Joe Rogan Experience #2526 - JD Vance

[0:01] So the last time we talked, last time I saw you, we were at a cage fight at the White [0:17] House. [0:19] That's right. [0:20] That's one of the craziest experiences of my life. [0:24] It must have been one of the craziest experiences of your life. [0:26] Oh yeah. [0:27] It took me like two weeks afterwards to recover, just to like go, did that actually happen? [0:32] That seems, it seems so insane. [0:34] Okay, the most insane part of it, which I guess was before you got there, to me at least, [0:39] is, you know, like you come into work every day in the White House, right? [0:43] You know, I have an office in the West Wing, there's the Oval Office in the West Wing, and [0:48] you look out the window, and as this like eight story complex was growing up, it was just the [0:55] most unbelievable thing. [0:56] It's like the South Lawn of the White House, but you've got the eighth wonder of the world [0:59] being built up around it. [1:02] And every day, I'd look at it and be like, it would take me a couple seconds and be like, [1:05] what the hell is going on? [1:06] And I'd be like, oh yeah, it's UFC. [1:07] It's UFC coming in a couple weeks. [1:09] The whole thing was surreal. [1:10] Yeah. [1:11] First of all, it was crazy that the weather just went around us. [1:15] That's right. [1:16] Like there was a real moment where the fights would have been postponed until 10.30 p.m. [1:21] start. [1:22] Correct. [1:23] And last minute, the storm just diverted. [1:28] That's right. [1:29] Well, and this book that I have that I guess we'll talk about a little bit, but the book [1:35] tour started the next day. [1:37] So, I was flying to New York the next day to talk about it. [1:40] What I could think about is, every time we got the update from White House weather, oh, [1:44] it might not start until 10.30 p.m., I was thinking to myself, holy shit, that means I'm [1:47] going to go to bed at like 4 a.m. I'm going to look like a total crazy person when I'm trying [1:52] to go talk about this book. But yeah, amazingly, it did work out. Honestly, it actually helped [1:58] a little bit because, as you know, it was hot as hell out there, and it was super humid, [2:03] you know, mid-June in D.C., and I think the weather actually helped cool it down a little [2:09] bit because by about 10 o'clock or so, I was not thinking it's hot as hell out here anymore. [2:15] Yeah, it wasn't too bad, but I talked to Justin Gaethje about it, and he said it was [2:19] a problem when he was fighting. He said the air was very thick, like right after the first [2:25] round, he was like, boy, like this is rough. It's that hot, humid air and, you know, it's [2:30] fine walking around. [2:33] I mean, it's okay walking around. It still feels, it is a swamp, right? That's why people [2:36] call it the swamp. So, you know, that's obviously June 14th. That's the president's... [2:40] That's not why they call it the swamp. [2:41] That's one of the reasons why they call it the swamp. [2:44] They call it the swamp because it's... [2:45] They call it the swamp because of my colleagues, too. [2:46] Because it's filled with mud and water and gunk and shit and swamp monsters. [2:52] Oh, man. So that's June 14th. So that's the president's birthday. That's also, that was [2:57] my 12th wedding anniversary. [2:59] Oh, wow. [2:59] And my wife, so that's the one thing, like if somebody runs in here, it's because my wife's [3:04] going into labor because she's like 39 weeks pregnant. But I remember we go out to dinner [3:10] like right before the UFC fight. And we're, of course, checking the weather report to figure [3:14] out what's going on. And, you know, my wife normally likes to come to the cool stuff of being [3:19] vice president. That was the one where she was like, it's hot. I'm super pregnant. And [3:24] I'm not going to sit, sit out there for six hours. So yeah, I couldn't imagine. Also, it [3:30] was just, there was so much chaos and the potential for real chaos was always there. First of all, [3:36] you have the ellipse. So the ellipse has what? 85,000 people outside. And for people that are [3:43] watching at home, like we could hear them. Like when the fights, when, when something would [3:48] happen. In like kind of a delayed way, right? Yeah. You'd hear the cheers from the people [3:51] that were near. So it was like 3,000 plus people tightly close to the octagon. And then you [3:57] had 85,000 people in the background. It was very eerie. Yeah. I actually loved that. Like [4:05] I love the delay reaction to where, you know, somebody get a good punch in or, you know, you [4:10] get a takedown. And then it was almost like the wave. Yeah. Because there was the initial [4:15] center of it and then the people outside of it. It was pretty sick. It was pretty sick. [4:19] It was very cool. I think Dana said not once in a lifetime or not once in a generation, [4:24] a once in a lifetime experience. Yeah. I mean, it's once ever. Yeah. I don't [4:29] see any other president. I mean, if you become president, you're not going to do that, right? [4:33] Uh, I don't know, man. I wouldn't, I didn't want to do it. It's actually very cool. It's a very [4:37] cool thing. It was very cool. Yeah. Get it over with, do it once. It was the only time in the history of [4:41] the sport where there's been seven stoppages, seven, seven knockouts. Like every single fight [4:47] was a knockout. Oh, I didn't realize that. Yeah. Every single fight. Okay. But the thing is like, [4:50] we've had seven knockouts in a card. I think this last weekend we had 10, 10 stoppages, but, um, [4:58] that was different because it was like 14 fights, right? This is all fights. Every single fight was [5:03] a knockout. So the last fight, when did you realize that was over? With Connor? Yeah. Um, [5:10] when he fell down a second time, I was like, Oh, this is not good. The first time I thought he [5:14] just slipped. It's hard to tell. It's wild. It's in the moment. I thought he slipped. And then when [5:20] he got up and he threw a kick again, I'm like, Oh, I don't like how his leg just gave out. That [5:24] didn't seem like, I'm still hoping he's just slipping. Yeah. I'm hoping he's just freaking out [5:30] because he hasn't been in the octagon in five years. And then he started moving around and he, he like [5:35] grabbed his knee and buckled. Okay. And there was some conversation. I didn't notice that. Yeah. [5:39] There was some conversation going on between him and Max Holloway. And I was like, you know, [5:43] Max is saying he can't fight, like something's wrong. And he say, fight me. He's like, get up. [5:48] And so he lets him up and then he's, his knee buckles. Then the referee stops the fight. [5:53] Yeah. Yeah. There it's always. So, so the, the very, I think was the very last fight where [6:00] the, the ref tried to call it at the end of the third round. And then because he was, he was saying [6:05] that there was a concussion issue. I mean, I couldn't tell what was going on. [6:08] This is the Ilya Tepuria fight? The Justin Gaethje fight at the White House? [6:11] Yeah. The Tepuria-Justin Gaethje fight. [6:12] No, he couldn't see. Okay. [6:14] He was saying he couldn't see well because something was wrong with his right eye. [6:17] Well, I mean, it looks like his whole face was puffed up so he couldn't see anything, but okay. [6:21] So I thought it was a concussion thing, but it was because of his vision. [6:24] No, they never do that. I mean, the concussion thing would only be if someone had been battered. [6:30] There's a lot of times where fighters are fighting with concussions. [6:33] Yeah. It happens all the time. [6:34] Yeah. Yeah. [6:34] You get dropped in the first round, you probably have a concussion. [6:37] Yeah. [6:37] You get back up, you keep fighting, you're fighting on these things. [6:39] There's been many times where fighters wake up in like the fourth round. [6:43] Sure. [6:44] And they've fought three rounds and they don't remember it at all. [6:47] Oh my God. I know. [6:49] That's pretty crazy. [6:50] Not the best way to make a living. [6:52] Not the best way to make a living, man. [6:54] Yeah, no. [6:54] So we saw Gaethje at the White House a couple of weeks ago. [6:57] Yeah, I saw that. [6:59] And I asked him, I was like, so are you done fighting? [7:01] And he kind of hesitated a little bit. [7:02] And then I think it was his mom was in the Oval Office with him. [7:05] She's like, yes. [7:07] Yeah. [7:08] But, you know, if they offer him some life-changing money for one more fight after that performance, [7:15] I have a feeling he'll take it. [7:17] Like what is, what could he fetch for his next fight? [7:20] Like 50 more? [7:21] It's a good question. [7:23] You know, I don't know what his contract is. [7:25] I don't know how it works. [7:25] I don't know what the most anyone's ever, I try not to pay attention to that stuff. [7:29] Yeah. [7:30] Because I'm not on the business end of the sport. [7:33] Yeah, it can kind of color your perception a little bit. [7:35] It can and it's also, I mean, I want them to get paid the most amount possible. [7:40] That's my perspective. [7:41] Yeah. [7:42] But what I'm, my job is just to analyze and to see what's going on and to commentate [7:48] and try to give color and life to what's happening inside the octagon. [7:52] And I don't, I try not to dwell too much on the money. [7:55] I just want them to get paid a lot. [7:56] Yeah. [7:57] I want them to be able to retire and never have to do anything ever again. [8:00] Sure. [8:01] I don't know if Justin could do that. [8:02] What's crazy about it to me is just how much the sport has replaced boxing. [8:07] And like, there's still obviously boxing is still a big deal and the fighters still get paid a lot [8:12] of money. [8:13] But like, I remember when I was, I don't know, in high school, I feel like people would get [8:18] really excited about the big heavyweight title bout. [8:23] Now it's the UFC thing. [8:24] Yeah. [8:24] So culturally, it's like UFC has taken over boxing. [8:28] And I don't, I mean, I don't know how or why that happened. [8:31] Like, I don't know if it's just good marketing or if it's just the fights are so much more real [8:35] and intense. [8:35] Like I, but it's, it is a crazy shift that's happened in 20 years. [8:39] Well, I've had some, I had some friends this past weekend that manage fighters. [8:42] My friend, Josh Dubin and a few other friends that actually manage boxers. [8:46] Yeah. [8:46] Come to the UFC and they were all like, oh my God, this is so much better than a boxing promotion. [8:51] Yeah. [8:51] Because you can, all the fights are exciting. [8:54] With boxing, most people are just there for the main event. [8:56] And a lot of people don't even stroll in until like 15 minutes before the main event. [9:01] Sure. [9:01] Like all the famous people that sit in the front row. [9:04] Yeah. [9:04] Yeah. [9:04] Uh, in the UFC, that place is packed for, you know, five, six, seven fights in. [9:10] Yeah. [9:10] You know, and there's 14 fights in the night and all of them are amazing. [9:14] It's like, in the beginning, it's usually like half full depending on where you are. [9:19] If you're in a place like Salt Lake City, it's pretty packed like right away because they [9:22] only get like one event every year or so, but it's just a more exciting sport. [9:28] There's more ways to win. [9:29] It's more dynamic. [9:30] More things happen. [9:31] Yeah. [9:32] Yeah. [9:32] And there's more stars. [9:33] There's so many stars in the UFC. [9:35] Yeah. [9:35] So I'd never seen a fight live before. [9:37] Like I've watched them on TV, but I'd never been there live. [9:39] So kind of crazy that it's literally in the South Lawn of the White House. [9:42] But the thing that I found completely shocking about it was like, I would think those, [9:48] those like arm bar takedowns are just done. [9:51] Like, that's it. [9:53] You're over. [9:54] But there were a couple of times where somebody had another person's arm. [9:58] Yeah. [9:58] That was Josh Hokett and Derek Lewis. [10:01] Bless you. [10:02] Sorry. [10:02] And it's like, holy shit. [10:05] Yeah, he just wasn't. [10:05] You're going to have your arm broken off. [10:06] He wasn't. [10:07] And yet he didn't. [10:08] He wasn't doing it right. [10:09] Okay. [10:10] Josh Hokett is a great wrestler. [10:12] Yeah. [10:12] And he's an excellent fighter, but he's not really a submission specialist. [10:16] I mean, he did get the arm bar, but he didn't do it right. [10:19] Okay. [10:19] He was basically like pulling on, you have to elevate your hips and you have to create [10:24] space so that the arm is bending back this way. [10:27] Yeah. [10:27] His arm is essentially flat to his chest, which is not what you want. [10:31] What you want is a back arch like this where you, see like how it is right there? [10:36] Yeah, yeah, yeah. [10:36] So what he wants to do here, what he should do, instead of having his hips down, his knees [10:41] up, what you're supposed to do is heavy leg curls with the leg and elevate the hips up [10:46] and pull it way back. [10:47] So he'd almost be bridging. [10:48] He would be on the top of his shoulders and bridging and then he would have broken his arm. [10:53] The other option is you pull it off to the side like this and you put it to the side of your [10:59] hip and you can break it that way. [11:01] Okay. [11:02] But it's just bad technique. [11:03] Yeah. [11:04] Okay. [11:04] So watching it- [11:05] No offense, Josh. [11:05] Yeah, yeah. [11:06] Watching it, I didn't realize that. [11:08] I just could not believe that dude held out