Latest / DeProgram with Ted Rall and Jamarl Thomas / China Won the Iran War | DeProgram with Ted Rall and Jamarl Thomas

Transcript

China Won the Iran War | DeProgram with Ted Rall and Jamarl Thomas · DeProgram with Ted Rall and Jamarl Thomas

• 0:11
  Good morning. It's Friday, September 18th, 2026.
• 0:15
  This is DeProgram with Ted Rall and Jamarl
• 0:18
  Thomas. Thank you for joining us. Good morning,
• 0:20
  JT. We're here Monday through Friday, 9 a.m.
• 0:25
  to 10 a.m. Eastern Time. Thank you for joining
• 0:27
  us. Please subscribe, like, follow, donate, all
• 0:31
  the things. And just a reminder, we will be doing
• 0:36
  the Q&A show at 12 noon today, Friday. So that's
• 0:41
  from 12 noon to 1 p.m. Eastern time. That's
• 0:45
  just free forum. We talk about anything and everything
• 0:47
  that you want to talk about. So give us your
• 0:50
  questions and comments, et cetera, et cetera.
• 0:53
  What else? Okay. Oh, and DMZ America podcast,
• 0:56
  we'll be talking about... We didn't really know
• 0:58
  what to talk about today, so we're going to be
• 1:00
  talking about my column, which is about whether
• 1:02
  we are ever going to be able to move past Donald
• 1:05
  Trump as a country. That's at 11 a.m. Eastern
• 1:08
  time on YouTube and Rumble. You're welcome to
• 1:11
  join, JT. And this is at 11 o'clock? 11 a.m.,
• 1:17
  yeah. Want to come? Maybe. All right, let me
• 1:20
  know. All right, you have time. I've blocked
• 1:23
  my window this morning. You did what? I blew
• 1:27
  up my pastor this morning. What did you do? What
• 1:30
  do you mean you blew up your terrorist? What
• 1:32
  are you doing? Well, because he's your typical
• 1:35
  evangelical Republican, right? And so we were
• 1:39
  talking about how the capitalist system just
• 1:42
  raises all boats. And this happened about two
• 1:45
  weeks ago. Well, not all. Not the guys who are
• 1:47
  sleeping outside. Right. Well, what I did is
• 1:50
  I did a comparison between 1935 and 2006,
• 1:55
  the height of the Great Depression, comparing
• 1:58
  the purchasing power relative to actual purchasing
• 2:02
  and savings versus the Great Depression to now.
• 2:04
  Well, they had a lot of purchasing
• 2:07
  power because of deflation, right? So everything
• 2:11
  was dirt cheap if you had money. Man, those were
• 2:13
  the days, but nobody had money. But when I did
• 2:17
  those, I compared it with the cost of living, things
• 2:19
  that you actually needed between now and then,
• 2:22
  and the dollar actually goes about 60 cents less
• 2:27
  today than it did in the height of the Great
• 2:30
  Depression, especially once you factor in the
• 2:33
  lack of savings and savings accounts and how
• 2:35
  that pushes people into debt like credit cards.
• 2:37
  Well, nobody had savings in the Great Depression
• 2:39
  either. That was part of the problem. I understand,
• 2:42
  but the point I'm trying to make is
• 2:45
  that it— And everything is, I use Credit Suisse
• 2:48
  and a lot of different sources, just completely
• 2:51
  just blew up the argument he was making. It was
• 2:54
  awesome. We're going to have to talk about the
• 2:57
  economy later or not at all or whatever at another
• 3:02
  time. But we have a lot. Who cares about it?
• 3:04
  The economy? No, people care about the economy.
• 3:07
  No, Ted, it's fine. The Wednesday after the midterms,
• 3:10
  I think we're going to all see how much people
• 3:12
  cared about the economy. Yes. Okay. So here's
• 3:16
  what we've got today. The economy is fine. Never
• 3:19
  better. Yeah. Okay, so in no particular order.
• 3:25
  So China appears to have been the big winner
• 3:28
  so far in the Iran war. Basically, they have
• 3:33
  a command and control economy that allows them
• 3:35
  to plan ahead for things in a big way. And they
• 3:38
  have huge stockpiles of oil. And basically they
• 3:41
  have unparalleled positioning across all energy
• 3:45
  sectors. We can talk about that. Abdul El-Sayed
• 3:48
  is being pressured to, it appears to be starting
• 3:52
  to throw Hasan Piker under the bus. It doesn't
• 3:55
  mean much by itself, but it's symbolic of the
• 3:57
  push and pull between the corporate and the
• 4:00
  non-corporate Democrats. So I want to talk about
• 4:03
  that. Also, we've got... Cuba, we talked about
• 4:07
  this before and we'll talk about it again, but
• 4:09
  Venezuela is already being looted and now the
• 4:13
  Trumpies are out to loot the shit out of Cuba.
• 4:16
  So we'll talk about that. Before we do that,
• 4:21
  I just wanted to get your quick thoughts on the
• 4:22
  fact that Donald Trump, in all seriousness, seems
• 4:26
  to be intent on demolishing the Kennedy Center.
• 4:31
  For people who haven't been to the
• 4:33
  Kennedy Center, and I'm one of them, the thing
• 4:35
  is, every time you drive into Washington across
• 4:37
  that Key Bridge from Virginia, you see the Kennedy
• 4:40
  Center right there. It's a big part
• 4:43
  of what Washington has that passes
• 4:46
  for a skyline. And it's just, it
• 4:50
  would be, I got to say, I think it would be perhaps
• 4:54
  like this. Think about, tell me if I'm
• 4:59
  wrong. I think if he demolished the Kennedy Center,
• 5:02
  it could kind of be the beginning of the end
• 5:05
  for Donald Trump in the same way that with the
• 5:08
  Taliban 1.0, blowing up the Bamiyan statues,
• 5:12
  the giant Buddhas at Bamiyan, turned out to be
• 5:16
  the beginning of the end for them in that the
• 5:17
  whole world was kind of like, okay, we're done
• 5:21
  with you now. We hate you. These
• 5:24
  things were here a thousand years through
• 5:27
  thick and thin and through constant battles and
• 5:30
  even the Mongols didn't do anything to them and
• 5:32
  now you're blowing that up. We hate you. And
• 5:35
  then it was easier to put a coalition
• 5:38
  together to destroy them after 9/11 in part because
• 5:42
  of that. I think it's like, even though
• 5:45
  it's just a building and who fucking cares? It's
• 5:47
  like, I think it would be symbolically for the
• 5:50
  ruling classes and the elites. It would be just
• 5:52
  a bridge too far in a way that all the much more
• 5:56
  serious shit that Trump has done has not resonated
• 6:00
  for them. It's just the body, Ted. Right, right.
• 6:08
  I mean, it's just a big white building from the
• 6:11
  60s. It's just a building. But it would probably
• 6:14
  mean a lot somehow. It would mean a lot. I think
• 6:17
  it would mean a lot to a lot of people. I do
• 6:18
  think that. I don't know if it's going to have
• 6:21
  the resonance that I think you may think it has
• 6:23
  in the context of. Because, come on.
• 6:26
  Those statues have been around for a thousand
• 6:28
  years. The Kennedy Center. Less so. Right? Of
• 6:32
  course, we don't have that kind of
• 6:34
  history. We don't have that history like that.
• 6:36
  60 years is a long time for the U.S.
• 6:39
  It is. And it's, what, a fifth, sixth of
• 6:42
  a country's history or something like that? I
• 6:44
  don't want to do math on air. I just think it
• 6:46
  just seems so gratuitous. It was doing
• 6:48
  perfectly fine until he came along. And then
• 6:51
  he destroyed it. And it's like you just named
• 6:53
  Kennedy on it. Meaning, you're doing this for
• 6:57
  obvious reasons. This is not arbitrary. You're
• 7:01
  doing this because it's a Democratic president
• 7:02
  that was successful, or at the very least was
• 7:05
  considered successful. This was Camelot. And
• 7:08
  he's also simultaneously putting up these stupid
• 7:10
  ballrooms that are illegal, this reflecting pool,
• 7:14
  this Arc de Triomphe, and all of this other nonsense
• 7:16
  that nobody asks for. No, I agree with you. And
• 7:19
  the Bordello Oval Office. Pretty much. But everyone
• 7:22
  thinks that people think,
• 7:24
  okay, the Oval Office, it has been redecorated
• 7:28
  in the past and it can be redecorated in the
• 7:30
  future. This is not that. They're ripping down
• 7:33
  parts of the White House to build a ballroom
• 7:35
  that nobody asks for. Right. The ballroom, I
• 7:38
  think, it's the prequel. It's like,
• 7:41
  well, it's illegal. But I think in a weird way,
• 7:45
  I think this is all about psychology.
• 7:48
  Of course. Trump doesn't own the White
• 7:51
  House. He's not even renting it. But he's basically
• 7:53
  a squatter. He has as many
• 7:56
  rights to do what he wants in the White
• 7:58
  House as a homeless person who's admitted to
• 8:01
  a shelter to spend the night until six in the
• 8:03
  morning. Yes. But I think psychologically
• 8:06
  people are like, well, he lives there.
• 8:09
  Okay. Previous presidents have done renovations.
• 8:13
  JFK put in a swimming pool in the basement.
• 8:17
  Reagan put in a movie theater. I think
• 8:21
  it was Reagan. It's just, these things
• 8:25
  have happened before. And for really old people,
• 8:27
  they remember Truman doing a total gut renovation
• 8:30
  of the White House. So, but I think the Kennedy
• 8:34
  Center is kind of like, no, you have nothing
• 8:37
  to do with this. At all. This is across
• 8:40
  town. This isn't you. It's something that has,
• 8:43
  you're not a high culture kind of guy. This has
• 8:49
  nothing to do with you. So I think just the psychological,
• 8:51
  it would feel more like an assault and an invasion
• 8:55
  than what he did to the East Wing. To
• 8:59
  me, the East Wing, I don't care about. To me,
• 9:01
  it's the Rose Garden. That's a desecration to
• 9:04
  destroy Jackie Kennedy's Rose Garden. But
• 9:09
  because that just seems like it's such
• 9:11
  a beautiful thing. Why would you get
• 9:13
  rid of that? The name Kennedy is at the end of
• 9:15
  it also. Right. Plus it's Jackie Kennedy who—
• 9:18
  I don't think it's arbitrary. Yeah.
• 9:20
  I don't think it's arbitrary. I think the name
• 9:22
  Kennedy is the issue. Yeah. No, for sure. For
• 9:26
  sure. He wants to take a big whiz on
• 9:29
  the Kennedy legacy. He's jealous of that legacy.
• 9:34
  It's like, well, hey, if he'd moved his head
• 9:36
  a little bit to one side in Butler, he might
• 9:38
  have had that same legacy. And RFK has nothing
• 9:41
  to say about this. No. Although he's been disowned
• 9:45
  by his entire family, but yeah. True, but still
• 9:50
  a Kennedy. True. There's something inherently
• 9:55
  wrong with it. I agree with you. One man shouldn't
• 9:57
  even be able to do it. I don't even know why
• 9:58
  the president has the power to do it. Well, I
• 10:01
  mean, this is the tech bro move fast and break
• 10:06
  things approach, right? It's sort of like the
• 10:09
  AI companies. We're going to engage
• 10:11
  in the wholesale intellectual theft of copyrighted
• 10:15
  intellectual property. Every painting,
• 10:19
  song, news article, editorial cartoon, comic
• 10:23
  strip, video, radio show, everything that has
• 10:28
  ever been on the Internet. We're going to scrape
• 10:30
  it all without permission. And then if people
• 10:32
  sue, oh, I guess we can pay
• 10:35
  them off to go away for pennies on the dollar.
