsom
• 30:08
  Speaker 2: is the closest you get to it. But the media
• 30:14
  Speaker 2: is dominated by Trump. Trump is in the headlines all
• 30:17
  Speaker 2: the time. It's Trump messaging that gets across, and the
• 30:21
  Speaker 2: Democrat line is buried. And there's a reason for this,
• 30:27
  Speaker 2: the fundamental reason that they can't really stand up and
• 30:30
  Speaker 2: go after him. Is that they know, they know that
• 30:38
  Speaker 2: they stand for nothing. They know that they often know alternative.
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: They know that to the left there are people.
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: Who are hated, despised by the American public and who
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: are going to lose them election after election. The Democratic
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: Party is stuck.
• 31:10
  Speaker 2: Because the Progressives have destroyed whatever high ground they thought
• 31:17
  Speaker 2: they had with the woke phenomena. Everybody's against woke and
• 31:24
  Speaker 2: you know, Biden destroyed or whatever. Claim they have to
• 31:26
  Speaker 2: do economics better. With the inflation of the.
• 31:29
  Speaker 1: Early two thousands, which ultimately is what led to Trump
• 31:32
  Speaker 1: being elected.
• 31:34
  Speaker 2: It's very hard for them to attack Trump on economics,
• 31:36
  Speaker 2: even though that's what they should be doing.
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: They should be going after him.
• 31:40
  Speaker 2: The pathetic job numbers, the rising rate of price inflation,
• 31:48
  Speaker 2: basically destruction of manufacturing jobs in the United States. You
• 31:55
  Speaker 2: will see in the months to come. The bankruptcy is
• 31:58
  Speaker 2: a small and medium sized business who used to import.
• 32:03
  Speaker 2: The general economic distress. They should be hopping on that.
• 32:09
  Speaker 2: And yet what do they have offer in instead? And
• 32:14
  Speaker 2: who are they talking to? Who is the Democratic voter,
• 32:20
  Speaker 2: I mean, the progressive is all going to vote for
• 32:22
  Speaker 2: them anyway, But who are they trying to convince to
• 32:25
  Speaker 2: vote for them. I mean, the reality is that in
• 32:32
  Speaker 2: every issue right now, Trump loses.
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: Like the latest post.
• 32:37
  Speaker 2: Show, majority disapprove of tariff policy. A majority disapproves of
• 32:43
  Speaker 2: Russia and Ukraine the way it's being handled right now.
• 32:46
  Speaker 2: A majority disapproves of Trump's handling of the economy.
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: A majority, we.
• 32:50
  Speaker 2: Have fifty eight percent disapprove of the situation in Israel,
• 32:53
  Speaker 2: in Gadza.
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: I'm not sure what that means. It's probably a bad thing.
• 32:56
  Speaker 2: Fifty five percent disapprove of the ways handling immigration.
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: Twenty four percent.
• 33:03
  Speaker 2: Think that disapprove of the way Trump is handling crime
• 33:07
  Speaker 2: in this country crime. So on every major issue, a majority,
• 33:12
  Speaker 2: not just a majority, disapproves of what Trump is doing.
• 33:17
  Speaker 2: And yet on every single issue when people are asked,
• 33:23
  Speaker 2: they trust Republicans more than Democrats to deal with it.
• 33:27
  Speaker 2: So an immigration, where they disapprove of Trump, you know,
• 33:31
  Speaker 2: they still give forty two percent of Republicans and only
• 33:33
  Speaker 2: twenty nine percent to Democrats. On the economy thirty nine
• 33:37
  Speaker 2: percent Trump, thirty two percent to Democrats. On crying forty
• 33:41
  Speaker 2: four percent of Trump, twenty two percent to Democrats. The
• 33:46
  Speaker 2: gap is they don't trust either one to deal with
• 33:49
  Speaker 2: the issue. Democrats have a problem because if they stand
• 33:55
  Speaker 2: for anything, they stand for MoManI, they stand for the left,
• 34:00
  Speaker 2: the real left, the socialist left, woke left, and that
• 34:06
  Speaker 2: is a loser and they know it. But if they
• 34:09
  Speaker 2: don't stand for that, what do they stand for, I
• 34:16
  Speaker 2: don't know, central planning, industrial policy.
• 34:19
  Speaker 1: Oh well, well, that's what Trump stands for.
• 34:22
  Speaker 2: They stand for not touching cell security, medicare. Oh wait,
• 34:27
  Speaker 2: that's what Trump stands for. They just want to spending
• 34:30
  Speaker 2: like there's no tomorrow. Oh wait a minute, that's what
• 34:32
  Speaker 2: Trump stands for. There is no way for Democrats to
• 34:38
  Speaker 2: differentiate themselves.
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: What is it that makes them better?
• 34:44
  Speaker 2: And when they go to their core, when they go
• 34:47
  Speaker 2: to their morality, where they go to their philosophy, when
• 34:50
  Speaker 2: they go to their governing ideology, it's war ward and
• 34:56
  Speaker 2: that'll destroy them. I Party, the Democratic Party have become,
• 35:02
  Speaker 2: at least if you exclude the crazy on the left,
• 35:06
  Speaker 2: they've become very similar on many of the issues that
• 35:09
  Speaker 2: are important to Americans. There's not that much difference between them.
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: So the Democrats are lost.
• 35:18
  Speaker 2: And the consequence of this loss is that we get
• 35:21
  Speaker 2: stuck with Trump and these kind of maga Republicans. For
• 35:24
  Speaker 2: a very long time. We'll see what happens in the midterms.
• 35:28
  Speaker 2: But Republicans Democrats are really lost. They have no identity.
• 35:32
  Speaker 2: They have nothing to rally the troops with. They have
• 35:36
  Speaker 2: nothing to convince independence to vote for them versus Trump.
• 35:41
  Speaker 1: They're just another.
• 35:42
  Speaker 2: Version of Trump without the bombast and without the I
• 35:45
  Speaker 2: don't know, you know, they you know, even this feat
• 35:48
  Speaker 2: speech stuff.
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: They should be hammering on this.
• 35:54
  Speaker 2: But then they have a problem because didn't Biden try
• 35:58
  Speaker 2: to force you know, social media companies to basically tow
• 36:04
  Speaker 2: the party aligne. How can they really advocate for free
• 36:08
  Speaker 2: speech when they don't really believe in it, never have
• 36:11
  Speaker 2: and certainly the woke left, the woke left certainly doesn't
• 36:16
  Speaker 2: believe in it. So they really have nothing to offer.
• 36:28
  Speaker 2: They have nothing to offer, and you know, they they could,
• 36:35
  Speaker 2: they could do a lot. They could do pretty badly
• 36:38
  Speaker 2: in the mentum elections as a consequence, not because the
• 36:42
  Speaker 2: country loves Trump or loves what Trump is doing, because
• 36:45
  Speaker 2: they dislike the far left more than they dislike Trump,
• 36:49
  Speaker 2: which I've always said is the case.
• 36:52
  Speaker 1: And they don't even know.
• 36:57
  Speaker 2: What these centrist moderate Democrats are because they have no
• 37:03
  Speaker 2: identity they stand for nothing. They mean nothing, they represent nothing,
• 37:10
  Speaker 2: they have no values. Yep, all right, let's turn to
• 37:26
  Speaker 2: some foreign policy stories.
• 37:31
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so this is a.
• 37:37
  Speaker 2: This is a story came out today in the Washington Post.
• 37:41
  Speaker 2: It turns that the Trumpet administration actually declined to.
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: Approve a package of weapons to Taiwan.
• 37:51
  Speaker 2: There's a four hundred million in Taiwanese military aid, a
• 37:56
  Speaker 2: bunch of pretty advanced weapons systems.
• 38:00
  Speaker 1: With more than four hundred million more letho, more sophisticated,
• 38:05
  Speaker 1: if you.
• 38:05
  Speaker 2: Will, than past rounds of aid in including both munitions
• 38:10
  Speaker 2: and autonomous drones. And they were supposed to prove it
• 38:16
  Speaker 2: the summer. It was getting ready to be shipped, and
• 38:19
  Speaker 2: the Trauma deminstation mixed it. Now they claim it's not
• 38:23
  Speaker 2: the final wood. They're still evaluating, they're still looking into it.
• 38:28
  Speaker 2: But that is a that's pretty stunning. It's pretty stunning,
• 38:32
  Speaker 2: in particularly given that the Traumado station had claimed that
• 38:40
  Speaker 2: they were going to be tough on China and they
• 38:42
  Speaker 2: were going to really pivot and focus American defense spending
• 38:45
  Speaker 2: and American orientation defense.
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: Wise to China.
• 38:50
  Speaker 2: And that would mean you want to beef up your
• 38:52
  Speaker 2: support of Taiwan, and you want to beef up the
• 38:55
  Speaker 2: military capabilities of Taiwan, your number one ally and of
• 38:59
  Speaker 2: course probably the source of any potential confrontation with China.
• 39:04
  Speaker 2: She has instructed the People's Liberation Army, the Chinese army,
• 39:10
  Speaker 2: to be capable of seizing Taiwan by twenty twenty seven.
• 39:14
  Speaker 1: That's according to US military intelligence.
• 39:19
  Speaker 2: And now that's not a date of invasion or deadline
• 39:24
  Speaker 2: for invasion, but it gives you a sense.
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: What Taiwan is trying to do is is.
• 39:31
  Speaker 2: Very quickly fortify against that, build up its defensive capabilities
• 39:35
  Speaker 2: at least be able to solw the Chinese down until
• 39:37
  Speaker 2: it gets help from the United States, maybe from Japan,
• 39:40
  Speaker 2: made from South Korea.
• 39:44
  Speaker 1: And you know, by the Ministration it proved a number
• 39:47
  Speaker 1: of packages.