for like 30 seconds with his arm in position. [11:11] Was that more shocking or when he said Michelle Obama is a man? [11:15] Which one was more shocking? [11:18] Definitely the arm bar part. [11:21] I work in politics, people say crazy stuff all the time. [11:24] Well, he says that every fight. [11:25] Does he? [11:27] Yeah, yeah. [11:27] Oh, I didn't realize that. [11:27] He said that the last time I interviewed him. [11:29] Yeah. [11:30] Oh, man. [11:30] Well, it's- [11:31] He's like a pro wrestling character. [11:33] People lost their minds about it. [11:35] I know. [11:36] Lost their minds about it. [11:37] To the point where, again, I had the view either the next day or the day after to sort of [11:43] promote this book. [11:44] That must be fun. [11:44] Yeah, it was crazy. [11:45] It was harder than anything I've done in politics, but to the point where all of my comms people, [11:52] the thing they were most worried about was, they're going to ask you about Michelle Obama [11:57] being called a man. [12:00] What are you going to say about it? [12:01] And I was like, what an amped up fighter told a joke after a fight, said something after a fight, [12:07] and that's actually national news. [12:08] I'm still surprised. [12:09] I've been in politics now for three, four years. [12:12] I'm still shocked the shit that people get really fired up about. [12:15] Well, I kind of understand it because it's at the White House. [12:19] First of all, a cage fight at the White House is crazy already. [12:22] I mean, if he said Michelle Obama's a man at the T-Mobile Arena in Vegas, it's like, okay. [12:26] That's less of a story. [12:27] What he is is he's a very good fighter, first of all, but sometimes it's not enough to get [12:34] attention. [12:35] And so what Josh has done is created this persona, like this pro wrestling bad guy persona. [12:40] When you talk to him offstage, he's like very normal, very smart guy. [12:43] Yeah, yeah. [12:44] It's just like he's decided, like, look, I want to maximize the amount of eyeballs that [12:49] see me, and I'm going to create this crazy persona. [12:51] He comes out to the Hulk Hogan song, I'm a real American. [12:56] That's right. [12:56] That's right. [12:56] He has sunglasses on, an American flag, bandana. [12:59] That's right. [13:00] It's, you know, he's got a character. [13:02] I mean, I love the presentation, but again, like. [13:07] Not the best thing to say at the White House. [13:08] Michelle Obama's a man is not the best thing to say. [13:10] Fair, but the reaction to it to me was still totally disproportionate. [13:15] Yeah, of course. [13:15] Dude, people say stuff all the time, and what I, okay, I work in a business where [13:23] obviously people make life and death decisions all the time, and I'm always a little bit [13:29] caught off guard by the culture that just overreacts, when clearly the thing that Josh [13:36] is trying to get is the overreaction in the first place. [13:38] Right. [13:38] So you give him exactly what he wants, and like the worst you could say is, oh, that [13:43] was an offensive comment, and you get on with the rest of your life. [13:45] Like, that's the worst that you could say. [13:47] The people who really flip out about it and kind of lose their minds, I just, I don't understand that. [13:54] Well, first of all, I think a lot of it is there is an economy that is essentially [14:00] based on getting reactions. [14:01] Correct. [14:02] And there's a lot of people that are just, for a lack of a better term, they're not real. [14:08] Their reactions are performative. Like, a lot of what they're doing is just trying to [14:16] trying to comment on things and get clicks and likes and views, and social media has ruined [14:23] discourse in a lot of ways. [14:24] Because people are not having like real conversations about things. They're reacting to [14:29] things on Instagram and Twitter. [14:31] Yes. [14:31] And, you know, they're just, they look at an opportunity like that, like, oh, I found [14:37] a gold nugget. [14:38] Yeah. [14:39] Like, this is going to give me money, or this is going to give me attention. [14:42] This is going to give, oh, I can't wait to have a take on that. [14:45] Well, that's exactly right. [14:46] So, but, okay, so my response to that is so many things is like, oh, he was being funny, [14:51] he was being outrageous, and I just move on with my life. [14:54] What I find very interesting is the people who say, you know, oh, that was a joke. [14:59] Like, when Kill Tony, do you remember he told, like, the Joker around the world in [15:02] Madison Square Garden during the 2024 election? [15:05] I remember getting into an argument with somebody about this, and I may have even been, [15:09] like, in an interview, but I don't remember. It could have been private, too. [15:13] Anyway, I'm like, he told a joke, and the person's response is, well, it's not a very funny joke. [15:19] And my response to that is, you know what happens when somebody tells me a joke that's not funny? [15:24] I don't laugh, and then I move on with my life. [15:27] This whole industry around outrage, especially getting outraged around humor, [15:33] I think is actually really hurting the country. [15:36] Well, in that case, first of all, I told Tony a long time ago that joke was going to get him stabbed. [15:40] I really did. He even jokes around about it on stage. [15:45] He talks about me telling him, that's the one, dude. That's the one that's going to get you stabbed. [15:50] Any good joke at least is going to run you some risk of getting stabbed. [15:53] Well, certainly a racial joke, and that joke being about Puerto Rico. [15:59] By the way, no one takes a joke better than Puerto Ricans. [16:02] Puerto Ricans are some of the best people at telling jokes. [16:04] Like, it is a culture of joking and fucking around with each other and talking shit. [16:10] Of course, yes. Absolutely. [16:11] Like, they're great at it. [16:12] So, like, they love him still. [16:13] Yeah, I serve some Puerto Rican guys in the Marine Corps, man. That's absolutely true. [16:16] They love him still. [16:16] Yes. [16:17] You know, like, even after that joke. [16:18] Yeah. [16:18] So, you advised him not to tell that joke? [16:21] Well, I was kind of half joking. [16:23] You know, Tony, that's what Tony does. [16:25] You know, I just said that's the one that's going to get you stabbed. [16:28] Yeah. [16:28] But, I mean, that's what Tony does. Tony is like the Josh Hokett of comedy. [16:33] Like, he – but very talented. You know, he's a really good – he's a roaster. [16:37] He's so funny. [16:38] Yes. [16:38] Like, roasting is his specialty, but it's also, like, he's trying to ruffle people's feathers. [16:43] That's what he wants to do. [16:44] Yep. [16:45] He wants to piss people off. [16:46] Yeah, yeah. [16:46] Like, that's – he likes being a pro wrestling heel. [16:49] Yeah. [16:49] He always – he's a huge pro wrestling fan. [16:51] Well, so – well, he – so, Tony – I, like, I'm a huge fan of his comedy. [16:56] I've only, you know, met him a couple of times. I don't know him particularly well. [16:59] But he's actually, like, you know, more political, I would say, than most comedians. [17:04] Do you think that's fair? [17:05] Yes. [17:05] Yes. [17:05] Okay. [17:06] So – [17:07] Well, very supportive of, like, Trump. [17:10] Like, he's on the Republican team. [17:12] Yes. [17:12] He's on the Republican team. [17:13] 100%. [17:13] So – [17:14] It's because he's experienced so many loony left-wing people in California, and that's why he had to move. [17:19] Well, somebody sent me a clip. I think it was Shane Gillis at a roast, [17:22] where the joke was they were roasting Tony, and they're like, [17:28] Tony Hinchcliffe is the only dude who would be excited if J.D. Vance was here. [17:35] And I was like, one, that's a very good joke, and number two, I feel like I had made – like, [17:40] there have been a few moments where I feel like I've made it. [17:42] When South Park – [17:42] You're the vice president of the United States. [17:45] I think you made it. [17:46] Yeah. [17:46] When South Park spoofed me, I felt it more than when I got it sworn in as vice president of the United States. [17:51] That's hilarious. [17:52] That's very funny. [17:54] This episode is brought to you by The Farmer's Dog. [17:56] Here's a fun fact. [17:57] Research shows that dogs who maintain a healthy weight can live up to two and a half years longer [18:03] on average than dogs who are overweight. [18:05] Isn't that wild and also kind of obvious at the same time? [18:09] So why is feeding vague scoops of ultra-processed kibble still the status quo for most dog owners? [18:16] Healthy alternatives exist, and trust me, I know. [18:20] I buy one, The Farmer's Dog. [18:21] I use it for both my dogs. [18:23] They love it. [18:23] They eat it up quick. [18:25] It smells good to them. [18:26] It smells good to me. [18:27] It's human-grade food. [18:29] The Farmer's Dog makes fresh food for dogs, and my dogs love it. [18:33] Their recipes are made with real meat and fresh vegetables that are gently cooked to retain vital nutrients. [18:40] They also portion out the meals to your dog's nutritional needs, which helps avoid overfeeding [18:45] and makes weight management easier. [18:47] And isn't getting more time with our four-legged best friends something every dog owner wants? [18:53] The answer to that is yes, obviously. [18:56] So try The Farmer's Dog today and get 50% off your first box of fresh, healthy food. [19:03] Plus, get free shipping. [19:05] Just go to thefarmersdog.com slash rogan. [19:09] This offer is for new customers only. [19:12] Yeah, Tony is, I mean, that's his style. [19:14] Like, he loves, like, being the heel. [19:17] He's in Austin, right? [19:18] He gets the kick out of it. [19:18] Oh, yeah. [19:19] Oh, yeah. [19:19] He's one of the first people that moved out here with me. [19:21] Okay. [19:22] Yeah, I mean, we've been here for six years now. [19:24] Yeah. [19:24] And every time we go back to California, we're like, we were right. [19:28] Yeah, absolutely. [19:29] We were right. [19:29] It's falling apart. [19:30] It keeps going further and further down the toilet. [19:33] How do you feel like Austin is going? [19:35] Because the criticism of Austin, call it five or six years ago, is that it's a cool town. [19:42] It's got its own unique culture. [19:44] It's Texas, but it's also its own thing. [19:47] But that all of the Blue Staters moving in were going to, like, totally change the politics [19:52] and the culture of Austin. [19:54] I actually don't think that's happened. [19:55] I think the Blue Staters that moved here, moved here because they recognized that wherever [20:00] they were living was not tenable. [20:02] Yeah. [20:03] It was falling apart. [20:04] And all of these places like New York and really California, like, especially Los Angeles [20:10] and San Francisco, they're falling apart. [20:13] And I have a bunch of friends that are stuck there that can't move. [20:18] Like, maybe they have family there or maybe they have a business there. [20:22] Yep. [20:22] And they fucking hate it. [20:24] And then I have a bunch of people that are trying to move, but they can't sell their house. [20:27] Like, it's nuts there, man. [20:29] I don't think people, first of all, you get gaslit by Gavin Newsom. [20:33] I mean, he's just gaslighting everybody about how well, you know, the GDP of like the fifth [20:40] largest country in the world. [20:42] That's what California is. [20:43] It's like, dude, hey, bro, it was like that before you were the governor. [20:46] Yeah, exactly. [20:47] Also, how much does a U-Haul cost if you're leaving California? [20:50] And how much does it cost if you're going to California? [20:52] Because that's the real measure of whether a state's doing well. [20:54] Yeah, the state has more people moving out than moving in. [20:58] And that has never happened before. [21:00] Correct. [21:00] California, when I moved there in 1994 until I left, [21:04] it was always every year traffic got worse. [21:07] Every year, more people moved there. [21:08] Every year. [21:09] And I loved it. [21:11] I loved it. [21:12] I loved it from the time I moved there. [21:13] I was like, this place is great. [21:15] It's warm all the time. [21:17] Yeah, yeah. [21:17] The weather's fantastic. [21:18] There's so much cool stuff to do. [21:20] The people are great. [21:22] Yeah. [21:22] And then politics ruined it. [21:23] That's right. [21:24] So my wife's from Southern California, San Diego. [21:26] And so we spent a fair amount of time there. [21:28] And I just, I mean, I still feel a certain sense of like heartbreak over LA. [21:34] Oh, I do too. [21:35] Because every time I'm in LA, you can see why this was like the quintessentially American city. [21:40] The architecture is beautiful. [21:42] It's got its own vibe going. [21:44] Like you said, the weather is amazing. [21:45] And then you drive through Skid Row and you're like, how could any state or any city let this happen? [21:50] Skid Row is now 55 blocks. [21:54] It was 50 blocks just like a year or two ago. [21:58] Okay. [21:58] So my first experience with Skid Row was... [22:03] So Usha used to work at this like very fancy litigation firm in Southern California. [22:09] Before she was second lady, she was a corporate litigator. [22:11] So there's a Christmas party in downtown LA. [22:15] And you get these instructions from her firm. [22:17] And they're like this really convoluted way of this is how you have to get to this Christmas party. [22:22] And I'm like, why do I have to follow these