• 10:38
  And we'll still be worth many billions of dollars
• 10:40
  more than that. And it'll be fine. And that's
• 10:42
  basically it's like the facts on the ground
• 10:46
  end up. I know this drives you crazy,
• 10:49
  right? And it drives me crazy too. It's
• 10:52
  sort of like you can basically fuck things
• 10:55
  up. There's no accountability. But then it's
• 10:58
  like, well, what are you going to do? It's fucked
• 10:59
  up now. Now we have, there's no, the East Wing's
• 11:02
  gone. I'm like, well, you could rebuild it exactly
• 11:04
  the way it was. You could tear down the ballroom
• 11:08
  down to the bottom. You could, roses can
• 11:12
  be replanted. You can do all
• 11:15
  that stuff. You're just not going to. I would
• 11:18
  do it the day that Trump leaves. I would do it
• 11:20
  all. That's my column this week. I'm saying everything
• 11:24
  should be reversed. Everything. Yeah, all of
• 11:27
  it, including policy. All of it. Joe Biden should
• 11:30
  have gone back to the JCPOA. Nicolas Maduro should
• 11:33
  be released from prison, flown back to Caracas,
• 11:35
  and put back into the presidential palace. But
• 11:39
  we benefit from the tech companies
• 11:40
  doing that, though, right? And maybe
• 11:42
  this is my software engineer stepping out for
• 11:44
  a moment. We benefit from that. The fact
• 11:47
  that they've been able to put everything online,
• 11:49
  I want to be able to search any random book
• 11:51
  that may be out that has been going on for a
• 11:54
  thousand years that I may not even know exists.
• 11:57
  Well, that you can't because it's not copyrighted.
• 12:00
  True. But even with copyrighted stuff, this idea
• 12:02
  of putting things behind paywalls, I get why
• 12:05
  they do it. Yeah, and people do want to access
• 12:09
  all this. Of course, it's incredibly
• 12:11
  exciting to have this digital repository where
• 12:16
  you could access everything. Who wouldn't
• 12:18
  want that? Yes. And I guess if we lived under
• 12:21
  a communist government where authors and musicians
• 12:26
  and artists were hired by the state,
• 12:30
  it wouldn't be a problem because they wouldn't
• 12:32
  starve to death. I don't want that either. I
• 12:33
  don't want them being hired by the state, but
• 12:35
  the point is well they have to earn a living
• 12:37
  somehow, right? If you're going to have them.
• 12:39
  I guess and maybe that therein lies the problem
• 12:41
  with that form of government. If I am
• 12:46
  a firm believer that who pays you is on some
• 12:48
  level indicative of what you do, true, and if that's
• 12:52
  the state then you have every interest because
• 12:55
  I don't believe for this moment that the state
• 12:56
  is always going to be a neutral
• 12:58
  arbiter. Yeah, the state always has priorities
• 13:03
  in regards to what it wants to accomplish, and
• 13:05
  everything conforms to the priorities that the
• 13:06
  state wants to accomplish. And if I'm hiring
• 13:08
  music acts, then the only thing that stops me
• 13:11
  from putting pressure on those musical acts is
• 13:12
  morality, ethics. And how long does that last?
• 13:17
  A few years after the revolution. Give it 100
• 13:21
  years. That's right. It won't be intact. Meaning,
• 13:25
  whatever there is, there has to be some kind
• 13:26
  of way of having these things to be on some level
• 13:28
  separate from the state. By the same token,
• 13:31
  well I don't know how to do it, be accessible.
• 13:33
  I don't know how you make, let's
• 13:35
  say you want, let's
• 13:37
  say people want me to draw a cartoon. Okay,
• 13:41
  and I draw that cartoon and I would love
• 13:43
  it for everybody to be able to see it, not have
• 13:46
  to pay a penny to a newspaper or a magazine or
• 13:49
  a website to see it. I would love that. I want
• 13:50
  everybody to see the cartoon. That's, I'm an artist.
• 13:53
  That's what I want. But who's going to
• 13:56
  pay me for it, right? Putting it behind a
• 13:58
  paywall is what allows me to sometimes
• 14:02
  pay some of my bills. So... No, I do get it.
• 14:06
  I do get the contradiction. Oh, I know. I'm not
• 14:08
  saying that my point of view fits in a...
• 14:12
  I don't know the answer, because what you're
• 14:15
  saying is 100% correct. If the state employs
• 14:18
  you, then the state's going to censor you. Yeah,
• 14:21
  probably. They're going to want Ted Rall to produce
• 14:22
  things showing how awesome the state is. Of course.
• 14:25
  Ted Rall is not going to want to do that, especially
• 14:28
  if he doesn't believe the state. It's like that.
• 14:31
  You're going to cheat at the leash. Yeah, I don't
• 14:35
  know. I don't know the answer for it. By the
• 14:38
  way, we need to also talk about bone-crushing
• 14:41
  sanctions from hell, ironically named. As far
• 14:47
  as the AI thing goes, I think that's probably
• 14:49
  the fairest way to do it because everyone that's
• 14:51
  online, if you have a smartphone, you are training
• 14:55
  AI. As part of the terms and conditions of the
• 14:58
  apps, if you have a Gmail account, Google uses
• 15:01
  every email that you send to help train Gemini.
• 15:04
  It's in the terms and conditions. Which everybody
• 15:07
  reads carefully. Of course. So I think that the
• 15:11
  best way, the fairest way to do this is come
• 15:15
  tax time, they figure out how much of your material
• 15:21
  was used for training these AIs, whether it's
• 15:23
  Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, whatever, and
• 15:27
  that would be applied as a credit towards your
• 15:28
  tax bill. How would they do that, Robby? So they
• 15:31
  know everything anyway. They do that. They know
• 15:33
  everything. An algorithm could figure that out.
• 15:35
  Of course. They have all that information.
• 15:38
  They have AI. They could have AI. They know
• 15:41
  how many emails you've sent, how
• 15:44
  many emails you've read, how many hours a
• 15:46
  year that you've watched on YouTube. They have
• 15:51
  all this information. And the reason I
• 15:52
  bring this up, and Rumble will actually
• 15:54
  expose this as plain as the nose on our faces,
• 15:58
  is that they plainly said, and Google does the
• 16:01
  same thing with Gemini, that they are using live
• 16:03
  streams and digital content in addition to books
• 16:05
  and emails and music to train their AI algorithms.
• 16:09
  So they know who you are. Yeah, right now,
• 16:12
  we're training Gemini AI. Right now. Everybody
• 16:16
  gets a kickback from tech companies in the form
• 16:18
  of their taxes. Correct. It doesn't have to be
• 16:21
  on their taxes. It could be a dividend. What
• 16:23
  about people who don't have income? Well, then
• 16:24
  you'd be paying an income tax. So let's not do
• 16:28
  that. That just goes against your tax burden.
• 16:32
  But I'm saying, what if you don't have a tax
• 16:33
  burden? What if you have zero income? Well, then
• 16:36
  you're training AI. You don't get anything. In
• 16:38
  fact, you're not going to have any income because,
• 16:40
  wait for it, AI. That means that everybody who's
• 16:45
  on Twitter, who's on social media at all, which
• 16:47
  is like 99.9% of the population, will get
• 16:50
  a dividend check from the state. By the way,
• 16:52
  that really gets that. That'd be the first way
• 16:54
  to do it, honestly, because they know how many
• 16:56
  hours this is drawn. For example, I've
• 16:58
  switched over to YouTube because Rumble has screwed
• 17:02
  me. And for those of you who have been supporting
• 17:03
  the YouTube channel, thank you. I could not do
• 17:05
  this without you. I can go in and I can check.
• 17:10
  JT, you can't do it with your own channel.
• 17:12
  You can go into your advanced metrics and you
• 17:14
  can get information within two days for every
• 17:19
  hour, where it came from, everything
• 17:23
  down to— You're already paid by either Rumble
• 17:26
  or YouTube, other social media companies. We're
• 17:28
  talking about people who are not doing channels.
• 17:30
  It sounds like— But you're training it.
• 17:34
  If a mom goes on to Twitter, then she should
• 17:36
  get a dividend check because she was watching
• 17:38
  Twitter. Meaning the more that you watch and
• 17:40
  engage in social media, the more money you get
• 17:43
  paid for doing— Correct, because you're training
• 17:45
  the model. I'm building an AI model right now.
• 17:47
  It takes a crap ton. It's a pain in the butt.
• 17:51
  And the point I'm trying to make is that if you
• 17:54
  are quote unquote working to train these things,
• 17:57
  you should be compensated for that time. But
• 18:00
  you are compensated in a way. You're compensated
• 18:02
  by using the application. They're not charging
• 18:04
  you to use Twitter. You could with a blue checkmark,
• 18:06
  but you're not being charged for it. They're
• 18:08
  not charging you to use YouTube. But you're the
• 18:10
  merchandise for it. You're who for it? You're
• 18:13
  the merchandise. Yes, but you're also using a
• 18:16
  product. Meaning, this sounds like Donald Trump,
• 18:18
  when Donald Trump is making the argument about
• 18:20
  tariffs or trade imbalances. And he's like, yeah,
• 18:23
  if I buy $2 billion of bananas, then I'm losing
• 18:28
  $2 billion. And so, hashtag trade imbalance.
• 18:32
  It's like, dude, but you're getting the bananas,
• 18:34
  right? The money is not going up in smoke. You're
• 18:37
  getting something in exchange for the thing to
• 18:38
  which you are trading your money for, that is
• 18:41
  bananas if you choose to eat the banana. But Ted's
• 18:43
  going to bananas. He's not being compensated
• 18:46
  for the bananas that he's growing. That's the
• 18:49
  point. Ted is buying the bananas by using the
• 18:52
  application. Meaning they could—the tech, God, man,
• 18:54
  I don't want to make this argument for tech companies.
• 18:56
  The tech companies could credibly say, well, dude,
• 19:00
  you're using the application for free. That is
• 19:02
  what you're being compensated. Meaning if you
• 19:05
  are ever getting anything for free you're usually
• 19:06
  the product. Same thing is true. You don't have
• 19:09
  to use the product. You use it. You choose to use
• 19:12
  it. Of course. And this idea is just saying,
• 19:16
  but if you live in at least a somewhat functional
• 19:20
  state, and what I mean by that, not South
• 19:23
  Sudan, you are connected to the internet in some
• 19:27
  way, shape or form and then that data is then
• 19:29
  being used to train an AI that is going to replace
• 19:32
  your job. Guys, all right, we can do
• 19:36
  this or whatever we want, in the Q&A,
• 19:38
  but we've got other stuff to talk about. I think
• 19:40
  we've all heard each other here. My only piece
• 19:43
  I want to add to this is I think someone who
• 19:46
  writes an article, for example, probably
• 19:49
  deserves a bigger share of that pie than someone
• 19:51
  who's just doom scrolling. Okay. And just,
• 19:54
  and reading the article should,
• 19:57
  who's spending the same amount of time on the internet,
• 19:59
  but all right. I agree. Yeah. That's very self-
• 20:05
  interested of us, but yeah. Okay. Jamarl, what
• 20:09
  should we talk about? Should we talk about
• 20:11
  bone-crushing sanctions from hell? All right.