• 39:50
  Speaker 2: Totally about three billion dollars of military spending, and I
• 39:54
  Speaker 2: think Taiwan pays for much of this. Congress has granted
• 39:58
  Speaker 2: the administration one billion in an annual authority to send
• 40:02
  Speaker 2: security aid to Taiwan.
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: And yet.
• 40:08
  Speaker 2: Again Trump nicks the four hundred million dollar deal. And
• 40:15
  Speaker 2: it's pretty clear why Trump is negotiating with She. It's
• 40:22
  Speaker 2: actually what he wants from She exactly. I think what
• 40:24
  Speaker 2: he wants is a parade when he comes to visit
• 40:28
  Speaker 2: in Beijing. I think what he wants is she's friendship.
• 40:33
  Speaker 2: I think that's what he wants. He wants respect, he
• 40:36
  Speaker 2: wants sheet of respect him. I don't think Trump wants
• 40:42
  Speaker 2: to confront China. I don't think Trump has any intention
• 40:45
  Speaker 2: of defending Taiwan. I don't think Trump has any intention
• 40:49
  Speaker 2: of building up a military capability to be able to
• 40:51
  Speaker 2: deal with China because I don't think he wants or
• 40:55
  Speaker 2: intends to ever confront China. This is why we're seeing
• 41:01
  Speaker 2: a real pivot militarily towards Latin America Venezuela, of all places,
• 41:06
  Speaker 2: instead of China. So he doesn't want to prove a
• 41:10
  Speaker 2: weapons deal to Taiwan, which might make she unhappy with him.
• 41:14
  Speaker 1: He won't take his phone call, he won't invite him
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: to Beijing. If he comes to Beijing, there won't be
• 41:18
  Speaker 1: a parade.
• 41:21
  Speaker 2: And it's the parade that's what he really wants. He
• 41:25
  Speaker 2: couldn't get one in Washington, not a good one third
• 41:28
  Speaker 2: eight parade for three parade, and so it's going to
• 41:37
  Speaker 2: be it's gonna be interesting the relationship between the United
• 41:40
  Speaker 2: States and Taiwan under this kind of environment. The United
• 41:44
  Speaker 2: States is clearly walking away from NATO. Will it walk
• 41:48
  Speaker 2: away from Taiwan? Will it walk away from Asia?
• 41:50
  Speaker 1: It looks like it. It actually looks like it.
• 41:53
  Speaker 2: I'm surprised because I thought that the kind of people
• 41:56
  Speaker 2: they got into the Defense Department they were China hawks.
• 42:00
  Speaker 1: Really looks like.
• 42:01
  Speaker 2: It's not about hawksh not hawk cash. It's about the
• 42:05
  Speaker 2: tension Trump gets. It's all about Trump. There's no ideas,
• 42:09
  Speaker 2: there's no principles, there's no strategy. There's Trump's relation with
• 42:23
  Speaker 2: talk about Trump's relation with She had a phone call
• 42:25
  Speaker 2: today with him, and Trump says it was very productive.
• 42:32
  Speaker 2: They talked about tariffs, They talked about TikTok. TikTok is
• 42:37
  Speaker 2: very important, god so important. They talked about a bunch
• 42:42
  Speaker 2: of different issues. Nothing was concluded. There's no TikTok deal yet.
• 42:47
  Speaker 2: In spite of all the chatter, no deal is actually
• 42:50
  Speaker 2: being put together. But Trump wrote that I just completed
• 42:55
  Speaker 2: a very productive call with President Shi of China. He
• 42:58
  Speaker 2: remade progress and many very issues, including trade, fentalon the
• 43:02
  Speaker 2: need to bring the war between Russia and Ukraine to.
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: An end, and the approval of the deal. They made.
• 43:08
  Speaker 2: No I mean, there's nothing concrete on any one of
• 43:11
  Speaker 2: those issues. He says, the call was a very good one.
• 43:15
  Speaker 2: We will be speaking again by phone. Appreciate the TikTok approval,
• 43:19
  Speaker 2: and both look forward to meeting at Apex.
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: So they're going to meet in Apex later this year.
• 43:26
  Speaker 2: This is this big Asian conference. It's going to be
• 43:30
  Speaker 2: held in South Korea. So I'll be meeting in South Korea,
• 43:34
  Speaker 2: and then next year Trump over to China. That's what's
• 43:38
  Speaker 2: been agreed to. Maybe getting parade, I don't know, and
• 43:42
  Speaker 2: then sometime next year she would come to the United States. See,
• 43:47
  Speaker 2: this is the thing that is what's important to Trump.
• 43:50
  Speaker 2: It's the invitation, it's the speaking, it's the respect. There's
• 43:59
  Speaker 2: no oh thing that Trump is trying to achieve other
• 44:04
  Speaker 2: than he wants people to respect him, other than.
• 44:06
  Speaker 1: His own narcissistic goes. There's no program, there's no thing that.
• 44:14
  Speaker 2: Is important to it. You know what, she promised to
• 44:19
  Speaker 2: cut fundanial shipments to Mexico. She not promised that. And
• 44:23
  Speaker 2: every phone call he's ever had with Donald Trump, what
• 44:28
  Speaker 2: was achieved? What are the concrete steps, what's actually happening?
• 44:33
  Speaker 2: It seems very little, close to nothing. Now we'll see
• 44:37
  Speaker 2: there'll be a deal on TikTok. It seems pretty clear
• 44:40
  Speaker 2: that that will happen. Whether that deal would be good
• 44:44
  Speaker 2: or not, it's hard to tell. Chie for example, said
• 44:48
  Speaker 2: with TikTok quote that the Chinese government respects the will
• 44:52
  Speaker 2: of companies and it's pleased to see companies conduct business
• 44:55
  Speaker 2: negotiations on the basis of market rules and reach solutions
• 45:00
  Speaker 2: that comply with Chinese laws and regulations and balance interests.
• 45:06
  Speaker 1: And also market rules.
• 45:11
  Speaker 2: He continued, We owe the United States side will provide
• 45:14
  Speaker 2: an open, fear and non discriminatory business environment for Chinese
• 45:19
  Speaker 2: companies investing in the United States. So we will see
• 45:24
  Speaker 2: what the TikTok deal actually looks like when it's done.
• 45:28
  Speaker 2: But you know, of all the things in the world
• 45:33
  Speaker 2: right now that should be fun and center of your
• 45:37
  Speaker 2: attention in terms of what's going on in the world,
• 45:39
  Speaker 2: I am not sure TikTok is at the top of
• 45:42
  Speaker 2: that list, or should be anyway at the top of
• 45:45
  Speaker 2: that list. But yet there it is, like rare earth
• 45:48
  Speaker 2: materials that should be at the top of the list.
• 45:51
  Speaker 2: So it's going to be interesting how all these things
• 45:53
  Speaker 2: get settled. Remember that New Year's tarists and Chinese goods
• 45:59
  Speaker 2: are thirty percent. China's got a ten percent tariff on
• 46:02
  Speaker 2: the US goods, much higher, much much, much, much much
• 46:08
  Speaker 2: higher than it was before Trump took office. So not
• 46:13
  Speaker 2: good for anybody, Not good for China, not good for
• 46:15
  Speaker 2: the United States, not good for anybody.
• 46:17
  Speaker 1: Tariffs or lose, lose, lose, lose, all right. Finally, Putin
• 46:25
  Speaker 1: continues to show his utter disrespect of NATO and Trump.
• 46:34
  Speaker 2: And a basically a complete ignoring whatever was agreed upon,
• 46:40
  Speaker 2: if anything was agreed upon in Alaska with Trump. You know,
• 46:44
  Speaker 2: last month today, uh, three Russian MENK thirty one jets
• 46:52
  Speaker 2: flew into Estonia air space, violated NATO airspace, flew in
• 46:59
  Speaker 2: They crossed a lot five montical miles inside Estonia towards Tallinn,
• 47:03
  Speaker 2: the capital of Estonia, and spent about twelve minutes in
• 47:06
  Speaker 2: NATO airspace. A number of NATO fighters were sent to
• 47:12
  Speaker 2: observe and watch and you know, deal with if necessary,
• 47:20
  Speaker 2: F thirty fives and Swedish aircraft. Forget the name of
• 47:24
  Speaker 2: the Swedish aircraft we'll put up in the air in
• 47:28
  Speaker 2: response to the meek thirty ones. Now the mid thirty
• 47:31
  Speaker 2: ones luckily to do anything, because if they had they
• 47:35
  Speaker 2: were discovered that F thirty fives are.
• 47:39
  Speaker 1: Better plane, much better, not even in the same lead.
• 47:43
  Speaker 2: It turns out the several Italian F thirty fives assigned
• 47:46
  Speaker 2: to NATO's Baltic Air Policing mission, we'll put up into
• 47:50
  Speaker 2: the air, into the air to challenge them, and a
• 47:58
  Speaker 2: euro Fighter typhoons also up there just in case they
• 48:04
  Speaker 2: came from northern Germany. And then there was another Chinese
• 48:12
  Speaker 2: plane that was flying without a flight plant or transpond
• 48:17
  Speaker 2: a signal.
• 48:18
  Speaker 1: Near NATO airspace over the Baltic Sea.
• 48:20
  Speaker 2: So generally, Russia's prodding, it's pushing, it's pushing buttons. It
• 48:25
  Speaker 2: wants to see response, response times, response energy, the extent
• 48:31
  Speaker 2: to which people complain notice Russia prodding NATO, sending drones
• 48:37
  Speaker 2: over poland flying over Estonia.
• 48:42
  Speaker 1: None of that, None of that is anything that upsets Trump.
• 48:47
  Speaker 2: Who has made Trump's agenda. None of that is something
• 48:50
  Speaker 2: that people are talking about. Nobody seems to be worry
• 48:53
  Speaker 2: at all.