directions? [22:25] Why don't you just put it in Google Maps, right? [22:26] This is like five or six, seven years ago. [22:29] So we realized that the reason why they gave you these convoluted directions was so that you could avoid Skid Row at night. [22:36] And so you get to this party. [22:39] You drive through Skid Row if you follow Google Maps's directions. [22:42] You get there and it's like this beautiful facility with like fancy food and fancy wine. [22:49] And then there are armed guards outside of it and these gigantic walls. [22:53] And I realized when I was there, you know what this reminds me of? [22:56] This reminds me of going to the U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. [23:01] Like super security, crazy wealth and privilege and status on the inside and squalor and misery on the outside. [23:10] Like it's the first time I'd ever thought America like this part of America is actually more like a third world country than anything that I thought we'd ever become. [23:19] Let me ask you this. [23:20] Yeah. [23:20] Why is it that large population centers like places like Los Angeles and New York are almost always run by the Democrats? [23:30] Yeah. [23:31] Like what is it about? [23:32] First of all, what happened with the last election in Los Angeles, just the primary, I think was so super sus. [23:42] Yes, it is. [23:43] And here's why it's super sus. [23:44] Not just super sus that Spencer Pratt, who was in second place, got overtaken by Nithya Raman in the mail-in ballots, [23:54] but that the mail-in ballots also passed a tax hike. [23:59] The people voted to pay more taxes. [24:03] Yep. [24:03] In a state where you have the highest taxes. [24:05] The highest taxes. [24:06] That's right. [24:07] They're like, we don't pay enough. [24:08] That is insane. [24:12] And then when you have direct evidence that they were recruiting homeless people. [24:17] That's right. [24:17] And they were getting homeless people and giving them cigarettes and cash. [24:21] There's evidence. [24:22] Yes. [24:22] To use their address and mail-in ballots. [24:25] Yeah. [24:26] I wouldn't be the Californian Joe who wakes up in the morning and says, you know what? [24:29] I'm going to go and vote for higher taxes. [24:31] I don't pay enough. [24:32] I don't pay enough taxes. [24:33] I feel like we can fix this if I just pay 5% more taxes. [24:37] The crazy thing about it, too, is it's that, okay, so after the initial ballots all came in, [24:43] it was Karen Bass was No. 1, Spencer Pratt was right behind her, and then No. 3, whatever this [24:49] woman's name is. [24:50] Nithya Raman. [24:50] Nithya Raman. [24:51] Okay. [24:51] So, you would expect the mail-in ballots to be more or less like the original ballots in terms of 1, 2, [24:58] and 3. [24:58] I'm not saying Spencer Pratt is going to win the mail-in ballots, but it just so happened [25:02] that the third-place person, in relative terms, did a lot better than the first and second-place [25:08] person, such that the Republican was actually kicked out of the race so that there's not [25:14] actually a real election in California. [25:15] That, to me, was the crazy part. [25:17] It's like you were designing the vote share in order to kick Pratt out and put the third person [25:24] into second place. [25:25] That, to me, is very, very bizarre. [25:27] Because what is the theory of the mail-in vote that is somehow so much more pro-Nithya [25:35] relative to Karen Bass? [25:36] Makes no sense. [25:37] Makes no sense. [25:37] Makes no sense. [25:38] Makes no sense. [25:38] Why would it be? [25:39] Yeah. [25:39] Why would it be? [25:40] I mean, Karen Bass was ahead by every metric. [25:44] Yeah. [25:45] But, I mean, okay. [25:46] So, you asked the question, why do all these blue states, or why do all these big cities, [25:49] population centers, end up becoming blue? [25:54] And I think it's very complicated, right? [25:57] So, one thing, and you said this a few months ago, and when you said it, I was kind of annoyed [26:02] by it, but then I thought, there's an element of truth to it, which is that Republicans still [26:07] fundamentally have a cool problem, right? [26:09] There's something more charismatic, more cool about the Democrats as opposed to the right. [26:16] Did I say that? [26:17] And so, you said something about there are too many dorks or something on the right. [26:22] There's a lot of dorks. [26:23] Fair. [26:24] I'd say there's a lot of dorks on the left. [26:25] There's a lot of dorks on the left, too. [26:27] It's a different kind of dork. [26:28] Yeah, it's a different kind of dork. [26:29] But the point is that there's something, you know, like, okay, if you're a pop star, [26:34] you're a rock star, you're an actor, you're in all these cultural centers, [26:38] you're more likely to be left than right. [26:40] And so, I think that a lot of young people who are attracted to these population centers, [26:44] they sort of move along with the prevailing culture. [26:46] I think that's one thing that's going on. [26:49] I think a second thing that's going on is the people who are sort of attracted to a certain [26:54] kind of right of center politics. [26:57] They want the suburbs. [26:58] They want the single family home. [27:00] They kind of want to be left alone. [27:01] They don't want sort of to be able to hear what their neighbors are doing. [27:04] So I think a little bit of it's just cultural self segregation. [27:07] And that's meant that a lot of these population centers have gone blue. [27:11] But it's very complicated. [27:13] I thought about this a lot. [27:14] And I also just, man, I like, I'm not one of these people who says we should just abandon [27:19] California to the Democrats, like let them deal with their own problems. [27:23] I think California is like a quintessential part of the American dream. [27:27] Like if you just abandoned California, you've like lost something very core to American culture. [27:32] And I just, I don't want to give up on it. [27:36] Like I'm not saying we're going to win California in my lifetime necessarily, [27:39] but I don't like the idea of giving up on it. [27:41] Well, it's not just giving up on, I mean, giving up on it would be terrible. [27:44] It's an awesome state. [27:46] The real problem is it's deeply corrupt. [27:50] I mean, deeply, deeply corrupt. [27:52] And what they're trying to do is make it impossible for the other side to win. [27:56] Yeah. [27:57] And there should be laws against that. [27:59] First of all, the idea of mail-in ballots for anybody other than people who are invalids, [28:05] who can't live their homes or military or people that for some reason they're serving overseas, [28:10] they're doing something overseas, it should not be legal. [28:13] That's right. [28:13] And the fact that it became ubiquitous during