• 20:14
  Let's hear this for just a couple of minutes.
• 20:16
  All right. Let's talk about it. I don't know
• 20:18
  if you saw the comment that came out of Congress
• 20:20
  where they basically made the point of saying
• 20:21
  now Vladimir Putin. And then he explicitly pointed
• 20:24
  out Modi and China. Basically, you're on record.
• 20:29
  Modi and China or Modi and Xi Jinping for helping
• 20:33
  this brutal war by you, by Vladimir Putin.
• 20:36
  And I thought to myself, gas is sitting at $4.20
• 20:40
  with diesel at $6.20. And these guys are
• 20:44
  now trying to pick a fight, an economic fight
• 20:47
  with India and China. They are delusional if
• 20:51
  they think that this is going to have the effects
• 20:52
  that they think. This is going to backfire. Donald
• 20:54
  Trump is already running Operation Outcast or
• 20:56
  Scott Benson against countries that are working
• 20:59
  with Iran, which also include India and China,
• 21:04
  meaning you've given the president power to do
• 21:07
  something that the president was already doing
• 21:09
  for other reasons, which should tell you something
• 21:12
  about the effectiveness of what you're doing.
• 21:15
  It's delusional and it's going to backfire. Give
• 21:18
  me your thoughts. Yeah, well, no. Look,
• 21:21
  it's relevant to the story that we're about to
• 21:23
  talk about, about China being basically impervious
• 21:26
  to energy shocks. Imagine that a big
• 21:30
  wealthy country sees a big systemic problem that
• 21:34
  they have. In their case, we don't really produce
• 21:36
  energy in significant amounts, but we consume
• 21:39
  a lot of it. And what if we built
• 21:42
  infrastructure and created supply lines that
• 21:46
  solved that problem so that we were prepared
• 21:49
  in the event that anyone tried to leverage that
• 21:52
  problem against us in the future. And then they
• 21:54
  did it. As Americans, we don't understand
• 21:58
  how a country can work that well. But just for
• 22:01
  a second, they did it because the U.S. was going
• 22:04
  after energy, meaning they. They did that because
• 22:08
  they saw what the United States was trying to
• 22:09
  create choke points. It was U.S. policy to try
• 22:11
  to create choke points that will go after Chinese
• 22:14
  energy. Hence Iran, hence Russia, hence Venezuela,
• 22:17
  etc. And China built capacity that's three
• 22:20
  times our strategic petroleum reserve. It is
• 22:22
  an astonishing amount of energy. It is. And obviously
• 22:25
  they have a much bigger population. Yes. And
• 22:28
  much more industrial infrastructure, too.
• 22:32
  So, yeah. Look.
• 22:37
  It's so ironic that this bill was named after Lindsey Graham,
• 22:40
  because like Graham, okay, this policy is dead
• 22:44
  on arrival. You are literally going after Iran,
• 22:49
  who basically they hold all the cards, as a certain
• 22:52
  orange man likes to say, and Russia, who holds
• 22:57
  most of the cards. And it's like, you've
• 23:00
  already lost this. It's kind of like.
• 23:04
  Look, the sanctions are what made Russia what it is today.
• 23:08
  That isolation strengthens
• 23:12
  the victims. Sure, there's exceptions.
• 23:15
  Venezuela and Cuba and other
• 23:18
  countries that have been victimized by sanctions
• 23:20
  have been hobbled economically and otherwise.
• 23:22
  But when it's a big country with a lot of
• 23:25
  natural resources, Iran and Russia are both like
• 23:28
  that, with good geopolitical positioning and
• 23:33
  a big sizable workforce, with good proper planning
• 23:37
  and proper alliances, they can work around it
• 23:41
  and emerge even stronger. That's what happened
• 23:43
  here. What bone-crushing sanctions are you going
• 23:47
  to impose? What's a bigger sanction than
• 23:50
  you blow up schoolgirls? That's a sanction,
• 23:54
  okay? You blow up oil
• 23:59
  infrastructure. You blow up people. You kill
• 24:02
  their generals. That's a sanction. I don't think
• 24:05
  you have a lot more arrows in your quiver. And
• 24:09
  the same thing is true with Russia. What
• 24:11
  are you going to do to Russia? You shut down
• 24:13
  their media outlets overseas. You froze, you
• 24:16
  kicked them out of the SWIFT banking
• 24:19
  system. You kick them out of
• 24:22
  Europe basically. You blew up their transnational
• 24:26
  oil pipeline and created an environmental catastrophe.
• 24:29
  What more do you have, right? Oh, you're going to
• 24:32
  threaten me now? It's absurd and
• 24:36
  obviously counterproductive. It's posturing, right? And posturing
• 24:39
  that is impotent on its face. For one, this
• 24:44
  is an existential war from the Russian standpoint.
• 24:48
  This is an existential war from the Iranian standpoint.
• 24:50
  In existential wars the countries are going to
• 24:53
  care less about these other things because their
• 24:57
  existence is at stake or at the very least the
• 24:59
  integrity of the state is at stake. You could
• 25:02
  do this. And the wild part about this too is this.
• 25:06
  By the way, the sanctions also applied to Iran,
• 25:09
  meaning they extended the sanctions that were
• 25:12
  on Iran. We initiated a criminal war. They're
• 25:19
  acting as if Iran somehow did this, which is
• 25:23
  the wild part to me. And they do the same thing
• 25:25
  with Ukraine, right? They ignore the fact that
• 25:28
  the government of Ukraine was overthrown and
• 25:30
  any notion of sovereignty still exists. And just
• 25:32
  to piggyback on this, this idea that Zelensky
• 25:35
  comes out and says, well, it is impossible to
• 25:38
  have elections in the middle of a war. And hey,
• 25:40
  we have 10 million people that are abroad. How
• 25:44
  on earth are those people ever going to be able
• 25:46
  to vote? And I thought of Ted Rall. I said, Ted
• 25:49
  Rall is a French citizen. Ted Rall can vote in
• 25:52
  French elections if he needs to. And France,
• 25:54
  just like every other country, has a means of
• 25:56
  getting them a ballot. All of this stuff
• 26:00
  isn't related. On my phone. I can vote on my
• 26:03
  phone. I have a question for the two of you,
• 26:05
  because you all talk about these bone-crushing
• 26:07
  sanctions. Bone-crushing. Well, I'm saying that
• 26:09
  because the Houthis are imposing
• 26:13
  a sanction on the West right now by closing. Yes.
• 26:16
  Iran has imposed sanctions on the West by closing.
• 26:20
  Those are called ass-kicking. So then
• 26:25
  those are different sanctions, right? Those
• 26:27
  are ass. We will blow the out of ships. So then
• 26:30
  if Congress is dumb enough to do this
• 26:33
  and Trump is dumb enough to sign it, well he
• 26:35
  is. Then couldn't the Russians at that point just
• 26:39
  say, well, fine, we're not going to sell any
• 26:40
  more diesel at all to the West, at all? Yes.
• 26:43
  Sure. Wouldn't that just blow? I mean,
• 26:47
  the United States running out of oil was not.
• 26:49
  Well, the timing would be exquisite, too, because
• 26:51
  I know you guys have read basically how the oil
• 26:54
  prices have been suppressed. They've
• 26:58
  gone up, but not as much as they should have.
• 27:00
  And now the West is out of cards. And
• 27:04
  literally, diesel prices are going up like 10
• 27:06
  cents a day now. And there's a refinery in the
• 27:09
  Midwest that apparently went down that had millions
• 27:12
  or thousands of homes a day. Did y'all see the
• 27:15
  link that I sent y'all yesterday about that
• 27:19
  truck driver? He spent over $1,000 in diesel.
• 27:23
  He wasn't able to flip his tank because his entire
• 27:26
  check would have went into his fuel before anything
• 27:31
  else. Yeah. Think about that. And so if we're
• 27:38
  dumb enough to do this, and if the Russians just
• 27:40
  say, okay, fine, then screw you. We're going
• 27:42
  to adopt the Houthi sanctions. We're just going
• 27:45
  to cut you off. What then? What happens then?
• 27:50
  Well, I think
• 27:53
  the deal is right now this war with Ukraine is
• 27:57
  no longer existential. As far as Putin
• 28:01
  is concerned. It's a problem that is manageable.
• 28:07
  It's like finding out you have a wasp's nest
• 28:11
  under your deck of your house and you use the
• 28:14
  back door instead for the time being. You're
• 28:17
  okay. You still got to take care of it. But it's
• 28:20
  not like keeping you up at night. Ukraine's not
• 28:25
  keeping Putin up at night anymore. But it needs
• 28:30
  to be taken care of. The thing is, I
• 28:34
  think if it got to the point where it felt existential,
• 28:36
  then maybe he would do that. But obviously, Russia
• 28:38
  wants the revenues. They want the oil. And that's
• 28:42
  what it really boils down to. So it's kind of
• 28:44
  like they have to assess what's the bigger
• 28:49
  priority for us, hurting the West or getting
• 28:52
  that money at a certain point. And of course,
• 28:54
  the irony is that as time passes, as the prices
• 28:57
  go up, it's going to be higher revenues for Russia,
• 29:00
  which, it's money. Every country needs
• 29:02
  money. Well, you can do both.
• 29:04
  The Russians could still sell their oil to India,
• 29:06
  which you're already doing. They can continue
• 29:08
  selling to China, which you're already doing.
• 29:09
  They can sell to Japan, sell to Korea. Sure,
• 29:11
  but it's at a discounted price, though. Well,
• 29:13
  don't discount it anymore. Seriously,
• 29:15
  it's a supply and demand thing. If you have the
• 29:17
  supply, and if there's a demand, and then you
• 29:20
  have some banker in Brussels saying, we have
• 29:22
  decided, Mr. Putin, you cannot sell anything
• 29:24
  more above this price. Well, you can tell that
• 29:27
  guy in Brussels to go eat a dick, because...
• 29:30
  This isn't about Brussels. Which he did. This
• 29:33
  is about the Chinese, yeah. Well, from the Chinese
• 29:36
  and India standpoint, where else are they going
• 29:37
  to get their oil from? Exactly. The oil in China
• 29:41
  has gone up in price, meaning the costs that
• 29:43
  the Chinese or the Malaysians or the Indonesians
• 29:46
  have to pay. Russia's relationship with those
• 29:47
  countries is very important to them. So they're
• 29:50
  not going to fuck with that. I accept that Russia's
• 29:53
  relationship is important to them, but those
• 29:54
  countries are also buying Russian oil at a discount,
• 29:57
  which is a disadvantage to Russia. If the oil
• 29:59
  is being sold on the market, they will get it
• 30:00
  at a different price. That goes both ways. Meaning
• 30:02
  to say the relationship is important. It's important
• 30:04
  to India. It's important to China. It does go
• 30:05
  both ways. Both needs a product. Yeah,
• 30:08
  I think they're going to negotiate. I would imagine
• 30:10
  that probably there are going to be talks and
• 30:14
  say like, listen, can you pay a little more?