• 48:54
  Speaker 1: Now. They were worried that if the United States would
• 48:57
  Speaker 1: help Ukraine or even help Israel too much, there will
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: be a World War three. They're worried about going after
• 49:02
  Speaker 1: you run, maybe a World War.
• 49:04
  Speaker 2: Three but they're not worried at all about Putin actually
• 49:08
  Speaker 2: doing stuff that could cause World War three, like getting
• 49:13
  Speaker 2: himself involved in a war with NATO. Nobody seems to
• 49:17
  Speaker 2: care about. It's like backpaid stories. Certainly when he comes
• 49:23
  Speaker 2: to the administration and when he comes to kind of
• 49:26
  Speaker 2: right wing they don't want to talk about this because
• 49:30
  Speaker 2: it also shows the extent to which Putin completely and
• 49:39
  Speaker 2: utterly disrespects Trump. I think what you're seeing right now
• 49:44
  Speaker 2: is proof there's Trump to be president.
• 49:47
  Speaker 1: In February twenty twenty two two, this still would have
• 49:50
  Speaker 1: been at war in Ukraine. Nothing would have been different.
• 49:55
  Speaker 1: Puts is not.
• 49:55
  Speaker 2: Afraid of Trump. He doesn't respect Trump. By the way,
• 49:59
  Speaker 2: this the Swedish plane, it's called the Grippin Grippin.
• 50:05
  Speaker 1: UH and it was also in the air today.
• 50:11
  Speaker 2: Since the Ukraine War started, they have never been as
• 50:15
  Speaker 2: many incidents like this, and as significant incidents. That is,
• 50:20
  Speaker 2: plane spending real time over NATO territory, drones heading towards
• 50:25
  Speaker 2: NATO facilities within a NATO country in Poland, a Russian
• 50:29
  Speaker 2: drone you know, acting suspiciously in Romania. I mean, it's
• 50:36
  Speaker 2: never been such a concentration. Yet again, nobody cares. And again,
• 50:40
  Speaker 2: you know, people who support trauma are going to be
• 50:43
  Speaker 2: little this this is not important.
• 50:45
  Speaker 1: Who cares, It doesn't matter because it doesn't.
• 50:48
  Speaker 2: Fit the rhetoric, right, it doesn't fit the story. The
• 50:51
  Speaker 2: story is supposed to be Trump will take care of Putin.
• 50:55
  Speaker 2: Trump knows how Hannah Putin. Trump will not let Putin
• 50:58
  Speaker 2: get out of hand. So obviously he Putin has not
• 51:00
  Speaker 2: gotten over their hands. So you have evidence of the.
• 51:02
  Speaker 1: Census cannot be white, cannot be right.
• 51:05
  Speaker 2: Your knowledge of what is going on cannot be white
• 51:09
  Speaker 2: because Trump wouldn't allow it. If this, it's this is
• 51:12
  Speaker 2: obviously fake news. This is obviously you know, exaggerated.
• 51:16
  Speaker 1: Yuron doesn't know what he's talking about, because no.
• 51:21
  Speaker 2: We were promised, we were told we know that Trump
• 51:28
  Speaker 2: knows how to handle put Putin. Putin, all right, let's see.
• 51:39
  Speaker 4: Yeah, And the.
• 51:39
  Speaker 2: Eupeans are saying in Europe, it's all the headlines. Well,
• 51:41
  Speaker 2: of course you're close to the war, you know it.
• 51:45
  Speaker 2: But Americans don't care about Europe. I don't know if
• 51:48
  Speaker 2: that's news to Europeans, but they don't. They don't care
• 51:50
  Speaker 2: about Europe. Trump doesn't care about Europe. Trump cares about
• 51:54
  Speaker 2: what the New York Times is writing about him. It's
• 51:56
  Speaker 2: all he cares about what NBC and and and you
• 52:00
  Speaker 2: see saying about him. He watches late night television to
• 52:03
  Speaker 2: find out what they're making jokes about him. That's all
• 52:06
  Speaker 2: he cares about. He doesn't care about Putin, he doesn't
• 52:08
  Speaker 2: care about Europe. He doesn't care about protecting America. All right,
• 52:20
  Speaker 2: So yeah, I mean I think it's a big story.
• 52:23
  Speaker 2: I think he should be a big story in America.
• 52:25
  Speaker 2: I mean, if we don't intend to come to the defense,
• 52:27
  Speaker 2: or are European allies in NATO, that's a big story.
• 52:31
  Speaker 2: If we do intend to come to the defense, it's
• 52:34
  Speaker 2: a big story either way, it's a big story. Estonia
• 52:40
  Speaker 2: executed Article four, which is again Article four is were
• 52:43
  Speaker 2: former committee consultations around what the Russians are doing. But
• 52:50
  Speaker 2: remember Article five is the commitment of all NATO members
• 52:53
  Speaker 2: to come to defense of a NATO member if they're attacked.
• 52:56
  Speaker 1: And the drone thing in Poland is attackers. We've gotten and.
• 53:03
  Speaker 2: Putsin is going to keep doing this because the responses getting,
• 53:05
  Speaker 2: particularly in the US is yeah, not interesting, we don't care.
• 53:11
  Speaker 2: It's exactly what sponsor wants. All right, let's move to
• 53:17
  Speaker 2: our super chests. That is the news for Friday, September nineteenth.
• 53:20
  Speaker 2: Now I'll answer your questions. You can ask questions about anything.
• 53:25
  Speaker 2: Thank you doll Lean for the sticker. You can also
• 53:26
  Speaker 2: use stickers to trade with me to show your support
• 53:33
  Speaker 2: for the show. Thank you, Silvanas, Thank you Jeffrey Miller,
• 53:35
  Speaker 2: Thank you Ed Hopper, Thank you Jeffrey Miller again.
• 53:38
  Speaker 1: Thank you guys. Really appreciate all the stickers in support.
• 53:41
  Speaker 1: We're doing well.
• 53:43
  Speaker 2: We're just hitting the hour right now and we've more
• 53:46
  Speaker 2: than made raised the money necessary for the first hour.
• 53:50
  Speaker 2: We've got one hundred and sixty three dollars to raise
• 53:53
  Speaker 2: to fund the second hour.
• 53:56
  Speaker 1: Which we're entering into in a few minutes. I'll also
• 53:59
  Speaker 1: mention sponsors.
• 54:01
  Speaker 2: Diamond Institute is promoting Inman Institute Live, where you can
• 54:06
  Speaker 2: study Iman's ideas with some of the world's leading experts
• 54:10
  Speaker 2: on her ideas from the Ironman Institute. You can study them,
• 54:14
  Speaker 2: you can take classes live, or you can take classes.
• 54:18
  Speaker 2: You can take them at your own leisure, your own time,
• 54:21
  Speaker 2: whenever you want to take them.
• 54:24
  Speaker 1: The classes are, you know, in depth.
• 54:30
  Speaker 2: You've got one class on the philosophy of objectivism kind
• 54:33
  Speaker 2: of Outpah.
• 54:34
  Speaker 1: You've got another class on objectivesm.
• 54:36
  Speaker 2: Through the fiction, showing how the fiction illustrates the philosophy.
• 54:40
  Speaker 2: And you've got a third class on work with Don Watkins.
• 54:44
  Speaker 2: And again you can take them when you want. You
• 54:47
  Speaker 2: can do homework or not, and you don't have to apply.
• 54:50
  Speaker 2: You can just register and take them. In the past,
• 54:52
  Speaker 2: you had to apply for these and not everybody got accepted.
• 54:55
  Speaker 2: Now everybody can take them, so please.
• 55:03
  Speaker 1: Sign up.
• 55:04
  Speaker 2: You can sign up at iinman dot oag slash dot here,
• 55:08
  Speaker 2: Iman dot oag slash dot here, and you've got.
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: A discount code.
• 55:12
  Speaker 2: Is you're on bookshow Listener, you have a discount code
• 55:15
  Speaker 2: and that discount code is twenty five ybs ten.
• 55:21
  Speaker 1: Twenty five ybs ten.
• 55:26
  Speaker 2: Alex website is the leading commentator on all things climate
• 55:31
  Speaker 2: change and fast our fuels and energy.
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: Is the leading, the leading thing in the world in
• 55:38
  Speaker 1: these issues, and I encourage you to follow him and
• 55:41
  Speaker 1: learn from him and gain.
• 55:43
  Speaker 2: End depth understanding of these issues because they're so relevant,
• 55:46
  Speaker 2: they're so important to everything that we do today. He'll
• 55:49
  Speaker 2: also give you a glimpse into the politics of it,
• 55:52
  Speaker 2: which he deals with really well. There's us at Alex
• 55:54
  Speaker 2: AI trained on Alex's material that you can ask questions of.
• 55:59
  Speaker 1: So check it out.
• 56:00
  Speaker 2: Alex Epstein dot substack dot com, Alex Epstein dot substack
• 56:05
  Speaker 2: dot com.
• 56:06
  Speaker 1: And finally, Hendershot Wealth.
• 56:08
  Speaker 5: Hand a Shot with two tis Wealth dot com slash
• 56:11
  Speaker 5: ybs and you can go to my YouTube channel and
• 56:16
  Speaker 5: go to the playlist for sponsors, and there's an interview
• 56:21
  Speaker 5: there that I do with Robert Handershot and.
• 56:23
  Speaker 2: We talk about capital gains and capital gainst taxes, and
• 56:27
  Speaker 2: he talks about a product that they're offering now that
• 56:30
  Speaker 2: can really defer your capital gains taxes in such a
• 56:33
  Speaker 2: way as to save you huge amounts of money.
• 56:37
  Speaker 1: Don't we all love saving huge amounts of money on taxes?