COVID is a giant problem. [28:18] Yeah. [28:18] So this raises one of my total segue here, side point. [28:21] But so if you remember in the aftermath of the 2020 election where there was all this debate about [28:27] was the election stolen, was the election not stolen, all the litigation that moved through, [28:31] there was a case in Pennsylvania that didn't get very much attention. [28:35] And I'm going to butcher it a little bit. [28:37] But basically, it was a guy in a rural area of Pennsylvania saying, [28:41] you're undercounting my vote because we didn't have the opportunity to do the mail-in ballots [28:46] like they did in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. [28:48] And the argument was a kind of disparate impact, right? [28:51] The cities ginned up all the mail-in balloting and the ballot harvesting. [28:55] You didn't do that in the country. [28:57] And that hurt sort of our representation. [28:59] So they take this case to the Pennsylvania courts. [29:02] And what's crazy is the Pennsylvania courts basically say, [29:05] you're making kind of a good point here. [29:07] Like the ballot harvesting did affect Republicans in a more negative way. [29:11] It did mean that certain people in the more rural parts of the state were underrepresented. [29:16] But then the court conclusion was, this is not a problem a court can fix. [29:20] Like, that's a political problem. [29:21] Change your local elections leaders. [29:24] Change your laws. [29:25] Like, that's not a remedy that the court has to fix. [29:29] And so everybody saw that case and they're like, [29:31] oh, the judge rules against Donald Trump, [29:33] rules against Republicans for saying that there was something illegitimate. [29:37] But no, actually, the judge kind of said, [29:39] there is something kind of fishy here. [29:41] We're just the wrong venue to fix it. [29:43] Mm-hmm. [29:44] Well, it's just very disheartening that you have to consider the fact that it's really possible [29:53] that the elections get stolen. [29:56] And the California one was a big one for me. [29:58] And why not just have mail-in or why not just have voter ID? [30:02] Yeah. [30:03] Well, that's insane. [30:04] Not only did they not have voter ID, you can't show your ID. [30:07] You're not allowed to show your ID. [30:08] You can, in fact, be prosecuted if you try to force somebody to show their ID. [30:12] Which is, that seems like you want people to cheat. [30:16] Exactly. [30:17] And this is from the same people that were saying, [30:19] you have to have an ID that shows you've been vaccinated just four years ago. [30:23] To go to a restaurant. [30:24] To go to a restaurant. [30:24] Or to go to a restaurant. [30:25] Yeah. [30:25] Yeah. [30:26] No, it's definitely, that's the part about it that I think makes most people, [30:32] of my political persuasion, skeptical of what the Democrats are doing. [30:36] Yeah. [30:36] Like, if you don't want to cheat in the election, then just make everybody actually show an ID. [30:41] Another thing people don't realize is, I didn't realize this until a couple years ago, [30:45] the voter ID solves a lot of the mail-in ballot problem. [30:48] Because if you have to show an ID in order to get a mail-in ballot, [30:52] in order to actually, you know, confirm that there's a real identification attached to that vote, [30:57] that solves a big chunk of the problem, too. [30:59] This is just logical. [31:01] Yes. [31:01] Like, I don't, I'm not skeptical. [31:03] Every country does it. [31:05] I'm not skeptical. [31:06] I'm accusing them. [31:07] I think they stole the election. [31:09] Yes. [31:09] And I'm, I'm, I think it's common. [31:12] And I, you know, this idea that elections can't be stolen. [31:16] I always say to people, okay, do you think that the amount of election fraud is zero percent? [31:23] No one thinks that. [31:24] Yeah. [31:25] No one thinks it's zero. [31:26] Exactly. [31:26] There's always some overzealous person that works somewhere, that's doing something. [31:30] There's always crazy people that like blue, no matter who we got to win or red, no matter [31:35] what. [31:35] There's always people right and left that are going to try to rig the election because they [31:40] think it's imperative. [31:41] Our Nate, like, look, we, we saw there was people like Oprah Winfrey was saying it. [31:46] Like, if we don't win this election, we, you may never vote again. [31:50] Like, what the fuck are you talking about? [31:51] Like, why, what, who's going to tolerate that left or right? [31:55] That's crazy. [31:56] That's right. [31:57] But that attitude allows people to justify cheating. [32:01] Correct. [32:01] And I think they cheat. [32:03] And I, I think they've been doing it forever. [32:04] And I don't think there's any other reason why you would have no voter ID. [32:08] And they try to say, oh, it's racist to have voter ID. [32:11] Like, what are you talking about? [32:13] Do you think other races are incapable of going to the DMV? [32:17] That's insane. [32:18] Yeah, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's actually super racist. [32:21] That's really racist. [32:22] The implication of their argument is literally [32:24] like blacks and Hispanics cannot go to the DMV to get an ID. [32:27] By the way, if you look at the polling, [32:29] black Americans are as pro voter ID. [32:31] Even though most black Americans vote Democrat, [32:33] they're still pro voter ID as much as white Americans is. [32:37] Most Americans are voter, they want voter ID except for operatives. [32:41] So I'll offer on the Joe Rogan podcast, [32:44] this deal as vice president of these United States, [32:46] that if Democrats really don't think that there's any cheating, [32:51] give us voter ID. [32:51] I just don't know. [32:53] Give us voter ID and we'll stop talking. [32:55] Why is that not a federal thing? [32:57] We are trying to make it a federal thing. [32:58] So we are right now trying to pass the Save America Act. [33:02] One of its main provisions is a requirement that you do voter ID. [33:06] And we actually have, I think, a majority of the Senate that would support it. [33:10] But this is just weird Senate procedural bullshit. [33:13] There is a sub-segment of people who want voter ID but won't blow up the filibuster in order to [33:21] achieve it. [33:21] And so they're so married to these old world Senate procedures [33:26] that they're going to make it impossible for us to pass Save America. [33:29] Now, for what it's worth trying to fix that and trying to address these like weird procedural [33:34] archaic things, it's insane though. [33:37] Like if you ever, okay, I'm sure you hear people talk about the filibuster all the time. [33:41] I don't want to go too far down this rabbit hole. [33:43] Here's what the filibuster is. [33:45] It