• 30:17
  You can afford it and we need it. It's
• 30:21
  not just about can you, it's a matter of you're
• 30:23
  going to. Right. Right. Because at this point,
• 30:26
  the price has floated upward. Meaning it's not
• 30:28
  like the Russians are... If oil is at $100 a
• 30:33
  barrel, and India is like, yeah, but we want
• 30:36
  it from you for $60. Which is what they've been
• 30:38
  getting. Where else are you going to get it from?
• 30:41
  Nowhere. Where are you going to get it? You're
• 30:43
  not going to get it from Australia. There's going
• 30:45
  to be a lot of give and take here. Yes. All right.
• 30:50
  Well, let's talk about China. Basically, China
• 30:55
  converted their vulnerability into an asset,
• 30:59
  right? They stockpiled massive amounts of reserves.
• 31:02
  They've built increased refining capacity. They
• 31:06
  worked hard on alternatives like coal, solar
• 31:12
  batteries, EVs. They've been more
• 31:19
  judicious about which countries they export oil
• 31:23
  fuel to. So their friends are getting it. Their
• 31:26
  frenemies, not so much. And so it's a
• 31:32
  big deal. They've, so now basically,
• 31:37
  what's so funny is the way that this is
• 31:39
  being presented in the Western press is somehow
• 31:41
  like. It's couched as a threat to the West. But
• 31:44
  when you read it, what's really going on is merely
• 31:48
  that China has taken steps to reduce the real
• 31:51
  threat which was to them from the West. All they've
• 31:55
  done is insulated themselves against
• 31:59
  being the victim of a fuel boycott
• 32:02
  and they're saying, we're prepared now.
• 32:04
  In case the West
• 32:06
  tries to blockade us they can't, or at least they
• 32:09
  can but it's going to take a lot more effort
• 32:11
  and a lot more time. I just think it's so fascinating.
• 32:15
  If another country simply defends themselves
• 32:18
  they're not doing anything to our energy infrastructure
• 32:21
  at all, right? All they're doing is defending
• 32:24
  themselves from a possible threat, imminent threat
• 32:27
  from us. We view that defense as a threat. That's
• 32:31
  how we frame it. Yes, but they always frame it
• 32:35
  that way. I'll give you another example. So you
• 32:38
  get the United States acknowledging we have satellites
• 32:42
  in space that can destroy other satellites. Basically,
• 32:44
  we have weapons in space. And then China puts
• 32:47
  up a satellite. And the way the Telegraph reports
• 32:49
  it is, Chinese dogfighting satellites sparks
• 32:52
  arms race in space. And it's like, wait a minute.
• 32:56
  Never acknowledge that they got weapons in space.
• 33:00
  The US literally came out and said they got weapons
• 33:02
  in space. Your response to this is Chinese dogfighting
• 33:05
  satellites. That's great. They always present
• 33:08
  the stuff as if it's threats, despite the fact
• 33:10
  that we're the ones that are doing the threats.
• 33:11
  China may have one military base or something
• 33:13
  like that. And they're like, this Chinese base
• 33:16
  is... It's analogous to the rhetoric about,
• 33:20
  oh, the U.S., Iran, Iranian-
• 33:23
  backed militias blow up U.S. troops with IEDs
• 33:27
  in Iraq. Right. It makes it sound like
• 33:32
  these U.S. troops are walking around at Fort
• 33:35
  Hood in Texas, and then they get blown up by
• 33:38
  dastardly Iranians. They frame it, they always
• 33:41
  frame it that way. It doesn't matter what it
• 33:43
  is, as you pointed out. This was U.S. policy
• 33:46
  written in manuals to go after choke points as
• 33:49
  a way of stopping China, meaning how do we keep
• 33:53
  this horse into the barn? Oh, I know it needs
• 33:55
  energy. Let's break its capability of getting
• 33:57
  energy by creating choke points. China doesn't
• 33:59
  necessarily have a military that projects power
• 34:01
  around the world. So we do. So let's use a power
• 34:05
  projection to make it difficult for them to get
• 34:07
  energy. And if you look at it, it's not that
• 34:10
  I think Donald Trump reads manuals or anything
• 34:11
  like that, but. His policies still flow that
• 34:14
  way. We're going to go after Venezuela. So we're
• 34:16
  going to chop off that oil from them. Who cares
• 34:19
  about the contracts? We're going to go after
• 34:20
  Venezuela and we're going to steal the oil. We're
• 34:22
  going to go after Cuba. We're going to go after
• 34:24
  Russia. We're going to go after Iran. And specifically,
• 34:26
  what were the sanctions on Russia for? To go
• 34:28
  after the energy sector, to make it difficult
• 34:31
  for Russia to give energy around the world, which
• 34:33
  by definition means that the U.S. energy sector
• 34:35
  becomes that much more viable, meaning you've
• 34:39
  taken a competitor off the map under this model
• 34:42
  of well these are just sanctions because we're
• 34:43
  going after Russia while simultaneously filling
• 34:46
  your own coffers in regards to the money that
• 34:48
  you're making up the same product being sold.
• 34:49
  This stuff had nothing to do with wars and stuff
• 34:52
  like this. This stuff had everything to do with
• 34:54
  this kind of mob mentality of I got cocaine, my
• 34:57
  cocaine is better and I need to sell my cocaine
• 35:00
  so I'm going to go after the other person selling
• 35:02
  cocaine and this cocaine means oil. No, it's wild.
• 35:07
  They frame it always as a threat, despite the
• 35:09
  fact that we're the ones that are taking the
• 35:10
  policies that are threatening. It's like the
• 35:11
  Israelis. We're the threat. Right. We're the
• 35:15
  threat. And everybody else is responding to that
• 35:19
  threat. Yeah. That's true. Which we, in our blind
• 35:23
  media, says is a threat. The level of projection
• 35:26
  is breathtaking. Annie Anna wants to know when
• 35:31
  the world is coming to an end. Well we'll let
• 35:33
  you know here on DeProgram so I can stop making
• 35:36
  auto payments, use it to go on vacation. Yeah it
• 35:41
  would be very liberating to know that. Yeah.
• 35:46
  Okay so let's see. Makadin thanks for the dollar.
• 35:50
  Henceforth all toilets in federal buildings shall
• 35:53
  be known as Dons. Dons. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Canada.
• 35:59
  I forget. I don't know where it is but one of
• 36:03
  the provincial Canadian governments renamed a
• 36:06
  toilet at a rest area after Donald Trump with
• 36:09
  a plaque. They should name all of them Dons.
• 36:11
  I like that. I've got to use the Don. Yeah, I've
• 36:15
  got to use the Don. Every toilet in Canada will
• 36:18
  be named after Donald Trump, the Don. He'd do
• 36:21
  it. Why not? Trump could do it. The Donald. Trump
• 36:24
  could rename Blank Ontario. And Amanda Raque,
• 36:26
  the Global South is a scam. They give nothing
• 36:29
  to Russia while expecting Russia to sell them
• 36:32
  cheap resources. No, I don't think so. I don't
• 36:36
  think it works that way. It's not a scam. Why
• 36:39
  does the United States give money across the
• 36:40
  globe? You think we do it for our own benefit?
• 36:44
  No. Just because we're just kind people? No,
• 36:46
  we're renting influence. Like even USAID, even
• 36:51
  these other, I forget the other one, defensive
• 36:55
  democracy or whatever the hell the thing is called.
• 36:58
  All of these things are being done. When Donald
• 36:59
  Trump first got in office, and if you remember,
• 37:01
  he pulled the chain for all of those USAID things
• 37:04
  and all the Democrats screamed and cried bloody
• 37:05
  murder. And what you found was that 90% of the
• 37:08
  media organizations, like 80%, were being funded
• 37:11
  by the United States. That money is not there
• 37:14
  just for shits and giggles. That money is there
• 37:15
  for control and clout. And I would put to you
• 37:18
  that Russia, or for that matter, China, doing
• 37:20
  a charm offensive by giving away COVID vaccines,
• 37:22
  by giving away, helping with bridges
• 37:24
  and loans and everything else. Same thing. It's
• 37:28
  a civilization model. You're renting a city-state.
• 37:33
  Yes, you could say that. I think they would believe
• 37:36
  in that. But yes. Yeah, they're vassals. Yeah.
• 37:40
  Well I don't want to call them although no, vassal
• 37:42
  states pay tribute. That's not the same thing.
• 37:44
  I will give you the sweet sweet money then you
• 37:47
  let me get your resources. I use your territory.
• 37:49
  Maybe you can help me with some scraps. Maybe
• 37:52
  I can have a military base somewhere nearby or
• 37:54
  if not then you can use your military as my proxy.
• 37:57
  We can do all kinds of things. Look at
• 37:59
  you. Houthis love your Chihuahuas. My mom
• 38:07
  had these friends who had two Chihuahuas and
• 38:11
  I used to hate visiting their house just because
• 38:13
  of when you first got there the noise, the
• 38:16
  incessant noise when you knocked at the door.
• 38:18
  Holy. It's so weird. It's the worst
• 38:22
  thing in the world, the sound of those dogs. Pitsu
• 38:26
  was—what is it—
• 38:30
  oh what is the word? Pits, pits, pit, pit, pit. What does it stand for?
• 38:34
  It was a pit bull.
• 38:39
  Oh, is it? It's not a Shih Tzu. No, I'm sorry. He was a pit bull Shih
• 38:43
  Tzu mix. Yeah, that makes sense. No, it doesn't
• 38:47
  because the pit bull and the Shih Tzu, I don't
• 38:49
  even know how that worked. You don't want to
• 38:50
  see that. The man was a pit bull. But he was
• 38:55
  kind of like that. Back to the bestiality discussion.
• 38:59
  Okay, so do we do, we can maybe, oh, there's
• 39:04
  a few more comments here. Or one more. Andre420,
• 39:09
  America. I would have gotten away with it if
• 39:12
  it wasn't for those meddling Iranians, LOL. I
• 39:16
  wonder how many, I know
• 39:19
  the Scooby-Doo reference. I wonder if 20-year-
• 39:21
  olds know the Scooby-Doo reference. I guess
• 39:23
  they do because of the internet, right? But they
• 39:25
  may have never actually seen the show. It's a
• 39:28
  meme. It's always a meme. It's weird. It's like
• 39:32
  all the Gen Z kids you see wearing Nirvana shirts.
• 39:36
  Have you ever heard Nirvana or do you just like
• 39:38
  yeah. My son—I'm sorry, my son had no idea who
• 39:45
  Bugs Bunny was. Really? Leghorn Foghorn is this
• 39:50
  on T-shirts or whatever? Yeah,
• 39:55
  but he's never watching the cartoons. It's
• 39:58
  like you are missing out on prime Americana,
• 40:02
  just good old offensive American cartoons that
• 40:06
  were great. Well, they weren't offensive, but—
• 40:08
  Oh, no. Speedy Gonzales was racist
• 40:11
  as hell. He would get canceled today. Foghorn
• 40:15
  Leghorn would get blasted. No, talking about
• 40:18
  deport that heifer. He's like, get rid of that
• 40:20
  rooster. Jettison from the planet. Yeah. Tom
• 40:24
  and Jerry were very violent. I guess
• 40:27
  the thing... Here's the thing, right? Culturally,
• 40:29
  that's a new thing, right? When in previous
• 40:33
  generations, young people learned about stuff
• 40:36
  that existed before. I remember my father
• 40:38
  telling me about Benny Goodman, let's say, or
• 40:41
  Benny Hill or anything like that. But you'd be
• 40:45
  completely brought up to speed. I remember
• 40:47
  my dad sitting me down to watch Monty Python
• 40:50
  and the Holy Grail. And he's like, all right,
• 40:52
  you're not going to understand this the first
• 40:53
  time you watch it, but English humor is different.