• 56:42
  Speaker 2: So yeah, liberate some of your dollars from Washington and
• 56:47
  Speaker 2: keep them or Sacramento if you're in California, and keep
• 56:50
  Speaker 2: them for yourself.
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: That's what this program does. It does it legally and
• 56:54
  Speaker 1: smartly and with some of the most.
• 56:58
  Speaker 2: Substantial financial institutions in the United States. So check it
• 57:02
  Speaker 2: out hand a Shot Wealth dot com slash ybs to
• 57:07
  Speaker 2: get more information. All right, I'll just mention Patreon dot
• 57:12
  Speaker 2: com is a way to support the show on a
• 57:15
  Speaker 2: monthly basis.
• 57:16
  Speaker 1: Please consider doing so.
• 57:18
  Speaker 2: It really is helps a lot and it makes the
• 57:22
  Speaker 2: income for the show predictable and that is great. No
• 57:25
  Speaker 2: bit of randorid. Thank you for the sticker, Thank you,
• 57:30
  Speaker 2: thank you. All right, let's go to the questions.
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: Michael fifty dollars. Thank you, Michael.
• 57:38
  Speaker 2: It's a large percentage of the population blinded by hates
• 57:41
  Speaker 2: and don't care about reality. Channeling hatred is all they
• 57:45
  Speaker 2: want to seem manifested, unlikely. It's a small number of
• 57:49
  Speaker 2: people like nik for Interests, Candice Owens and Techo Costs
• 57:53
  Speaker 2: and have millions of subscribers. So god, I mean, there's
• 58:00
  Speaker 2: a large percentage of the population that in some parts
• 58:04
  Speaker 2: of their life.
• 58:08
  Speaker 1: Are devoted to hatred and they don't care about reality.
• 58:11
  Speaker 2: But look, the reality is that a significant percentage of
• 58:15
  Speaker 2: population must be working pretty hard, innovative, producing, creating, building,
• 58:20
  Speaker 2: because the economy keeps chugging along.
• 58:23
  Speaker 1: Somebody must be using their mind and being productive.
• 58:31
  Speaker 2: So a big chunk of the population is using their
• 58:33
  Speaker 2: mind and productive. Now are they people who are blinded
• 58:39
  Speaker 2: by hate?
• 58:40
  Speaker 1: Yeah? I don't know how big of a percentage.
• 58:42
  Speaker 2: There are a lot of the people online, but other
• 58:45
  Speaker 2: people online are big percentage of people overall.
• 58:48
  Speaker 1: I don't know, I mean active online in political chat.
• 58:54
  Speaker 2: It's true, the influent, This Candas owned techno costs and
• 58:56
  Speaker 2: millions of subscribers.
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: How many of those subscribers agree with them? How many
• 59:02
  Speaker 1: of them are there for the entertainment? How many of
• 59:05
  Speaker 1: their just to see what's going on?
• 59:09
  Speaker 2: But yeah, you know, we'reking with three hundred and fifteen
• 59:11
  Speaker 2: million people, several millions a wacko, I mean wacko ideologically,
• 59:19
  Speaker 2: several million on the left and several million on the right.
• 59:24
  Speaker 1: You know, But I don't think that's the country. The
• 59:27
  Speaker 1: country is not winning for inentances.
• 59:31
  Speaker 2: Anti Semitism is on the rise, but it's not the
• 59:34
  Speaker 2: kind of a it's not a significant number of Americans
• 59:38
  Speaker 2: hold niqu for interess's view of Jews or candae Owan's
• 59:41
  Speaker 2: view of Jews in Israel, and Charlie Koch was killed
• 59:45
  Speaker 2: by the Mossad, didn't you know that? It's kind of
• 59:48
  Speaker 2: obvious if you really think about it, that's Candie owned.
• 59:53
  Speaker 2: I just don't think that a big chunk of the
• 59:55
  Speaker 2: population is that way. Yeah, it's sadly millions. It's tragic
• 59:59
  Speaker 2: that it's million. And yeah, there are a lot of
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 2: people blinded by hate and fear. Don't forget fear. Fear
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 2: is a big part of this.
• 1:00:15
  Speaker 1: Roland.
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 2: Thank you for the sticker, and uh Marius, thank you
• 1:00:19
  Speaker 2: for the sticker. All Right, we got a bunch of
• 1:00:22
  Speaker 2: twenty dollars questions.
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 1: Let's go through them.
• 1:00:26
  Speaker 2: Sounds about mobster, nice army base. You've got here, colonel.
• 1:00:32
  Speaker 2: It would be a shame if something happened to it.
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 2: Monty Python's flying circus yep, I mean some armies. They
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 2: could get away with that, Anomalists. The Daily Wire has
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 2: the film rights Adler shrug.
• 1:00:50
  Speaker 1: They have stated that they.
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 2: Will make a true Terran's works series. Will they or
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 2: can they do this successfully?
• 1:00:58
  Speaker 1: Will it be better than the.
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 2: Three part movie from the twenty Tents? Okay, so let
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 2: me clarify. As far as I know, the Daily Wire
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 2: does not have their film rights after the Shark. As
• 1:01:10
  Speaker 2: far as I know, the Daily Wire at.
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 1: Some point bought the option to buy the film rights
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 1: to have the Shock. Then they want the film rights.
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 2: They were the rights to make it into a TV show,
• 1:01:22
  Speaker 2: which are different than the rights to.
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 1: Make a film. Last I heard about this project is
• 1:01:32
  Speaker 1: a year and a half ago. I think.
• 1:01:35
  Speaker 2: I suspect it's not going anywhere. I suspect it's not happening.
• 1:01:40
  Speaker 2: I do not know if they renewed the option, but
• 1:01:44
  Speaker 2: as far as I know, they do not hold the rights.
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 2: Hold the rights.
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 1: Now, could they make a good Could they make a
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 1: good you know, a TV series of Atlas Shrug? I
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 1: doubt it. Yeah, I mean I don't think.
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 2: I don't think even with the best intentions, there were
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 2: a lot of people out there, they could make a
• 1:02:16
  Speaker 2: good series of Atlas shrug. And you should stop talking
• 1:02:18
  Speaker 2: about stuff you don't know anything about. So no, I
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 2: don't think they could make a good one, and I
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 2: don't think they can be successful.
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 1: Will it be better than the three part movie for
• 1:02:34
  Speaker 1: twenty ten?
• 1:02:35
  Speaker 2: I mean I think I think if we got a
• 1:02:38
  Speaker 2: bunch of kids to put together a project to do it,
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 2: then then they would make a better movie than the
• 1:02:48
  Speaker 2: one in twenty tens. Right, So I don't think that's
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 2: a that's the benchmark we should have. Is better than
• 1:02:54
  Speaker 2: the twenty tens movies, which were absolutely horrific. Counter to
• 1:02:59
  Speaker 2: what end is saying on the chat, Peter Tiel is
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 2: not doing anything with anything iron Ran property related, right,
• 1:03:09
  Speaker 2: So they're not. Peter Teel is not doing a movie
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 2: of Atlas Shrugged and or The Fountainhead or anything else
• 1:03:23
  Speaker 2: he has been They have been talks about doing stuff
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 2: over the years. We talked about him doing something with
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 2: The fountain Head. They will talk about him doing something
• 1:03:36
  Speaker 2: with Atlas Shrugged. But yeah, yeah, there is nothing in
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 2: the wooks that as far as I know from Peter
• 1:03:48
  Speaker 2: from Teal on Atlas Shrug, I don't think that's where
• 1:03:51
  Speaker 2: he's interest live right now. Michael, what makes you think
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 2: that Ironman had more influenced when she was alive than
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 2: she has today? More people have read her novels and
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 2: know her name today than the eighties when Reagan Thatcher
• 1:04:04
  Speaker 2: Revolution happened. I mean that's true, but certainly I think
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 2: that the people who held their ideas who were in
• 1:04:11
  Speaker 2: politics were better than the people who knew about her
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 2: ideas and politics. Today, I think there's just been an
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 2: erosion the quality of people. But yeah, there's a lot
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 2: more people today, a lot more people. So she's had
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 2: more of an influence on the culture, probably less of
• 1:04:28
  Speaker 2: an influence in politics.
• 1:04:30
  Speaker 1: That's how it put it. And again I was very optimistic.
• 1:04:34
  Speaker 2: I don't know, fourteen years ago, thirteen years ago, because
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 2: there were a lot of people in politics who were
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 2: big Iran fans, Ted Kuz being one of them, right,
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 2: And they really seemed like they were going places and
• 1:04:46
  Speaker 2: doing things, and then Trump imploded it all. So no,
• 1:04:53
  Speaker 2: she's still there. She's definitely got an influence there. There's
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 2: no question about that. It's just where's again to show
• 1:05:00
  Speaker 2: up is the question, David. Can the president huse the
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 2: the Botoment of Justice to bring civil lawsuits against people
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 2: he doesn't like or would that a bottom of injustice
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 2: have to spend his own money for all the deformation
• 1:05:16
  Speaker 2: suits he plans to file. He's spending his own money
• 1:05:19
  Speaker 2: under deffermation suits. I think it's his own lawyers. The
• 1:05:22
  Speaker 2: Department of Justice doesn't suit his name. That the Bartoment
• 1:05:25
  Speaker 2: of Justice suits in the government's name, so that Bardum
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 2: of Justice can go after people who are critical of
• 1:05:32
  Speaker 2: the president. But I don't think they acquired the bond
• 1:05:37
  Speaker 2: of Justice could sue for defamation if they can find
• 1:05:44
  Speaker 2: other legal I'm sure causes to go after people, But no,
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 2: he has to pay for this. But he's making so
• 1:05:52
  Speaker 2: much money off of being president that paying for a
• 1:05:54
  Speaker 2: few defformation lawsuits is going.