is a pure Senate rule. [33:47] It is a creation of the Senate procedures, which basically says that anything that has [33:53] to do with the budget is a 50-vote threshold. [33:56] And anything that everything else, non-budgetary, is a 60-vote threshold. [34:01] Now, as you can imagine, there's some gray area on things that maybe count as budget issues [34:06] and should be 50 or are not budget issues and count at 60. [34:10] So what we have tried to persuade the Senate to do is to treat the voter ID [34:17] as something that can fall within the 50-vote threshold. [34:21] And there is no law. [34:22] There's no provision in the Constitution. [34:24] It is legitimately that there are senators who are so attached to the idea that budget is 50, [34:30] non-budget is 60, that they're quite literally willing to prevent voter ID in America. [34:35] God. [34:37] It's nuts, dude. [34:38] It's nuts. [34:39] It's so crazy. [34:40] It's nuts. [34:41] And it's also like the idea that somehow or another, like Kathy Holtzschel had the craziest take on it. [34:49] Did you? [34:49] She often does. [34:50] Did you see her take on it? [34:52] I have not. [34:52] She was talking about black people in inner cities not even knowing what a computer is. [34:57] Did you ever see that? [34:58] No, I didn't see that. [34:59] Oh, my God. [35:00] It was so crazy. [35:01] And then this one comedian, this black comedian did this hilarious video where he was like circling [35:08] around a computer, staring at it, like touching it, like he didn't know what it was. [35:13] It's just like, what are you talking about? [35:15] Everyone has a phone. [35:17] That's a computer. [35:18] So many of these Democratic talking points presume that their own voters are actual idiots. [35:25] That's actually, there's a big difference between, you know, Republicans, we sort of [35:28] presume that our voters are adults and you don't see that with, I'm not saying every Democrat, [35:33] of course, I don't want to cast too broad of a brush here, but it's like, you know, [35:37] Gavin Newsom did this speech a few months ago. [35:39] The president, I think it's the funniest thing ever, because he's like speaking to a group of [35:44] black leaders and black businessmen, but it's like an audience that is 95% black. [35:49] And they're asking him about his dyslexia and his struggle with education. [35:52] And he basically says, yeah, you know, I'm not very smart. [35:56] Like a lot of you. [35:57] And it's like, I'm like you, I can't even read. [35:59] I can't even read. [36:00] Meanwhile, there's a ton of interviews where he's talking about all the books he reads. [36:04] Like he's so full of shit. [36:05] Yeah, he's, he's full of shit, but it's admirably full of shit. [36:10] It's, it's, I admire the, the, the fucking, the sheer tenacity that he has [36:17] in being full of shit. [36:18] I agree. [36:19] Because it's amazing. [36:19] It really is amazing. [36:21] But it, it speaks to the incentives of, there's kind of like, look, there's a real populism [36:27] that I'm very much a fan of, because I think you should be responsive to people. [36:30] But there's like a faux populism of the way that I'm going to appeal to people is by assuming [36:36] that they're idiots and acting like they're idiots. [36:38] Yeah. [36:39] And then, but, but if you, if you're committed enough to that bit, eventually it kind of leaks [36:43] out what you're doing. [36:44] Yeah. [36:45] And I think that's, that was sort of what Gavin did there, is he told on himself a bit. [36:49] Yeah. [36:50] Well, it was just, it's just, he's bizarre. [36:53] I will say. [36:53] He's a bizarre guy. [36:54] So I've only met Gavin, I think I've only met him one time in my life. [36:58] And it was, it's such a crazy experience. [37:02] So the debate between Biden and Trump during the 2024 cycle, and I'm there, I'm actually [37:09] doing an interview for a documentary when the debate starts. [37:13] And there's this clip of me, the debate starts. [37:16] I'm in the middle of this interview. [37:17] There's a big screen behind me as I'm talking to the camera, which is here. [37:20] And I kind of freeze and I look back at the TV and I'm like, oh my God, like this is actually [37:27] happening. [37:27] Biden is imploding because if you remember, it was obvious from the get go. [37:30] So, so I go to the spin room afterwards and that's where, you know, all these reporters [37:36] and all the surrogates of the candidates, this is before I was the VP nominee. [37:40] And I'm just like, you know, talking about how great the president did, how bad President Biden [37:43] did. [37:44] Okay. [37:44] I see Gavin Newsom there and he literally looks like he's seen a ghost. [37:48] Like I've, I've never seen a person who as good of a bullshitter as he is, who realized [37:54] there was no selling that performance. [37:56] Like, but can you imagine, like, try to put yourself in the perspective of a human being. [38:00] I always try to be empathetic where Joe Biden has just had that debate and you have to go [38:05] on CNN to talk about how great of a job Joe Biden did. [38:09] Well, my favorite is Joe Scarborough because Joe Scarborough before it was like, you know, [38:14] I'm going to say something and F you if you can't take it. [38:17] This is the sharpest Biden we've ever seen. [38:21] Have you ever seen that? [38:22] No, I haven't. [38:22] Oh, it's amazing. [38:23] And then after the debate, he's like, we got to get rid of him. [38:26] He's got to go, he's got to go, hey, hey, hey, what did you say? [38:29] You just said a couple of months ago, this is the best Biden ever. [38:32] That's wild. [38:33] Well, it's like, I wonder what was going on with that. [38:37] Because like the debates were earlier than they've ever been before. [38:40] And it seemed to me, it's like there was a concerted effort to hide what was wrong with him. [38:46] A hundred percent. [38:46] A hundred percent. [38:47] Everybody was bullshitting. [38:48] Yes. [38:48] Everybody was gaslighting us. [38:49] Correct. [38:50] We all saw it. [38:51] I remember a friend of mine who's super progressive, super liberal. [38:55] You know, I talked about it on a podcast. [38:57] I'm like, this is crazy. [38:59] Even if he wins, he's not going to be the guy that's the president. [39:02] You're going to have his cabinet that are running everything. [39:05] Turned out I was right. [39:06] And they were saying, oh, don't you understand that he has a stutter? [39:10] And I said, where the fuck was that stutter in the 1990s? [39:14] Like, that's crazy. [39:15] That's right. [39:16] Like a stutter that only shows up when you're 80. [39:18] That doesn't make any sense. [39:19] Yeah. [39:19] Yeah. [39:20] Like, this is a lie. [39:20] You're lying. [39:22] He's had two brain surgeries, like where they have