• 40:56
  Let me give you a lecture. Now sit down and watch
• 40:58
  the whole thing, right? And he was right. I didn't
• 41:00
  get it the first two or three times. But the
• 41:03
  point is you got the whole thing. Now people
• 41:06
  get bits and pieces of shrapnel from the internet,
• 41:09
  from memes and so on, and the original source
• 41:13
  is detached from what the meme has become. They
• 41:18
  don't know what it's from.
• 41:21
  The meme is its own thing. I just think
• 41:24
  it's interesting. I don't know that it's necessarily
• 41:25
  bad but it's odd. It's definitely a different
• 41:30
  way of consuming culture. That's Aretha Franklin.
• 41:33
  She don't remember the Queen of Soul like that
• 41:36
  and it's like what, you don't know who Aretha Franklin
• 41:38
  is? It becomes that. And even though, yeah well,
• 41:42
  no but this would be like more like if Aretha
• 41:43
  Franklin was a meme and you still didn't and
• 41:46
  you're like oh yeah Aretha says. But you never
• 41:49
  heard Respect. Right, ever. It's like the I Have
• 41:54
  a Dream speech from Martin Luther King. It's like,
• 41:56
  did you ever really sit down and listen to the
• 41:59
  entire speech? I have. Yeah, me too. Listening
• 42:02
  to a bunch of Baldwin, King, all this stuff.
• 42:05
  But how many people have? Oftentimes
• 42:07
  they decapitate him from the socialism thing
• 42:10
  and just make it like he was this woke warrior.
• 42:14
  When I was in college, kids used to say the revolution
• 42:16
  will not be televised. And then I'd find out,
• 42:19
  wait, you've never heard the song that that comes
• 42:22
  from, right? Gil Scott-Heron. It's like, the
• 42:25
  song's great. You've got to hear the song. Yeah,
• 42:29
  as well. Maybe just because there's so much to
• 42:33
  remember. If you think about it.
• 42:37
  But there was before, too. That's true also. You're right.
• 42:42
  And on the plus side, what's also interesting
• 42:44
  is people, the flip side is Gen Z,
• 42:47
  they go back a lot further into pop culture than
• 42:51
  we did, right? So my kid, he listens
• 42:56
  to stuff from the 80s and voluntarily downloads
• 42:58
  it, listens to it himself. It's not just
• 43:01
  when I'm around. He listens to a lot of 80s shit.
• 43:06
  And likes it. He listens to 70s shit. Now, for
• 43:09
  him, that's the same as, that's 40, 50-year-
• 43:12
  old music, right? Now, in the early 80s, when
• 43:16
  I was in college, I'm not listening to
• 43:19
  stuff from the 30s and 40s. No way.
• 43:22
  I went back maybe to the 50s and
• 43:26
  worked my way back to Elvis Presley and
• 43:28
  Chuck Berry and that stuff. And that's about
• 43:30
  it. I'm not listening to...
• 43:35
  I'm just not. I got to that stuff later,
• 43:37
  but. I think it's different.
• 43:40
  For one, time catches up with itself. Meaning
• 43:44
  history has been cataloged in a way that it wasn't
• 43:48
  true for us. True. Although big pieces are missing
• 43:51
  too. Sometimes people will say, oh,
• 43:54
  I'll mention something that happened in
• 43:56
  the 70s. I'll be like, oh, I looked it up online.
• 43:57
  I'm like, there was no internet back then. That
• 43:59
  may not have made it. True, but that means that
• 44:02
  that stuff is prehistory from the perspective
• 44:04
  of people who are living now. Yeah. That sounds
• 44:07
  weird, but it is kind of true. They catalog some
• 44:09
  of everything. So it's easy for your son to go
• 44:11
  back in a way that it wasn't for us. I would
• 44:12
  have to go get an album or I would have to hear
• 44:14
  something on the radio. Right. They can just
• 44:15
  go online and be like, oh, let me pull this.
• 44:17
  Or blunder into an oldie station or something.
• 44:19
  Yes. Yeah. But I think if these old cartoons
• 44:23
  make a resurgence, it'll be because of the comedy
• 44:25
  factor. Yosemite Sam was hilarious. Bugs
• 44:28
  Bunny. Hilarious. And laughter is immortal. It
• 44:33
  never goes away. Yeah, but comedy is the thing
• 44:36
  that dates, is the form of entertainment that
• 44:38
  dates the most quickly. Oh. So ethnic
• 44:41
  humor. Most of these ethnic references,
• 44:45
  take out the whole woke aspect of it.
• 44:47
  It's like most, the Brooklyn accent
• 44:50
  is, except for Bernie Sanders, is pretty much gone
• 44:53
  even in Brooklyn. Yeah. Regional
• 44:57
  accents are in grave danger in the United
• 45:00
  States. Language is being homogenized.
• 45:03
  People are, everybody's influenced
• 45:06
  by mass culture, television, internet, and standard
• 45:11
  quote unquote standardized English,
• 45:14
  which kind of sounds more like me, right. Kind
• 45:16
  of like Ohio. Yeah. The Southern accent is going
• 45:19
  extinct. It is. Yeah. And that's, so
• 45:23
  a lot of these jokes, right, relate to those
• 45:25
  kind of regional dialects. And
• 45:28
  I think jokes about, say, I'm going
• 45:31
  to hit you with my shillelagh. Those are going
• 45:33
  to fall flat now, right? Nobody's, what the fuck
• 45:35
  is a shillelagh? What are you talking about?
• 45:38
  Nobody knows. You could walk up in the street
• 45:41
  in Times Square, ask 100 people, what is a shillelagh?
• 45:46
  I'd be surprised if five knew the answer.
• 45:49
  But the Roadrunner and Wile E. Coyote is always
• 45:52
  going to be hilarious. And it's always going
• 45:54
  to give some Karen a stroke. Oh, my God. Did
• 45:57
  you see the violence that Coyote just blew himself
• 45:59
  up? By the way, I want to see the movie. Have
• 46:02
  you heard about the movie? No, I didn't hear
• 46:04
  about the movie. Speak it out. There's a new
• 46:05
  movie out where Wile E. Coyote files a lawsuit
• 46:10
  against Acme for product liability because everything
• 46:16
  he buys from them always goes wrong. But he's
• 46:19
  trying to murder the guy. He's trying to murder
• 46:21
  the Road Runner, right? Right. That's probably in
• 46:25
  the defense. Well, he obviously was not
• 46:29
  reading the safety labels. It's kind of
• 46:35
  the whole argument about suing firearm
• 46:37
  manufacturers. Yeah, you can't do it. Yeah, because
• 46:40
  if you use this as designed, it won't just
• 46:44
  walk into some places and start shooting up random
• 46:47
  office buildings. But if it happens, that's on
• 46:51
  the user. I know, but it's a gun. I don't know
• 46:54
  how you even do that with a gun. Hillary Clinton
• 46:56
  was trying to do that to try to kill guns in
• 46:58
  the U.S. But it's like it's a gun. It's designed
• 47:00
  to kill. The entire point of it is to put a...
• 47:02
  But that's the point that ACME would make. Yes,
• 47:06
  we sold you this rocket. It's intended to explode.
• 47:11
  It's not intended necessarily to try to explode
• 47:13
  a Road Runner. Right. So that would be the argument
• 47:17
  that they'd be making. Yeah. It'd be the same
• 47:19
  way they'd be making it for murder. We have other
• 47:21
  uses of that. Exactly. We'd have to kill the
• 47:24
  Road Runner. Yeah. He's going to lose that lawsuit.
• 47:26
  It's just like a Volkswagen. This vehicle
• 47:31
  is not designed for some Muslim immigrant to
• 47:34
  run over festival goers at a Christmas carnival.
• 47:38
  Yet here it is. That's not the intention. You
• 47:40
  can't sue us for this. Or like the premise is
• 47:42
  that it's Charlotte running over a bunch of people
• 47:45
  in a crowd, protesting. No, for sure.
• 47:48
  That's not the purpose. It's not Acme's
• 47:51
  fault. That's because Wile E. Coyote doesn't
• 47:52
  know how to play him properly. He's just stupid.
• 47:55
  Although, go ahead. Well, I was just
• 47:58
  going to say there's a story that puts me to
• 48:00
  mind that's from the Sample to the Valance thing,
• 48:02
  the Hasan Piker thing. I don't know if you saw
• 48:04
  the interview with Hasan Piker, Symone Sanders,
• 48:07
  and I don't know, some guy with a weird afro.
• 48:10
  I don't know his name. I didn't see it. So Hasan
• 48:14
  Piker, I can put it in the chat if you want.
• 48:17
  But basically, they're talking to Hasan Piker
• 48:20
  about Hamas and about violence from Hamas. And
• 48:24
  it's a wild interview. And I guess this leads
• 48:27
  into the conversation we were going to have about
• 48:29
  Hasan Piker. Anyway, so you might as well get
• 48:31
  to the conversation. We can just expand
• 48:32
  out. Well, so basically, as we know, the right
• 48:38
  and conservative Democrats, which is our subset
• 48:41
  of the right, have been giving El-Sayed a
• 48:45
  hard time over his friendship, his association
• 48:48
  with Hasan Piker and basically trying to do
• 48:52
  guilt by association. Everything that
• 48:55
  Piker ever said that might be controversial or
• 48:58
  offensive they're saying you have to condemn
• 49:01
  what Piker said. This is an old trick, right?
• 49:04
  We see it all over and over. And up until
• 49:08
  now El-Sayed has been pretty smart about
• 49:12
  not wanting to distance and not fall
• 49:14
  from the bank. It's a trap. Even if he privately
• 49:17
  thinks Piker's an asshole, he can't admit that,
• 49:21
  right? I would be telling him, don't say
• 49:24
  that. This is a game. Once you admit it,
• 49:27
  once you say something like that, it never fucking
• 49:30
  stops. So you just have to tell him
• 49:34
  to fuck off. You know what kind of stupid— And
• 49:35
  to be clear, these people aren't your friends.
• 49:37
  They're not your friends, right? These are your
• 49:39
  enemies and they're trying to trap you and they're
• 49:41
  baiting you so you should just not comment or
• 49:44
  double down really Trump style and be like, man,
• 49:48
  Hasan Piker's my bestie. He's going to be hanging
• 49:51
  out with me every day on Capitol Hill and we're
• 49:54
  going to be gay lovers. It's going to be amazing.
• 49:55
  Whatever. But so now the latest is that
• 50:00
  and I thought the reason I wanted to talk about
• 50:02
  this is really because of the content of what
• 50:04
  Piker said. Piker said recently that the U.S.