• 1:05:56
  Speaker 1: To be penny changed.
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 2: David is a diminishing judiciary enough to hold the damn
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 2: against the flood of attacks against the law.
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 1: I don't know, I hope. So it's all we have.
• 1:06:10
  Speaker 1: Congress won't do it. Congress clearly won't do it.
• 1:06:20
  Speaker 4: And so all we have is, you know, what we
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 4: have is is the judiciary, all right, h.
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 2: Right, here's the article about irand and and uh and
• 1:07:02
  Speaker 2: uh Planteo or Iland and and uh and uh Peter
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 2: Teo and looking for anything that suggests what they plan
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 2: to do.
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 1: But again, the chances of anything happening are close to zero.
• 1:07:21
  Speaker 2: And and by the way, to associate Ironland with the
• 1:07:24
  Speaker 2: ideas coming out of Palenteer God, I mean Palentia CEO is.
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 1: You know quite is about us? I mean about as
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 1: close to fascism as you can get. Here's here's what
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 1: it says, right.
• 1:07:46
  Speaker 2: And and and this is pure speculation, It's untrue, and
• 1:07:50
  Speaker 2: they don't have the rights to do it. The company
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 2: plans also hopes, hopes to create a three part aditation
• 1:07:57
  Speaker 2: of Alasho.
• 1:07:58
  Speaker 1: It hopes to do so.
• 1:08:03
  Speaker 2: It ain't happening, guys, It is not happening. I know
• 1:08:10
  Speaker 2: lots of people who hope to do adaptation of Attla show.
• 1:08:13
  Speaker 2: For a long time, Angelina Julie was gonna do an
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 2: adaptation of Attler show.
• 1:08:17
  Speaker 1: She had script written, she had scripts. But Peter Tiel
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 1: is not going to make an adaptation of Attla show.
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 1: It ain't happening anyway. Let's see David.
• 1:08:36
  Speaker 2: Speech were speech is still alive on act substack, YouTube,
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 2: et cetera. Let's Trump focus is anti First Amendment, attack
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 2: on dying platforms like broadcast TV.
• 1:08:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but they won't. You know, it won't end there.
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 1: You know it won't end there and particularly be successful.
• 1:08:53
  Speaker 1: And that's why you need to stop him. You need
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 1: to stop it before he.
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 2: Is successful and gains the momentum to then go after,
• 1:09:13
  Speaker 2: you know, the rest of the platforms in which we
• 1:09:17
  Speaker 2: have free speech, because once he's successful on one platform,
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 2: he's definitely going to go after the others.
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 1: And you could see somebody was threatening yesterday. I think
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 1: we covered this.
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 2: There were threats on Section two thirty towards incidet companies
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 2: if they didn't behave themselves. So it's just they're just
• 1:09:36
  Speaker 2: going to use all leverage that they have in order
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 2: to try to get people.
• 1:09:40
  Speaker 1: To behave the way they want them to behave.
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 2: David, your thoughts on Victor Davis Hansen. He has become
• 1:09:46
  Speaker 2: such a hack it makes me sick to listen to him.
• 1:09:49
  Speaker 2: He used to be an honest into a cultur. Yeah,
• 1:09:52
  Speaker 2: I mean, I agree. I love Victor Davis Hansen. I
• 1:09:55
  Speaker 2: literally have done a public event with Victor Davis Hanson.
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 2: It was me Victor Davis Hansen and then you know
• 1:10:00
  Speaker 2: Pipes on stage at UC Bookley at Brookeley a long
• 1:10:06
  Speaker 2: time ago. And so I have great admiration of Victor
• 1:10:10
  Speaker 2: Davis Hansen as a military historian. I do not have
• 1:10:14
  Speaker 2: much respect for him as a cultural commentator.
• 1:10:17
  Speaker 1: I think his work on immigration is awful. I think his.
• 1:10:23
  Speaker 2: His willingness to defend Trump, who's being terrible. I think
• 1:10:28
  Speaker 2: he's smarter than this, and his willingness to vilify in
• 1:10:35
  Speaker 2: the kind of worst maga kind of way the left
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 2: has been has been terrible. And he strikes me more
• 1:10:42
  Speaker 2: and more like a hack these days rather than like
• 1:10:44
  Speaker 2: a seriously stabian that he used to be. Now, once
• 1:10:47
  Speaker 2: in a while he does some good work, and for example,
• 1:10:49
  Speaker 2: when he criticized the that Ian Carroll that so called
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 2: historian that was on Tucker Carlson who criticized Churchill. He
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 2: did a good job ripping the guy to shreds. So
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 2: once in a while the starian resurfaces and he and
• 1:11:03
  Speaker 2: he's good. And Rick Davis Hansen the starian is somebody
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 2: have a huge amount of respectful But yeah, I mean,
• 1:11:10
  Speaker 2: he could have been so much strong on I Rock,
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 2: so much stronger enough Ghanistan. He kind of always said
• 1:11:16
  Speaker 2: the right things, but he muted it. Like in his books,
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 2: he's very clear about what he believes victory looks like
• 1:11:22
  Speaker 2: and how to win wars. And yet he's not willing
• 1:11:26
  Speaker 2: to actually actually go out there.
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 1: And criticize, right, So we will we will see, all right, can.
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 2: I I'm gonna comment on Ian and AND's I mean
• 1:12:00
  Speaker 2: it strikes me as nutty and that you really don't
• 1:12:03
  Speaker 2: know what you're talking about, right. You saw an article
• 1:12:05
  Speaker 2: where they expressed interest. They don't say they have the right,
• 1:12:08
  Speaker 2: they don't say they have the option on making the film.
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 2: A three part movie is not the same as a
• 1:12:13
  Speaker 2: TV series. The rights for a three part movie owned
• 1:12:17
  Speaker 2: by somebody different than the rights to the TV series
• 1:12:20
  Speaker 2: that are owned by somebody different. The option that the
• 1:12:23
  Speaker 2: Daily Wire has that is, I guess expires this November
• 1:12:27
  Speaker 2: and we'll see if they renew. It is not the
• 1:12:30
  Speaker 2: same as the right to make a three part movie,
• 1:12:33
  Speaker 2: which is held by somebody else. And again, there's nothing
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 2: in that article that says that they have the rights.
• 1:12:44
  Speaker 2: It just says that they have an interest in making it.
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 2: Have they bought the rights, they bought the option? Who
• 1:12:53
  Speaker 2: have they bought it from? Yeah, I mean there were
• 1:12:59
  Speaker 2: discussions a few year years ago with Peter Teal about
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 2: making out the shrug. I'll tell you that the Institute
• 1:13:04
  Speaker 2: was involved. There were some real discussions with him and
• 1:13:09
  Speaker 2: with the owner of the rights, and there was also
• 1:13:13
  Speaker 2: discussions with Daily Wire. I had discussions with the scriptwriter
• 1:13:21
  Speaker 2: who Ben Shavio Center talked to me about the making
• 1:13:24
  Speaker 2: of the movie. So there have been a lot of
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 2: discussions about this right. We'll see, there's been a lot
• 1:13:30
  Speaker 2: of discussions about this. But to just talk out of
• 1:13:36
  Speaker 2: nowhere and speculate, I mean, this is typical knowledge knowledge. Now,
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 2: Palatium might make it, they might not. I don't know
• 1:13:48
  Speaker 2: if they'll make it. You don't know if they'll make it,
• 1:13:51
  Speaker 2: And again, it partially depends on who owns the rights
• 1:13:54
  Speaker 2: and whether they're willing to sell and a lot of companytions.
• 1:14:01
  Speaker 2: If it was easy, it would have been done a
• 1:14:03
  Speaker 2: long time ago. Who's going to write the script?
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 1: David? Thank you, David, A lot of questions. Is great.
• 1:14:13
  Speaker 2: If one takes an extreme isolationist view, then Europe, Asia,
• 1:14:16
  Speaker 2: Africa could all be sacrificed as long as western hemisphere
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 2: is completely controlled by the US. Maybe that is Trump's
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 2: real agenda. Well, I mean, I think he doesn't really
• 1:14:25
  Speaker 2: have an agenda. I think that's important to know. He's
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 2: not a strategic thinker. He doesn't have a big agenda. Again,
• 1:14:32
  Speaker 2: he wants the big dictators of the world to like him.
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 1: That's she and Putin. And yes, I do think he's
• 1:14:38
  Speaker 1: willing to sacrifice Europe. He's going to sacrifice Southeast Asia
• 1:14:42
  Speaker 1: so that the western hemisphere is controlled by the US.
• 1:14:45
  Speaker 1: But does he have a strategy for all of that?
• 1:14:47
  Speaker 1: And does he know what all of that means?
• 1:14:50
  Speaker 2: No?
• 1:14:50
  Speaker 1: And did he understand the consequences of all that?
• 1:14:53
  Speaker 2: No?
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 1: And to the people around him, are they really thought
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 1: this through? No? But yes, I think that's where we
• 1:15:04
  Speaker 1: seem to be going.
• 1:15:05
  Speaker 2: So the strategic document strategic got posted in quotes that
• 1:15:09
  Speaker 2: is going to come out of the Defense Department, maybe
• 1:15:11
  Speaker 2: later this year, maybe early next year. That strategic document
• 1:15:19
  Speaker 2: is that strategic document seems to be implying, yes, that
• 1:15:28
  Speaker 2: America is pivoting it its attention, pivoting its attention to
• 1:15:32
  Speaker 2: Latin America.
• 1:15:36
  Speaker 1: We will see when the document comes out, how thoughtfully
• 1:15:39
  Speaker 1: it is written, how much sense it makes it actually makes.