• 50:08
  had caused more terrorism than Al-Qaeda. And
• 50:12
  I was thinking that it took one second for me
• 50:15
  to think about that. And we'll say, obviously,
• 50:17
  that's true. Right. Okay, so. Let's go
• 50:20
  through it. Al-Qaeda. East Africa embassy bombings,
• 50:23
  that's probably about 500, 600 people. 9/11,
• 50:26
  that's like 3,000 people. The USS Cole,
• 50:29
  I think, like what, 10? So basically, Al-Qaeda
• 50:34
  probably, over the course of its entire existence,
• 50:37
  has killed maybe 5,000 people. I'm going to
• 50:40
  include that. Most of the people it kills are
• 50:42
  Muslims. True. 5,000 people, though. We'll just
• 50:46
  say terrorism, right? So, and then it's like,
• 50:49
  okay, but the United States killed a million
• 50:52
  people in Iraq alone, and I'm not going to go
• 50:55
  through the rest of it, right? So, of course,
• 50:56
  2 million people in Vietnam. Are you
• 50:59
  kidding? That's an easy statement. So, I
• 51:02
  mean, if I were, the thing is, I felt
• 51:05
  like El-Sayed was stupid, A, to fall for the trap
• 51:08
  and say, well, I don't agree with that, and to
• 51:12
  even address it. He shouldn't have addressed
• 51:14
  it, but if he did address it, he should have
• 51:15
  said, Piker's right. And Piker is right.
• 51:20
  We just watched the United States murder
• 51:23
  random people in fishing boats. Let's put
• 51:26
  that in perspective, right? This is just murder.
• 51:29
  It's ongoing, too. Right. And even the
• 51:33
  double tap and what the media was concerned about
• 51:35
  was the double tap. Oh, my God, I can't believe
• 51:36
  we double tap. We don't double tap. We murder
• 51:38
  on the first shot. Double tap it is impolite.
• 51:41
  Really? That's the conversation. So rude. When
• 51:44
  El-Sayed is walking that line, he's walking that
• 51:49
  line because he's aware that the U.S. media
• 51:51
  fundamentally lies about what the U.S. does
• 51:53
  around the globe. Meaning what he's saying, what
• 51:56
  Hasan Piker is saying is flat fact. Indubitably,
• 52:00
  without a doubt. It's like saying that the sun
• 52:02
  rises in the east. It just does. It's like saying
• 52:04
  the world is round. Right. He could have just
• 52:08
  said the world is round. It's like when I heard
• 52:10
  that, I was like, duh. I was kind of like, I
• 52:13
  was angry at Hasan Piker for speaking stuff that
• 52:16
  was so obvious. I was like, why are you making
• 52:18
  millions of dollars a year speaking such obviousness?
• 52:21
  But that's just it. The U.S. media doesn't take
• 52:23
  it as obvious. Regardless of them disliking Trump's
• 52:26
  war in Iran, they're fine with the war on Iran.
• 52:28
  They just don't like the fact that Donald Trump
• 52:30
  did it and there's consequences for the way he
• 52:32
  did it. It's impolite. Meaning, if you listen
• 52:34
  to Democrats, they will still trash Iran. They
• 52:37
  will still trash China. They will still trash
• 52:38
  Russia, even if they don't necessarily like the
• 52:42
  war. Or, let's say, leveraging the war because
• 52:44
  they know the American public doesn't necessarily
• 52:46
  like the war. They don't really ultimately care.
• 52:48
  I put a video for Hasan Piker and when he was
• 52:50
  talking to Symone Sanders, all of these people
• 52:52
  are Democrats. Symone Sanders obviously worked
• 52:54
  for Joe Biden. Can you pull that up and show
• 52:57
  it? Yeah, he is. They are. Not his friends. That's
• 53:02
  what I'm trying to say. These people are not
• 53:03
  on the same page. They are not your buddies.
• 53:06
  Go look back at what they did to Bernie Sanders
• 53:08
  and take that as a lesson. You should have had
• 53:10
  that almost like as a classroom. Never play the
• 53:13
  guilt association game. Never play. Ever. Never
• 53:16
  play. These people are trying to do everything
• 53:18
  in their power to undercut your campaign. And
• 53:20
  they will be perfectly okay if you lose that campaign.
• 53:22
  And then we'll turn around and say, see, we told
• 53:24
  you that the left couldn't win. Totally. Yeah.
• 53:27
  I think El-Sayed's in trouble by the way
• 53:30
  in that race. But okay here we
• 53:33
  go. We're about to watch that clip.
• 53:37
  All right Robby let it rip. Well the Hamas is
• 53:42
  or Israel's a thousand times worse than Hamas.
• 53:44
  This is intentionally provocative but it's
• 53:47
  also not. Do you believe that? But no but like
• 53:49
  do you? Yeah no I do believe that. No for sure
• 53:51
  because well here's the thing. Is Hamas a religious
• 53:56
  fundamentalist operation that have engaged in
• 53:59
  violent actions? Of course they have. Absolutely.
• 54:01
  But that violence is directly born out of and
• 54:04
  even that repression is directly born out of
• 54:07
  the conditions brought about by the occupation
• 54:09
  that's been going on for 80 plus years. And not
• 54:12
  only that, but I think it's a good entry point
• 54:14
  into the conversation for many Americans who
• 54:17
  also understand that. What Israel has done is
• 54:21
  unconscionable. The genocide is unacceptable.
• 54:24
  Many of them are also now coming to the recognition
• 54:26
  that there has also been an ongoing occupation
• 54:28
  and apartheid. And the reason why I make this
• 54:33
  intentionally provocative statement is to challenge
• 54:38
  the previous implicit biases that many Americans
• 54:41
  have that are sympathetic to the Palestinian
• 54:43
  plight, but not exactly understanding of why
• 54:46
  Palestinians fight back or even aware of
• 54:49
  the internationally recognized right to resist
• 54:52
  that the Palestinian resistance has. I know we
• 54:54
  don't want to get into a 20-minute conversation
• 54:56
  about Israel and Gaza. We have more questions.
• 54:59
  Really believe that and you said yes. So do you
• 55:05
  understand that by saying that that there are
• 55:07
  a lot of people that hear you say that and say
• 55:09
  one okay I think he's being provocative but two
• 55:11
  oh my God he's endorsing violence. I think endorsing
• 55:16
  violence is no different when people say that
• 55:19
  Israel has a right to defend itself, that Israel
• 55:22
  is the most moral country in the Middle East,
• 55:26
  that it's a democracy. It's an apartheid. It's
• 55:29
  no different than the way that people argued.
• 55:31
  Can I just go back? I'm not talking about Netanyahu
• 55:35
  and the state of Israel. I guess my question
• 55:37
  is, it sounds to me like you are endorsing violence
• 55:40
  because you think it's justified on this
• 55:44
  particular issue and somebody will, that's how
• 55:47
  I heard it. I know that's how other people have
• 55:49
  heard it and so do you understand that that's
• 55:51
  how people hear it and is that— I hate so this
• 55:54
  again goes back to the same— Yeah we I hate
• 55:59
  these people because obviously she doesn't want
• 56:03
  to have that conversation, right? He is being very
• 56:05
  contextual with what he says. In fact just not
• 56:08
  the scenario. The answer is yes. Violence is appropriate
• 56:11
  in certain situations. Hamas, in a strongly worded
• 56:14
  letter, is not necessarily going to get them
• 56:16
  what they want. They have a right to self-defense,
• 56:18
  which is what he pointed out, even in that statement.
• 56:21
  They have an international right. Endorsement
• 56:23
  is a trap word, right? You endorse it.
• 56:25
  Who is he to endorse it? Is Hamas going
• 56:29
  to put a sticker on their next drone? Like, endorsed
• 56:32
  by Hasan Piker, endorsed. It means nothing.
• 56:34
  The appropriate question would be,
• 56:37
  do I think they're within their rights. Yeah,
• 56:41
  I do. Do I have the right to use violence to
• 56:47
  defend myself, my family, my home against someone
• 56:50
  who's trying to kill me? Yes, I do. And if that
• 56:52
  means using violence, I will kill the ever-living
• 56:55
  dog crap out of that bastard. Which is his point.
• 56:58
  100%. They're justified in using violence. If
• 57:02
  this was the French. And what he should have
• 57:04
  asked her was, what about Nat Turner? Did Nat
• 57:06
  Turner have a right for self-defense? Now, I
• 57:10
  will be super curious about her answer to that,
• 57:12
  because that answer is going to tread on this
• 57:13
  idea of Black slavery and whether or not Blacks
• 57:16
  had a right to fight back from the standpoint
• 57:18
  of slavery. Symone Sanders is never going to
• 57:21
  say, no, Nat Turner didn't have a right to do
• 57:24
  what he did. She would never say it. Did George
• 57:27
  Washington have the right to take to violence
• 57:30
  against the British crown? Exactly. Now, Symone
• 57:33
  Sanders may not know those things. And she may
• 57:36
  think that violence is wrong in all situations,
• 57:38
  which she's dumb if she thinks that. Self-defense
• 57:41
  is a real thing. And they have a right to self-
• 57:43
  defense under international law, meaning they
• 57:45
  have every right. And under common sense. And
• 57:47
  just under common sense. In all societies,
• 57:52
  self-defense is a valid defense
• 57:55
  to murder in Sharia law, in Western law.
• 57:59
  Everywhere. He came
• 58:02
  for me first. I killed him. And if the jury believes
• 58:07
  you, you walk. Notice that she wants to take it
• 58:09
  out of visual. Well we don't, we could have
• 58:12
  a 20-minute conversation about God forbid it's
• 58:14
  not 20 minutes it's okay. And it's like, dude we're
• 58:17
  talking about this specific issue. We're talking
• 58:19
  contextually about this issue. I'm not saying
• 58:21
  that people should go and kill somebody and rob
• 58:24
  a liquor store. These people are aggravated.
• 58:29
  Well, there's a difference between self-defense and
• 58:31
  murder. So if someone tries to go in and take
• 58:33
  something that doesn't belong to them and they
• 58:36
  want to hurt you in the process, that's an act
• 58:40
  of aggression. I can kill my enemy. I have every
• 58:43
  right to use force up to the point of taking
• 58:47
  your life to protect my family and what belongs
• 58:50
  to me. That also includes my country. Well,
• 58:53
  it's totally part of the mythology. That's
• 58:55
  part of the mythology. It's sort of like
• 58:57
  right now. I'm still
• 58:59
  deep reading the Ben Moser book. We're going
• 59:01
  to be talking to Ben Moser next week. And
• 59:04
  it's talking, it serves as a reminder. Oh,
• 59:07
  Israel was created
• 59:10
  in 1948. And then the innocent state of Israel
• 59:13
  was immediately in its cradle, attacked by the
• 59:16
  mean Arab neighbors who surrounded them. Right.
• 59:19
  It's like, okay, but the state of Israel shouldn't
• 59:22
  have been created in 1948. So it's like, because
• 59:25
  of that, it's like, well, except for the fact
• 59:29
  that you guys invaded a space that wasn't yours
• 59:34
  and took it over and then said, oh, we'll share
• 59:37
  part of what we stole with you. And then everyone's
• 59:40
  like, no, no, thank you. Fuck you. We're going
• 59:43
  to war. Okay, well. That's the invasion.
• 59:48
  That is the precipitating incident.
• 59:51
  There were lots of prequels going
• 59:53
  back to the Balfour Declaration and
• 59:55
  before, but still that's the main point.
• 59:59
  The main point is the state wasn't yours
• 1:00:01
  in the first place and nobody accepted it
• 1:00:04
  and it's like you're like well they used violence
• 1:00:07
  against us. It's like well the creation of the
• 1:00:10
  state of Israel was an act of violence so they
• 1:00:14
  were just defending themselves. So we have
• 1:00:16
  a few more questions here. Can we stay over
• 1:00:19
  a few minutes or not? Yes. All right. Cool.
• 1:00:25
  Okay. I think we're up to right here with
• 1:00:31
  Aron Roscoe. Wile E. Coyote is a super genius.
• 1:00:35
  That's it. Okay. Maybe she says I was also thinking
• 1:00:39
  Hasan is scared also, scared after seeing what
• 1:00:42
  they did to his pal Charlie. So Hasan is just
• 1:00:44
  going to do what his management says going around
• 1:00:48
  these days. Yeah well I don't think it's that.
• 1:00:50
  I think it has to do with this, as you point
• 1:00:54
  out, El-Sayed and he's probably like goddamn
• 1:00:56
  dude, right, I'm trying to win this race. I need
• 1:01:00
  you to chill out. Yeah even if you look at
• 1:01:03
  it honestly that's not the right tactical approach.
• 1:01:05
  If I were El-Sayed's
• 1:01:08
  campaign manager I wouldn't say this just to
• 1:01:10
  be because I'm spicy because I'm Ted Rall. I'd
• 1:01:13
  say listen, people like a fighter.
• 1:01:16
  They like someone who basically, see,
• 1:01:20
  like Zohran Mamdani. He won in
• 1:01:24
  large part because he never shied away. I mean,
• 1:01:27
  he won in the most Jewish city in the United
• 1:01:29
  States, in the biggest Jewish community outside
• 1:01:32
  of the state of Israel, and he won overwhelmingly,
• 1:01:35
  and he won most of the Jewish vote in New York
• 1:01:38
  City, right? And he never shied away from being
• 1:01:40
  anti-Zionist, ever. Yeah, and he's in a Muslim
• 1:01:43
  state. Yeah. You can... Meaning...
• 1:01:47
  I smell the puss... I smell some pussiness on
• 1:01:50
  El-Sayed, and that's what's coming out here. Which
• 1:01:53
  I don't like, because if you run there, it's
• 1:01:55
  an issue. I get it. That's why he's like, for
• 1:01:58
  example, oh, I didn't really join the DSA. I'm
• 1:02:01
  DSA adjacent. Okay. Thank you for the dollar.
• 1:02:06
  Robby, the real racist bit of Speedy Gonzales
• 1:02:08
  is all the other mice were lazy as fuck, which
• 1:02:12
  is true. The other mice were definitely lazy
• 1:02:16
  sitting there in the shade with their big old
• 1:02:19
  floppy hats. With the hat of dignity, the sombrero.
• 1:02:25
  Yeah, it's so good. It's so awesome. Cuba. So
• 1:02:30
  basically, The Guardian has a piece about how
• 1:02:33
  Trump's rich allies and Rubio's Florida
• 1:02:38
  lobbyists and Cuba exile scoundrels in Miami
• 1:02:42
  are all basically currying favor with the White
• 1:02:45
  House, plotting and scheming to take over all
• 1:02:49
  of Cuba's natural resources and indigenous businesses,
• 1:02:52
  much like the way Russian oligarchs rushed in
• 1:02:55
  to steal state assets after the fall of the Soviet
• 1:02:58
  Union in 1991. I still maintain
• 1:03:04
  that Venezuela will have a revolution because
• 1:03:06
  of what's going on right now. Cuba obviously
• 1:03:10
  has a history of revolution. I think
• 1:03:14
  it's going to be ugly there too. The U.S.
• 1:03:16
  is just going too far. Yeah, they're trying to
• 1:03:20
  hold back the night. Yeah. And
• 1:03:24
  the night from the same point of the way the
• 1:03:26
  U.S. is looking at the world. Look at what
• 1:03:28
  Trump is doing. And the way that the U.S. is
• 1:03:30
  effectively operating, it is dictating to the
• 1:03:33
  world. When Donald Trump first got in office,
• 1:03:34
  he was dictating to the world, you should do
• 1:03:37
  this. And I'm going to use the tariff power to
• 1:03:39
  force you to do this. And in other cases, if
• 1:03:42
  tariffs didn't work, he went directly to military
• 1:03:43
  force. He's doing this to the entire world or
• 1:03:46
  trying to anyway. He's putting edicts
• 1:03:49
  out. Hey, I don't want you to trade with this
• 1:03:51
  country. Okay, these are sovereign nations with
• 1:03:53
  1.3, 1.5 billion population that he's basically
• 1:03:57
  saying. I am trying to control your foreign policy
• 1:03:59
  in regards to who you trade with. Okay, this is
• 1:04:02
  outrageous in and of itself. Attacking the country
• 1:04:04
  is outrageous. Murdering fishermen is outrageous.
• 1:04:07
  Going after Brazil, going after Cuba. Again,
• 1:04:09
  these are things that the U.S. is trying to
• 1:04:11
  overextend itself. And I think it's overextended.
• 1:04:14
  And I think it's going to be found lacking. I
• 1:04:15
  don't think this shit's going to work. I could
• 1:04:17
  be wrong. Yes, he's going to put a huge amount
• 1:04:19
  of pressure on Cuba. And yes, he's going to put
• 1:04:21
  a huge amount of pressure on Venezuela. He's
• 1:04:22
  going to steal the resources of Venezuela, whether
• 1:04:25
  he's able to do this Cuba or not. I don't know
• 1:04:27
  if Cuba is going to be able to maintain. But
• 1:04:31
  I will say, I agree with you. This is an overextension.
• 1:04:34
  And this is, morally, ethically, which
• 1:04:37
  obviously doesn't matter. It's disgusting. Outrageous.
• 1:04:40
  Yeah. It's so disgusting. After 60 plus years
• 1:04:44
  of bone-crushing sanctions imposed against Cuba.
• 1:04:48
  Strangulation. And they want to drive out their
• 1:04:51
  government out of power, which.
• 1:04:55
  I think if there was a plebiscite, I'm pretty sure they
• 1:04:58
  would not choose to go become a U.S.
• 1:05:01
  vassal, right? Keep in mind, the
• 1:05:04
  U.S. is killing babies. Right. Every day. Pregnant
• 1:05:07
  mothers, the children who's not able to eat or
• 1:05:10
  not able to get electricity and those type of
• 1:05:12
  things as a result of sanctions. Just one last
• 1:05:15
  point. Madeleine Albright, that famous interview
• 1:05:18
  where she's asked on TV, hey it seems like your
• 1:05:21
  sanctions have killed 500,000 kids and Madeleine
• 1:05:24
  Albright's response was yeah but I think it's
• 1:05:26
  necessary. That's what sanctions do. Yeah and they
• 1:05:30
  know. Well Albright says it's a price worth paying.
• 1:05:33
  Well that you're not paying the price. It's
• 1:05:36
  not your kids being killed. It's their kids and
• 1:05:39
  that's the price that you're willing to
• 1:05:40
  pay is that you're willing to kill half a million
• 1:05:44
  of someone else's kids but you're not like that's
• 1:05:46
  your price that you're paying. I'm glad she's
• 1:05:49
  in the hill right now. That's amazing. Yeah I
• 1:05:51
  love that tweet. If Putin had been caught
• 1:05:53
  saying that can you imagine what you're, what
• 1:05:57
  is that? Well I don't think he would ever say
• 1:05:59
  something like that in private. I don't
• 1:06:02
  think he thinks things like that. I don't think
• 1:06:04
  he thinks of it in those terms either.
• 1:06:06
  But we do is the point I'm getting at
• 1:06:09
  and yet we frame everything as a threat for somebody
• 1:06:12
  else when you have video of people saying
• 1:06:14
  that in the United States. If there was a war
• 1:06:17
  trial that testimony would have came up in a
• 1:06:20
  Nuremberg trial. Yeah. Hey, it looked like
• 1:06:23
  you've killed 500,000 babies. There'd be a noose
• 1:06:24
  with her name on it for sure. Yeah. What show
• 1:06:27
  is it that Jenna Bush is on? It was one of the
• 1:06:30
  morning shows. Is it NBC Today? I'm not looking
• 1:06:34
  at TV. George W. Oh, W has got a new book coming
• 1:06:39
  out. And I bet he wrote it all himself. I'm sure
• 1:06:44
  he did. So he called in, and they were just talking
• 1:06:46
  to each other. He called Jenna. They're talking
• 1:06:48
  to each other on her iPhone and stuff. And they're
• 1:06:51
  just all there giggling and laughing. And the
• 1:06:53
  whole time I was just thinking, this man is responsible
• 1:06:56
  for over a million murders. Yes. And none of
• 1:07:00
  you care. And he's going to die sooner rather
• 1:07:03
  than later. And he's going to lay in state at
• 1:07:06
  the Capitol. And we're all going to, the flag
• 1:07:08
  will be at half mast. And we're all going to
• 1:07:11
  have to pretend to be sad. I don't know if Donald
• 1:07:14
  Trump will go to the funeral because they're
• 1:07:16
  not buddies. But it's just, I mean,
• 1:07:19
  that'll be one of the rare examples if he doesn't
• 1:07:21
  show up of Trump doing the right thing. Yeah,
• 1:07:24
  but he's not doing it for the right reasons.
• 1:07:26
  He's doing it because he's a petty man. Certainly
• 1:07:27
  not. Certainly not. He'll get credit for that.
• 1:07:31
  Any horrible person. 1% credit. All right. We
• 1:07:35
  have a few more comments and then we should go
• 1:07:38
  get ready for the Q&A show at 12 noon. But just
• 1:07:41
  filming really, who has a podcast about geopolitics
• 1:07:44
  and the podcast name is Clockett. She's a bozo.
• 1:07:48
  What is Clockett? Clockett. That's the name.
• 1:07:50
  That was the name of Simone's show. I'm surprised
• 1:07:56
  she even has a podcast. I mean, she is.
• 1:08:00
  Didn't her show get canceled on MSNBC? Oh, yeah.
• 1:08:04
  Yeah. All this stuff is boring. It's an
• 1:08:07
  ecosystem of— I hate her. She's such a sellout.
• 1:08:11
  The thing is, what it is, she's like Rachel Maddow.
• 1:08:14
  It's like, you know better, and you're doing
• 1:08:18
  this anyway. That's the difference. They're part
• 1:08:21
  of a clique. There's a body of ideas that all
• 1:08:23
  of them have to agree to. Again, the
• 1:08:25
  Lawrence O'Donnell thing was eye-opening for
• 1:08:27
  me. I was just watching like, wow. I was just
• 1:08:30
  enamored by it. I hadn't watched it on MSNBC forever.
• 1:08:34
  And when the thing came up, I was like, he's
• 1:08:36
  staying on script. It's amazing. The Iranians
• 1:08:39
  are bad. We have to somehow separate, but we
• 1:08:41
  need to attack Trump for the war because the
• 1:08:43
  war is unpopular. By the same token, I don't
• 1:08:46
  want to give any credit to Iran, so I have to
• 1:08:48
  attack them also in the process of it. And of
• 1:08:50
  course, Donald Trump is still working with Vladimir
• 1:08:52
  Putin in some way, and he hasn't ended the war.
• 1:08:54
  And it's like he had all of his notes. Yeah,
• 1:08:56
  that's the thing, right? I hate that sort of
• 1:09:00
  trying to quote unquote split down the middle.