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 2: Matthew, if we imagine Trump could be an absolute dictator
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 2: of the US with no opposition or obstacle, what policies
• 1:15:49
  Speaker 2: would he pursue if free to do so, I.
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 1: Mean suddenly, I think a big one would be for him.
• 1:15:56
  Speaker 1: He would shut down free speech.
• 1:15:59
  Speaker 2: I think he would at least he would eliminate criticism
• 1:16:04
  Speaker 2: of him and the government.
• 1:16:07
  Speaker 1: From major, major sources.
• 1:16:10
  Speaker 2: You know. Would he would he take into a completely
• 1:16:13
  Speaker 2: sense of the internet. I don't know, but he would
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 2: certainly sensor newspapers, magazines and TV.
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 1: TV really cares about TV, so I think that would
• 1:16:25
  Speaker 1: definitely be one. And then what else would he do?
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 1: You know, It's hard to tell.
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 2: I don't think he has an agenda, right, It's not
• 1:16:35
  Speaker 2: like Trump believes in something. Once achieve something, you know,
• 1:16:41
  Speaker 2: there's no Greater America he wants to pursue. He would
• 1:16:45
  Speaker 2: do all the stuff that he he wants to do it,
• 1:16:47
  Speaker 2: you know, tariffs, and he would he would take over companies,
• 1:16:52
  Speaker 2: companies he likes. But it wouldn't be ideologically driven. It
• 1:16:55
  Speaker 2: would be Donald Trump's whim driven. And that's why the
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 2: first thing he would do shut down people who make
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 2: fun of him, because he doesn't like that. So it
• 1:17:04
  Speaker 2: would be personal. Again, the thing driving him is narcissism.
• 1:17:10
  Speaker 2: He's not even a He's not a Putin. Putin has
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 2: a deep understanding of history, has an ideology, has an agenda,
• 1:17:17
  Speaker 2: has beliefs. Trump has none of those. Andrew, your force,
• 1:17:25
  Speaker 2: your will is within your control. You must know your
• 1:17:28
  Speaker 2: individual self control to feel to feel out of control,
• 1:17:33
  Speaker 2: which is why collectivists who don't know they have self
• 1:17:36
  Speaker 2: control one control over others. Thoughts why the collective is
• 1:17:43
  Speaker 2: one control of others. I mean, I don't know it's
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 2: because they feel out of control. I don't know if
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 2: that's true.
• 1:17:56
  Speaker 1: I don't know. It's a psychological question. I don't really
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 1: they have an answer to. I mean, I think at
• 1:18:00
  Speaker 1: the end they are taught that what matters in life
• 1:18:04
  Speaker 1: is the other that's.
• 1:18:05
  Speaker 2: What altruism teaches them. And if the other is what matters,
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 2: then they should pursue that. And they don't want to
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 2: sacrifice the other people that you know, they figured that out.
• 1:18:17
  Speaker 1: They figured that out. That doesn't make any sense.
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 2: So the only other way they can imagine to deal
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 2: with others is that control them, that is to have
• 1:18:25
  Speaker 2: them sacrificed to you. So I go back to that
• 1:18:28
  Speaker 2: thinking it's altruism. But I'm sure there's a psychological element
• 1:18:32
  Speaker 2: that I just don't know what it is. Maybe it's
• 1:18:34
  Speaker 2: out of control. Maybe they feel out of control and
• 1:18:37
  Speaker 2: they think they gain control over themselves by controlling others.
• 1:18:40
  Speaker 1: Maybe it's that. I don't know. I have to think
• 1:18:44
  Speaker 1: about it.
• 1:18:46
  Speaker 2: David, have to admire Putin's strategy of taking the West
• 1:18:49
  Speaker 2: to the edge and then pulling back, then going for
• 1:18:52
  Speaker 2: the next time until it wears us out. Yeah, I mean,
• 1:18:55
  Speaker 2: he knows what he's doing. He's a strategic thinker. As
• 1:18:58
  Speaker 2: compared to Trump. He has a plan and that's why
• 1:19:01
  Speaker 2: he plays Trump. He has a long term vision, he
• 1:19:04
  Speaker 2: knows what he wants, and he plays Trump because Trump
• 1:19:06
  Speaker 2: has no clue, he doesn't know anything. I got a question,
• 1:19:14
  Speaker 2: Viy email from Daniel, a supporter of the show on Patreon.
• 1:19:20
  Speaker 1: So let me read this. It relates to something I
• 1:19:23
  Speaker 1: said a few days ago.
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 2: He says, on the recent show Free Speech Hate Speech
• 1:19:28
  Speaker 2: from September sixteen, twenty twenty five, you shed comments from
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 2: San Pika calling for violence against capitalism, including killing them
• 1:19:34
  Speaker 2: in the streets. He said that you believe his comments
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 2: would be protected by the First Amendment. How are these
• 1:19:38
  Speaker 2: comments different than Muslims calling for jihad or advocating for
• 1:19:41
  Speaker 2: killing Jews, apostates, or other non Muslim groups. Is the
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 2: group a capitalist less specific than Jews? Doesn't matter whether
• 1:19:50
  Speaker 2: the individual calling for violence is within the jurisdiction of
• 1:19:52
  Speaker 2: the United States. If the individual is outside the used jewishdiction,
• 1:19:55
  Speaker 2: what role does the government play in each case? It's
• 1:19:59
  Speaker 2: not clear to me that calling for violence against a
• 1:20:01
  Speaker 2: group should be protected speech, regardless of the specificity of
• 1:20:04
  Speaker 2: the comment. Is it not true that the call to
• 1:20:08
  Speaker 2: jihad is a generalized statement advocating violence against anyone who
• 1:20:12
  Speaker 2: does not submit to a slump? If so, why is
• 1:20:15
  Speaker 2: it different when someone like Hassan makes a generalized call
• 1:20:18
  Speaker 2: for violence against capitalists.
• 1:20:21
  Speaker 1: Could that not also result in lone wolf.
• 1:20:23
  Speaker 2: Type attacks, such like calls the Jihadis inspire individuals to
• 1:20:28
  Speaker 2: drive cause into crowds. I think it is one thing
• 1:20:31
  Speaker 2: to advance to advocate shunning somebody or a group because
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 2: one believes its ideas are to be abhorn and a
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 2: completely different thing to advocate violence against that person who group,
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 2: even if the comments are as general as be violence
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 2: towards group acts. I agree that the former should be
• 1:20:47
  Speaker 2: protected speech, but I don't think that the latter should
• 1:20:50
  Speaker 2: be protected speech. I think they express an opinion that
• 1:20:52
  Speaker 2: someone deserves to die is protect I think that especially
• 1:20:57
  Speaker 2: an opinion that someone deserves to die is protected speech.
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 2: Or stating that people should go punch, kill, or violate
• 1:21:03
  Speaker 2: or be violent towards group acts sounds like a call
• 1:21:05
  Speaker 2: to action. To me, I'm not convinced that protected speech
• 1:21:07
  Speaker 2: or should it be protected speech. I mean to hear
• 1:21:09
  Speaker 2: your thoughts on the matter. Thanks for taking my question. Yeah,
• 1:21:12
  Speaker 2: I mean it's a good it's a good question. And
• 1:21:14
  Speaker 2: and when I said that, I said it hesitantly because
• 1:21:18
  Speaker 2: I think I think it's a there's a it's a
• 1:21:21
  Speaker 2: it's a borderline.
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 1: It could go either way. And and let me let
• 1:21:26
  Speaker 1: me specify one of the things that I think the
• 1:21:28
  Speaker 1: law will quiet is that it not just be.
• 1:21:34
  Speaker 2: A threat or an incitement, not just involve go do acts,
• 1:21:41
  Speaker 2: but it have credibility.
• 1:21:44
  Speaker 6: That is that they be specific people that that this
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 6: is being addressed to who have the capability and the
• 1:21:55
  Speaker 6: inclination to actually follow through with it.
• 1:21:59
  Speaker 1: That it's not being done hyper bowl. You know, it's
• 1:22:03
  Speaker 1: just yeah, I should kill all those capitalists and slaughter them.
• 1:22:07
  Speaker 2: But it's not really targeted to anybody, and it's not
• 1:22:11
  Speaker 2: really trying to motivate anybody specific. And I think as
• 1:22:14
  Speaker 2: long as it's generalized, then I think the court's content
• 1:22:22
  Speaker 2: a predicted speech. It's why even in the United States
• 1:22:26
  Speaker 2: you have Islamic preachers.
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 1: Calling for kind of jihad, but.
• 1:22:34
  Speaker 2: Generalized, not any specific action visa ejihand.
• 1:22:42
  Speaker 1: Not and not telling.
• 1:22:45
  Speaker 2: This particular group there is likely to be suicide bombers,
• 1:22:50
  Speaker 2: but just generally this would be a good.
• 1:22:52
  Speaker 1: Thing in the world.
• 1:22:53
  Speaker 2: If this happened, if people were killed, it's probably we
• 1:23:00
  Speaker 2: protect the speech, and that's why they're allowed to keep
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 2: doing it.
• 1:23:02
  Speaker 1: And they do it all the time here and in
• 1:23:05
  Speaker 1: Europe you hear it all the time.
• 1:23:09
  Speaker 2: But here's the difference with Islam In my view, Islam
• 1:23:16
  Speaker 2: has the means to execute, They have the network by
• 1:23:23
  Speaker 2: which to execute. They have executed in the past. A
• 1:23:38
  Speaker 2: a mom says go kill acts, we know he has
• 1:23:43
  Speaker 2: troops ready to do it. Again, not everywhere. This is
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 2: why I think in an in an American mosque, he's
• 1:23:53
  Speaker 2: probably not going to be prosecuted because because he doesn't
• 1:23:56
  Speaker 2: really have troops.
• 1:23:57
  Speaker 1: But anywhere else we know that they are.