• 1:09:03
  In my column, which I'm going to be talking about
• 1:09:05
  in a little bit under an hour with Scott on DMZ,
• 1:09:08
  I talk about how I quote Gavin Newsom. Gavin
• 1:09:11
  Newsom was asked, oh, if Trump becomes president,
• 1:09:16
  would you get rid of tariffs against Canada?
• 1:09:20
  And he's like, I'm not going to say that. I'm
• 1:09:23
  like, really? When you say it.
• 1:09:26
  Only 20% of Americans are in favor of them. No
• 1:09:29
  Democrats. That's a hard lift for you, right?
• 1:09:33
  Yeah, by the way he's attacking Trump for
• 1:09:35
  the tariffs that he won't write up. This is the
• 1:09:37
  right thing, right? He's also saying he wouldn't
• 1:09:39
  necessarily. And he also said, oh he was asked
• 1:09:42
  would you stop the war in Iran? He's like he should
• 1:09:46
  have gone for congressional approval but he's
• 1:09:48
  not saying no, right? So I mean and that's what
• 1:09:50
  they're all like. And I don't mean just Josh
• 1:09:53
  Shapiro and those people. All of them. Even AOC
• 1:09:56
  won't say that if she were president on day one
• 1:09:58
  we would stop, she would stop the Iran war. None
• 1:10:01
  of them will. None of them are saying that
• 1:10:03
  and it's like they all have to say this
• 1:10:05
  is always what you have to do in the American
• 1:10:07
  system if you're a member of one of
• 1:10:10
  the two major parties in their media or in their
• 1:10:13
  political space. You have to say well okay Trump
• 1:10:17
  should have gone to Congress to get approval
• 1:10:19
  to kill the people of Iran. That's wrong that
• 1:10:22
  he didn't do that. That said, the Iranian regime
• 1:10:25
  has killed 40,000 people and they're evil and
• 1:10:29
  they deny women equal rights and they have to
• 1:10:33
  go and they must never be allowed to have a nuclear
• 1:10:35
  weapon. And it's like, okay, so here's the thing.
• 1:10:38
  Even if you actually think those things
• 1:10:40
  about Iran, they didn't kill 40,000
• 1:10:42
  people. But the point is, even if you think
• 1:10:44
  those things and you don't like their government,
• 1:10:47
  okay, you shouldn't say that. You should just shut
• 1:10:50
  up about that and just focus on if you're really
• 1:10:54
  seriously an opponent of the war, just say I'm
• 1:10:58
  against the war. We should get out of there right
• 1:11:00
  away. We should never have been there. And yes,
• 1:11:02
  leave the fucking with the Iranians
• 1:11:06
  to the right-wingers because they have that covered.
• 1:11:08
  You don't need to help them in any way. The
• 1:11:12
  right-wingers never do that the other way around.
• 1:11:15
  Right. They don't ever come around and say.
• 1:11:18
  Okay, well, we want to
• 1:11:22
  make sure Iran has no
• 1:11:24
  nuclear weapons. But it is kind of true that
• 1:11:27
  Trump should have gone to Congress. And it is
• 1:11:29
  also kind of true that we've killed too many
• 1:11:31
  schoolgirls. They don't give you any
• 1:11:34
  quarter. Right. They don't sort of
• 1:11:36
  half-ass it. They just come right out
• 1:11:39
  and say, the reflecting pool is awesome.
• 1:11:41
  You know what I mean? Everything is everything's
• 1:11:44
  100 percent MAGA. And so Democrats,
• 1:11:48
  like these, like Symone Sanders,
• 1:11:51
  like her, they should just be like Israel
• 1:11:55
  sucks. Israel needs to be turned
• 1:11:59
  into a, has to be abolished and turned
• 1:12:03
  into a democratic state from the Mediterranean
• 1:12:06
  Sea to the River Jordan and one man one vote.
• 1:12:09
  Get rid of apartheid. The end. Republic of Palestine.
• 1:12:12
  Anybody who wants to stay can stay. Anyone who
• 1:12:14
  wants to leave can leave. The end. But that's assumed.
• 1:12:17
  They disagree, and I don't think they disagree
• 1:12:19
  with the war. No, well, that's the whole point,
• 1:12:21
  right? If they really felt the way that they
• 1:12:25
  felt, they wouldn't be half-assing it. Exactly.
• 1:12:28
  Well, they'd probably pay her. From their point
• 1:12:30
  of view, this is standard. This is like the speed
• 1:12:32
  of light, right? Yeah. Meaning a massless particle
• 1:12:35
  always travels at the speed of light. This is
• 1:12:37
  kind of like that. Under normal circumstances,
• 1:12:38
  their bias is, we're okay with the wars. We don't
• 1:12:42
  like the way Donald Trump is doing it. And by
• 1:12:44
  the way, they're not going to pull it back. Just
• 1:12:46
  like with the JCPOA. And the fact that you can't
• 1:12:49
  say, yes, I'm going to repeal the Canadian tariffs
• 1:12:52
  the moment that I get in office. How can you
• 1:12:54
  not say that? Insane. That's the easiest thing
• 1:12:57
  in the world to say. Literally. Okay, so
• 1:12:59
  here's the standard for me. And then we're out.
• 1:13:03
  In 1944, after France was liberated from
• 1:13:07
  the Nazis, the interim president was Charles
• 1:13:10
  de Gaulle until they had an election. De Gaulle
• 1:13:13
  comes in, his very first rule, his first law
• 1:13:17
  that he got through parliament simply said, all
• 1:13:20
  laws and regulations passed between 1940 and
• 1:13:24
  1944, i.e. under Vichy, under Philippe Pétain,
• 1:13:29
  are invalid. Now, that's it. Basically,
• 1:13:33
  it's like Vichy France, like it never even happened,
• 1:13:36
  like zero. And that's what the next Democratic
• 1:13:39
  president should promise to do. They should say,
• 1:13:42
  everything that Trump did. We will go through,
• 1:13:45
  they could say, just one executive order. All
• 1:13:47
  executive orders passed between, in
• 1:13:50
  the last four years, no longer are valid and
• 1:13:53
  are to be reversed. In other words, all the DOGE
• 1:13:55
  people, you all have your jobs back. USAID, welcome
• 1:14:00
  back. Your desk is waiting for you.
• 1:14:02
  Although I personally hate USAID. My point is,
• 1:14:06
  the Democrats should undo everything. And by
• 1:14:08
  the way, parenthetically, De Gaulle. There were
• 1:14:11
  a lot of laws that had been passed under,
• 1:14:13
  because it was a government. And they did
• 1:14:15
  stuff about taxes and tariffs and
• 1:14:18
  widening roads. And they had to go back and repass
• 1:14:21
  those, right? Because they were things that needed
• 1:14:23
  to happen. But the point is, symbolically, we're
• 1:14:26
  just going to undo all this shit. We're out of
• 1:14:29
  Iran on day one. We beg forgiveness and offer
• 1:14:32
  restitution on day one. But
• 1:14:37
  that's not what they're going to do. Democrats don't
• 1:14:40
  do that. And when people complain about people
• 1:14:42
  like us saying, oh, the Democrats and Republicans
• 1:14:44
  are the same, I point to things like this. They
• 1:14:46
  are the same on the important stuff. Yeah.
• 1:14:50
  As I keep saying, Joe Biden didn't go back
• 1:14:53
  to the JCPOA. He could have. He chose not to.
• 1:14:57
  Joe Biden kept Space Force. Yes, he kept Space
• 1:15:00
  Force. It's almost like... Democrats instantiate.
• 1:15:03
  Joe Biden kept the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem
• 1:15:05
  where Trump had moved it instead of taking you,
• 1:15:07
  sending it back to Tel Aviv. Yeah, because he
• 1:15:10
  agrees with those things. He agrees with it.
• 1:15:12
  He's okay. Same thing with Canada. Same thing with
• 1:15:15
  Iran. They're going to say, hey, what
• 1:15:17
  advantages did we get out of it? And they're
• 1:15:20
  not going to want to look weak. There's that.
• 1:15:22
  Right. Which is always part of the presidency.
• 1:15:25
  And maybe it looks weak if you make a deal with
• 1:15:27
  Canada and stop with Canada. It's like, yeah,
• 1:15:29
  dude, but. This came from what you consider to
• 1:15:32
  be the devil. You're still accepting what the
• 1:15:36
  quote devil did. Same thing with Obama and the
• 1:15:39
  taxes, right? The gargantuan tax cut that George
• 1:15:43
  Bush put in and Obama got like 80 something percent.
• 1:15:45
  Biden did the same thing. He kept Trump's first
• 1:15:46
  term tax cuts. Exactly. They instantiate whatever
• 1:15:50
  Republicans do, even though they bitch and moan
• 1:15:52
  about what Republicans do. And as you point out,
• 1:15:54
  then they would say, hey, you guys need to get
• 1:15:57
  on board. We don't need to get on anywhere. No.
• 1:15:59
  Until you guys can actually stand for something.
• 1:16:03
  Differentiate yourselves. Yeah. And they'll be
• 1:16:06
  like, well, will we rejoin the World Health Organization?
• 1:16:09
  Okay, sure. It's not important, but okay.
• 1:16:13
  All right, we go now. We do have one rant to
• 1:16:17
  do real quick from Deep Green. Simone is a fucking
• 1:16:21
  traitorous sellout. Fuck the black mongrel class.
• 1:16:25
  Hence why I'm a class reductionist. What's a
• 1:16:30
  class reductionist? I'm sorry, I misread that.
• 1:16:33
  Managerial class, not mongrel class. Oh, God.
• 1:16:36
  Thank God. Thank God. Mongrel is not a good word
• 1:16:43
  to use next to the word black, even if you're
• 1:16:46
  talking about a color of a pen. And I think he's
• 1:16:51
  black himself. Well, this is also why y'all
• 1:16:56
  should not have the Southerner reading. Reading
• 1:16:59
  and Southerner don't go together. The family
• 1:17:02
  should go straight up. Y'all have got the lowest
• 1:17:05
  of low bars here. All right. See you guys in
• 1:17:08
  an hour and 45 minutes. We'll be back with the
• 1:17:10
  Q&A. See you here on YouTube and Rumble. See
• 1:17:13
  you live. We love you, Robby. Have a great weekend
• 1:17:16
  if you're not rejoining us, but otherwise we
• 1:17:18
  hope you do. DMZ America podcast with me and
• 1:17:20
  Scott. We'll be talking about America. Can we
• 1:17:22
  move past Donald Trump? That's coming up in 40
• 1:17:25
  minutes on YouTube. Are you going to join us?
• 1:17:32
  Give me an answer yes or no. I'm curious. What
• 1:17:36
  do you mean? What's the question? Can we move
• 1:17:38
  past Donald Trump? No. No. Really? You think
• 1:17:42
  the answer's no? I think his works remain. His
• 1:17:44
  works will remain. He has metastasized. He's
• 1:17:47
  changed politics forever and he's changed the
• 1:17:49
  country forever. There's no getting him out.
• 1:17:52
  There's no going back. He can drop dead today,
• 1:17:54
  but that's not going to change anything. The
• 1:17:56
  cancer he's unleashed on the body politic is
• 1:17:59
  in the bone marrow. There's no getting it out.
• 1:18:01
  That's what I think. Send me a link. I might
• 1:18:02
  join at 11. Okay. I'll send you a link. All right.
• 1:18:06
  Bye everyone. See you. Hopefully you'll see you
• 1:18:08
  soon. Ciao.