• 1:24:01
  Speaker 2: You know, a whole organization is dedicated to doing exactly
• 1:24:04
  Speaker 2: what he's saying.
• 1:24:06
  Speaker 1: So he has a direct goalie is people he is
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 1: inspiring directly. So it's not it's a.
• 1:24:16
  Speaker 2: Credible threat, it's actionable. Now if a Sunpike up, it
• 1:24:23
  Speaker 2: turns out has some kind of network out there, people
• 1:24:30
  Speaker 2: who are basically waiting for his instructions on what to do,
• 1:24:37
  Speaker 2: and who listened regularly to hear what he does, and
• 1:24:40
  Speaker 2: they go out and execute.
• 1:24:43
  Speaker 1: And the direction are n and they're ready to do it.
• 1:24:47
  Speaker 2: And he comes out and says, go kill the capitalist,
• 1:24:49
  Speaker 2: and yeah, he is liable for anything that they actually do.
• 1:24:54
  Speaker 1: That speech is not protected.
• 1:24:56
  Speaker 2: But if he's just a commentator, even if he has
• 1:24:59
  Speaker 2: millions of follow he's just a commentator, and he says
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 2: this is what I think should happen. Then, I mean,
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 2: he's a horrible, despicable sub human being, right. But it's
• 1:25:11
  Speaker 2: not clear that it's actionable. It's not clear that it's
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 2: a call to action because it's not clear there's anybody
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 2: to act on it. And indeed, nobody acted on it
• 1:25:23
  Speaker 2: as far as we know. So it's not the fact
• 1:25:26
  Speaker 2: that it's a group. It's a fact that there's nobody
• 1:25:32
  Speaker 2: to do the acting.
• 1:25:34
  Speaker 1: There's no specific it's not actionable in that way. Now,
• 1:25:38
  Speaker 1: again I might be wrong on this. I'm happy to
• 1:25:43
  Speaker 1: be wrong in this.
• 1:25:47
  Speaker 2: We'd have to look at US law exactly how it
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 2: and I think this is part of US law, exactly
• 1:25:52
  Speaker 2: what US law says in terms of what is an incitement,
• 1:25:56
  Speaker 2: what does it mean to incite violence?
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 1: And think about it objectively. Now, I would make one
• 1:26:02
  Speaker 1: other difference with Islam, and I think this is an
• 1:26:07
  Speaker 1: important one.
• 1:26:08
  Speaker 2: Whether we know it or not, we are at war
• 1:26:13
  Speaker 2: with these Muslims. The one is calling for jihad, not
• 1:26:18
  Speaker 2: not isy a.
• 1:26:21
  Speaker 1: A. It's not just terrorism. We're at war with them.
• 1:26:26
  Speaker 1: They want to destroy us, they want to destroy a civilization.
• 1:26:28
  Speaker 2: They want to destroy us, And it doesn't matter if
• 1:26:32
  Speaker 2: they hear of the any way in the world, they
• 1:26:34
  Speaker 2: want to destroy us. And therefore, since we're at war
• 1:26:38
  Speaker 2: with them, it is unacceptable to have their agents in
• 1:26:44
  Speaker 2: the United States advocating for the ideas that we're at
• 1:26:48
  Speaker 2: war with or the ideology that animates those people.
• 1:26:53
  Speaker 1: Where at war with? So at war with the Muslim
• 1:26:56
  Speaker 1: bother wood, Well what what again?
• 1:26:59
  Speaker 2: We don't have the play war, but we are war
• 1:27:01
  Speaker 2: with Kamas and slumming jihad and Al Kaida Nisis and.
• 1:27:05
  Speaker 1: The million other variations of it. And if there's any.
• 1:27:08
  Speaker 2: Mom here who is spouting those ideologies, just like it
• 1:27:12
  Speaker 2: would be if there was a Nazi here spouting Nazis
• 1:27:14
  Speaker 2: and what would war with the Nazis, that speech would
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 2: clearly be banned. You can't that's treason. You can't advocate
• 1:27:20
  Speaker 2: for the enemy here. So it's clear to me that.
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 1: You would.
• 1:27:26
  Speaker 2: You would go to jail. We should go to jail
• 1:27:30
  Speaker 2: today because we're war. No, we should declare war and
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 2: all of that. And and if your overseas, it doesn't matter,
• 1:27:37
  Speaker 2: you're you're you're now supporting a group that we're at
• 1:27:39
  Speaker 2: war with.
• 1:27:46
  Speaker 1: I don't I mean.
• 1:27:47
  Speaker 2: Again, as vile, as hobable, as what how, some piker said.
• 1:27:51
  Speaker 2: I don't take what he said as actually a called
• 1:27:53
  Speaker 2: for action, as clear excitement for violence, and the fact
• 1:28:06
  Speaker 2: that nobody acted on it is a good sign, but
• 1:28:10
  Speaker 2: as an indication that they're not sitting there waiting for
• 1:28:12
  Speaker 2: instructions like they are among the Muslims.
• 1:28:16
  Speaker 1: But there's again a lot of contexts with the Muslims
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 1: is would war with them and they fall.
• 1:28:21
  Speaker 2: All this speech is any speech that is pro the
• 1:28:25
  Speaker 2: ideology the represents of people would war with should be banned.
• 1:28:32
  Speaker 1: Hopefully then answers the question.
• 1:28:34
  Speaker 2: Hopefully it's right, Jeffrey said, finally, hood back from offended Noma.
• 1:28:47
  Speaker 1: He no longer works there and left on bad terms.
• 1:28:50
  Speaker 1: So we're on our own. That's too bad. That is
• 1:28:53
  Speaker 1: too bad, and my time in Europe is running out,
• 1:28:56
  Speaker 1: so I'm not sure I could make it anyway at
• 1:28:58
  Speaker 1: this point. Thanks Jeffrey Michael. If if business started.
• 1:29:09
  Speaker 2: Bribing Trump, will he regulate them less, Yes, no question,
• 1:29:15
  Speaker 2: in a perverse way, leading to.
• 1:29:16
  Speaker 1: More economic growth.
• 1:29:19
  Speaker 2: Well maybe, but he would regulate them less, but he
• 1:29:22
  Speaker 2: would also regulate in favor of those people bribing him,
• 1:29:25
  Speaker 2: which would reduce competition, reduce innovation, and maybe the economy doesn't.
• 1:29:29
  Speaker 1: Grow that fast, so it's not click cut how that goes.
• 1:29:33
  Speaker 2: The bribing doesn't just reduce regulation in everybody. It reduces
• 1:29:37
  Speaker 2: regulation on some and increases regulation maybe on others. So
• 1:29:41
  Speaker 2: it depends how it all works out. Neil, you on
• 1:29:48
  Speaker 2: force one of your kids to run for president and
• 1:29:50
  Speaker 2: control everything from the back end? Why would I do
• 1:29:53
  Speaker 2: that to my kids? And why would they listen to me?
• 1:29:55
  Speaker 2: And says when can I force my kids to do anything?
• 1:29:59
  Speaker 2: You know, what if you run for president and having
• 1:30:01
  Speaker 2: me run things from the back end, you know, neo?
• 1:30:05
  Speaker 1: You do it?
• 1:30:07
  Speaker 2: Now it looks like Neo's in Canadis And maybe you can't,
• 1:30:10
  Speaker 2: you know, but maybe Michael current for president. Michael is
• 1:30:15
  Speaker 2: Charlie Cook's assassination going to save the up in the midterms.
• 1:30:19
  Speaker 1: We're the country blamed Democrats for this. I don't think.
• 1:30:23
  Speaker 1: I don't think so so to find the future. I
• 1:30:26
  Speaker 1: think what saves the up in.
• 1:30:27
  Speaker 2: The midterms if that happens, is just the compete pathetic
• 1:30:32
  Speaker 2: nature of the Democratic Party, the inability to have a
• 1:30:36
  Speaker 2: message and to oppose what Trump is doing. Cook says,
• 1:30:42
  Speaker 2: it turns out the road to hell is paved with
• 1:30:44
  Speaker 2: conservatives with what ABOUTI isms about the left?
• 1:30:48
  Speaker 1: Uh yeah, yeah, and I told you so. Thanks Cook.
• 1:30:56
  Speaker 2: W c ZN how you're on please ignore Anne thinks
• 1:31:01
  Speaker 2: all right. But and just to ask the question, and
• 1:31:04
  Speaker 2: is the center right doing better against Trump? I think
• 1:31:08
  Speaker 2: the criticism coming out of I don't know what you
• 1:31:10
  Speaker 2: call the center right. I think the criticism of Trump
• 1:31:13
  Speaker 2: coming out of the better free market organizations is is
• 1:31:22
  Speaker 2: quite good. Like the people criticizing him on on tariffs,
• 1:31:25
  Speaker 2: the the you know, the the Scott Linsic the and
• 1:31:30
  Speaker 2: the other economists that I have on that have had
• 1:31:32
  Speaker 2: on my show, I think that I think the critique
• 1:31:35
  Speaker 2: is very good. It's consistent, it's hard hitting, it's pervasive.
• 1:31:42
  Speaker 2: I think they do a good job. I think they're
• 1:31:44
  Speaker 2: the best. The criticism of human immigration coming out of
• 1:31:49
  Speaker 2: let's say, CATO is really good, and and and a
• 1:31:53
  Speaker 2: few other organizations.
• 1:31:57
  Speaker 1: I don't know what the central right is anymore. I mean,
• 1:32:00
  Speaker 1: I mean, to.
• 1:32:01
  Speaker 2: An extent silence associate with the Dispatch. Then yeah, if
• 1:32:05
  Speaker 2: the Dispatch is center right, then yes, it is much
• 1:32:09
  Speaker 2: better against Trump.
• 1:32:11
  Speaker 1: It's doing much better. Now.
• 1:32:12
  Speaker 2: It depends what you mean by doing much better, doing
• 1:32:14
  Speaker 2: much better? For what that is is doing much better
• 1:32:17
  Speaker 2: in terms of providing getting the Republican Party to embrace
• 1:32:23
  Speaker 2: an alternative. No Republican Party is Trump's party. It's not
• 1:32:27
  Speaker 2: going anywhere without Trump and his accolades, and we're stuck
• 1:32:30
  Speaker 2: with whatever Trump is or whatever follows Trump.
• 1:32:35
  Speaker 1: Fannopa.
• 1:32:36
  Speaker 2: Have you read any books on new plasticity brain health?
• 1:32:40
  Speaker 2: It's my current fascination, so I'm looking for accommodations. I
• 1:32:43
  Speaker 2: recommend the brain the changes, the changes itself. Thanks for
• 1:32:48
  Speaker 2: the recommendation. And no, I haven't read anything about it,
• 1:32:51
  Speaker 2: and I know nothing about it other than there is
• 1:32:54
  Speaker 2: blain brain. Can't talk plasticity, much more so than thought
• 1:32:59
  Speaker 2: in the past. Assary dichotomy.
• 1:33:02
  Speaker 1: Isn't most productivity coming from a minority of the population
• 1:33:07
  Speaker 1: and majority only subsists on transfers not useless, but not
• 1:33:12
  Speaker 1: net contributors.
• 1:33:13
  Speaker 2: No, I don't think that's true. I think a vast
• 1:33:15
  Speaker 2: majority of Americas are net contributors. I think the net
• 1:33:18
  Speaker 2: contributors of a little as compared to a few people.
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 2: The net contributors are a lot. So I don't think
• 1:33:24
  Speaker 2: it's an issue of net contributors versus net withdraws. I
• 1:33:29
  Speaker 2: think it's more of an issue of some people contribute
• 1:33:31
  Speaker 2: a huge amount tech, for example, and some people contribute
• 1:33:35
  Speaker 2: very little but still contribute pretty much everything else.
• 1:33:39
  Speaker 1: But there's still contribution. And even that's not fair, right,
• 1:33:45
  Speaker 1: I mean, there are lots of industries that contribute a lot,
• 1:33:48
  Speaker 1: but there are a few geniuses that contribute most of that.
• 1:33:51
  Speaker 1: But that doesn't mean.
• 1:33:51
  Speaker 2: Everybody else who works for them, for example, doesn't contribute
• 1:33:54
  Speaker 2: as well.
• 1:33:54
  Speaker 1: They all do.
• 1:33:55
  Speaker 2: It's it's it's it's a net win win. It's just
• 1:33:59
  Speaker 2: that the winning doesn't get done to the same extent.
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 2: The amount of productivity added is not the same for
• 1:34:05
  Speaker 2: each Michael, we're Americans. Were Americans as mindless and readily
• 1:34:12
  Speaker 2: accepting of aathilitarianism during the FDR on the New Deal
• 1:34:17
  Speaker 2: as they are today and the Trump How could it
• 1:34:19
  Speaker 2: be worse than FDR?
• 1:34:22
  Speaker 1: I don't know it. Certainly it was bad on the FDR,
• 1:34:27
  Speaker 1: and it's bad now.
• 1:34:30
  Speaker 2: Remember FDR was a true emergency, not that that's an excuse,
• 1:34:34
  Speaker 2: but you could you could see why Americans were willing
• 1:34:37
  Speaker 2: to allow him to do radical things because they thought
• 1:34:41
  Speaker 2: that the world was gonna end. They really thought that
• 1:34:43
  Speaker 2: it was an emergency, and to the loge extent, it
• 1:34:46
  Speaker 2: was an emergency caused by the government. Trump just declares emergencies.
• 1:34:50
  Speaker 2: He doesn't actually there is no emergency. That's one big difference.
• 1:34:56
  Speaker 2: I think FDR truly believed that the things he was doing,
• 1:35:00
  Speaker 2: we're going to make the country do better, come out
• 1:35:04
  Speaker 2: of a depression. I don't think Trump cares one way
• 1:35:12
  Speaker 2: or the other. And there's no depression. There's nothing to
• 1:35:15
  Speaker 2: come out of today, So it's more gratuitous today. But yeah,
• 1:35:22
  Speaker 2: I think people are more mindless today than back then.
• 1:35:27
  Speaker 2: Just a level of debate, de a discussion, the level
• 1:35:29
  Speaker 2: of everything, and there was more freedom back then.
• 1:35:31
  Speaker 1: The news today in spite of FDR and everything.
• 1:35:35
  Speaker 2: Matthew, if Obama could have been absolute dictator, what policies
• 1:35:40
  Speaker 2: would he have pursued. Is this a valid way of
• 1:35:43
  Speaker 2: evaluating politicians, even given that they are constrained in real life? No,
• 1:35:48
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's an interesting question thought experiment because it
• 1:35:51
  Speaker 2: goes to the heart of their ideological essence.
• 1:35:55
  Speaker 1: But look, our politicians are not very ideological. It's not
• 1:36:01
  Speaker 1: like Obama was a raving socialist.
• 1:36:04
  Speaker 2: Now, if Obama was in a complete dictator, could he
• 1:36:10
  Speaker 2: have been convinced to do like reparations?
• 1:36:14
  Speaker 1: Would do? We have a lot more affirmative action and
• 1:36:17
  Speaker 1: DEI like policies.
• 1:36:20
  Speaker 2: Would he have been a lot tougher on the oil
• 1:36:23
  Speaker 2: and gas industry, gun control things like that, Yeah, but
• 1:36:34
  Speaker 2: none of them are like a socialist agenda or the
• 1:36:39
  Speaker 2: flip side of that being a fascist agenda, like with
• 1:36:46
  Speaker 2: clear cut, clear goals.
• 1:36:48
  Speaker 1: Neither of them have that.
• 1:36:50
  Speaker 2: And gun control, maybe he would have done gun control,
• 1:36:53
  Speaker 2: but he would have been afraid of the resistance right.
• 1:36:56
  Speaker 2: Gun control is the one thing Americans seem to really
• 1:36:59
  Speaker 2: get upset about, So you might have been You might
• 1:37:01
  Speaker 2: have been worried about the resistance of people with guns
• 1:37:04
  Speaker 2: to gun control.
• 1:37:05
  Speaker 1: So not clear that would have been a primary.
• 1:37:07
  Speaker 2: You would have done some gund of control, but not
• 1:37:09
  Speaker 2: confiscating the guns kind of thing. Even Democrats don't, I mean,
• 1:37:13
  Speaker 2: voting democrats don't believe in that, at least except for
• 1:37:18
  Speaker 2: the ones who live in New York City. All right, guys,
• 1:37:23
  Speaker 2: thank you to all the super cheddows really really really appreciated.
• 1:37:27
  Speaker 2: Thank you to everybody for being here. There will be
• 1:37:32
  Speaker 2: no sho tomorrow. I'm going to chin Ka Terra, chin
• 1:37:36
  Speaker 2: Katerra on the Italian coast. I will be back probably
• 1:37:42
  Speaker 2: Sunday and probably Monday, and then I'll be off for
• 1:37:46
  Speaker 2: the rest of that week as I go to Madrid
• 1:37:49
  Speaker 2: and then home, and then we'll start up again a
• 1:37:52
  Speaker 2: week from Saturday at home at least for a little while.
• 1:37:56
  Speaker 2: But I'll be traveling most of October, most of the November,
• 1:38:02
  Speaker 2: most of October, most of most of November. Trains in
• 1:38:07
  Speaker 2: Italy ian, I mean, I'm sure there strikes and everything,
• 1:38:10
  Speaker 2: but trains in Italy amazing. They run mostly on time.
• 1:38:15
  Speaker 2: They are fast, really fast trains, much faster than American
• 1:38:19
  Speaker 2: fast trains. They go everywhere. They're really good. I've used
• 1:38:25
  Speaker 2: the trains this time in the past, and much better
• 1:38:29
  Speaker 2: than English trains, much better than And they're private. Then
• 1:38:33
  Speaker 2: number of companies I mean private nominally right, the heavily regulated,
• 1:38:36
  Speaker 2: but they're private and they compete. The number of companies
• 1:38:39
  Speaker 2: and trains are really nice to clean, the fast. Yeah,
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 2: I'm impressed, all right. Asatak Economy says, I see, I thought,
• 1:38:49
  Speaker 2: given ten to twenty thousand per week for public school
• 1:38:54
  Speaker 2: and how slated progressive taxes, welfare, Medicare, medicaid, you get
• 1:38:58
  Speaker 2: lots of.
• 1:38:59
  Speaker 1: Net consumer I don't understand that.
• 1:39:04
  Speaker 2: I see thought, given ten to twenty k per year
• 1:39:08
  Speaker 2: for public schools, and how slightly progressive taxes welfare and
• 1:39:12
  Speaker 2: medicare medicare you get, Yeah, I don't know. Isn't most
• 1:39:17
  Speaker 2: productivity coming from minority of the population. No, I mean
• 1:39:21
  Speaker 2: even people who who you know in that sense, in
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 2: sense of playing taxes. Half of Americans don't pay taxes.
• 1:39:31
  Speaker 2: That's true, but that doesn't mean they don't add to productivity.
• 1:39:34
  Speaker 2: They're still working, They're still out there with a job
• 1:39:37
  Speaker 2: and working and creating stuff. Just because they don't pay
• 1:39:41
  Speaker 2: taxes doesn't mean they're not working. So I think that's
• 1:39:48
  Speaker 2: the answer. Thanks sensatific economy. All right, guys, I will
• 1:39:53
  Speaker 2: see you Sunday. I hope buy everybody