to take the top of your head off. [39:28] Literally, they have to take like a cap. [39:31] Wait, Biden had two brain surgeries? [39:33] Oh, yeah. [39:33] How did I not know this? [39:34] You didn't know this? [39:35] I didn't know that he had two brain surgeries. [39:36] He had two brain surgeries. [39:39] Jimmy, please look this up. [39:40] Wow. [39:40] Make sure that I'm right. [39:41] I'm 99% sure I'm right. [39:43] But I know he had one that was like a widow. [39:45] Did he get a refund afterwards? [39:47] Well, it kept him alive. [39:48] It kept him alive. [39:50] I mean, here, Biden has not undergone recent brain surgery. [39:55] He underwent two successful life-seizing brain surgeries to repair two intracranial aneurysms [40:02] in 1988. [40:03] I did not know this. [40:04] That's pretty crazy. [40:05] His medical professionals have stated that he made a full recovery and suffered no lasting [40:10] brain damage or cognitive impairment from these procedures. [40:13] Oh, it's from the Washington Post, so you know it's accurate and definitely not biased at all. [40:17] And these medical professionals, were those the same people that said that the COVID vaccine is [40:21] safe and effective? [40:23] That's right. [40:24] It's- we live in a wonderful time for bullshit. [40:27] It's like- because they don't bullshit you right to your face. [40:29] We do. [40:30] He had two brain surgeries, like major brain surgeries because he's having aneurysms. [40:35] I don't care who you are, that's probably going to do some damage. [40:38] It's going to leave some- [40:39] Aneurysms are a real problem. [40:40] That's a real thing. [40:41] Your brain is bleeding. [40:42] People die from aneurysms all the time. [40:45] See, the crazy thing is I never even knew about that. [40:48] How'd you not know about that? [40:49] That's nuts. [40:49] I knew about it. [40:50] Well, it speaks to how constrained our media environment is that even I had never heard that. [40:55] Right. [40:55] It was not a part of the narrative. [40:56] It's certainly not from the Democrats. [40:59] But yeah, he's- it was clearly- I just don't understand why they ran him in the first place. [41:05] The whole thing made no sense. [41:07] And then to have no primary and just stick Kamala in there, and then all of a sudden pretend that [41:11] she's the best thing ever. [41:13] And like this idea, like complete flip of her being the least popular vice president ever, [41:18] always sticking her foot in her mouth, always saying crazy shit. [41:22] Yeah, yeah. [41:22] How dare we say Merry Christmas? [41:24] Remember that one? [41:25] I do remember that. [41:25] Like, what the fuck is- what are you saying? [41:28] Yeah. [41:28] Like, joy is bad? [41:30] Merry Christmas is bad? [41:32] Legitimately, when the campaign consultants told me, [41:35] hey, we're going to hit this line because Kamala Harris came out in favor [41:39] of taxpayer-funded sex changes for illegal aliens. [41:43] And I remember thinking to myself, come on, you guys. [41:46] Like, she didn't really say that. [41:47] It's taken out of context. [41:49] And then I go and look at it. [41:50] I'm like, holy shit, she actually said that. [41:53] And she really was like the very worst version of what the Democrats were producing in 2020. [42:01] The thing is, they were all doing it because that was the incentives of the party. [42:05] Like, if you remember that debate where it was, do you want taxpayer-funded Medicare for illegal aliens? [42:12] Which, like, Medicare is the program to provide healthcare to the elderly that people pay into [42:17] for, like, you know, your entire working life. [42:19] You see your little Medicare tax statement. [42:22] And the idea that we were going to give taxpayer-funded healthcare to illegal aliens, [42:27] it was just insane. [42:28] It was a 90-10 issue, but their party in 2020 got kind of taken over by the radicals. [42:34] And I think, actually, maybe you're seeing a little bit of that happening right now where [42:39] it seems like the radical organizations, the nonprofits, the donors are pushing the party [42:45] in a direction that most of the voters haven't gone in. [42:48] Like, you ask why Joe Biden was the nominee, and I'll say something in defense of Joe Biden. [42:53] So, like, was he the most effective politician? [42:56] No. [42:56] Had he had two brain surgeries? [42:58] Yes. [42:58] And clearly had shown the negative signs of aging. [43:01] But he was kind of the only candidate, if you go back to 2020, who could hold together, like, [43:07] the reasonable middle-class black American in the Atlanta suburbs with whatever is going on on the [43:16] far left of the Democrat Party. [43:17] And I think this is sort of the issue their party has. [43:19] I mean, like, to be a candidate, our party has its own coalition problems. [43:23] And it's always tough in a two-party system to hold everybody together. [43:26] Like, I think about this a lot. [43:28] I think it's really tough on the Democrats because the core of their party, like, the [43:32] most important voting bloc in the Democratic Party is middle-class black Americans, socially [43:37] moderate to even socially conservative, maybe a little bit more economically populist on certain [43:43] business and tax issues. [43:44] You know, they don't want to give tax breaks to major corporations. [43:47] They also don't want to trans the kids. [43:49] That's the base of their party. [43:51] But then you've also got, like, the crazy people. [43:55] And you have to kind of hold that together. [43:57] I think the argument for Biden was he was one of the only people who could hold that [44:01] together, even though he was an awful politician in his own right, even before he was, like, old. [44:05] The president says this all the time. [44:07] Well, it's because he was Obama's vice president. [44:09] Exactly. [44:10] And, you know, he's established. [44:12] He's a known name. [44:13] And for the people that were kind of casuals who weren't really paying attention to politics, [44:17] like, he's a proven commodity. [44:18] That's right. [44:19] He doesn't read as a crazy person to the general electorate, even though, you know. [44:23] I got hairy legs. [44:27] When he would tell stories, like, I'll tell you about cord pop. [44:32] Like, what? [44:33] What the fuck is going on? [44:35] The thing I couldn't get over Biden is just bad staff work, man. [44:38] The way that he ate ice cream. [44:40] I mean, it's like, you know, we could bring some of this stuff up, but it's like they would [44:45] get him eating ice cream in the most ridiculous, suggestive way imaginable. [44:50] I never even paid attention to that. [44:52] Oh, my God. [44:52] I never saw the ice cream. [44:53] Such bad optics. [44:54] Okay. [44:54] So there's a clip, I want to say, from the 2016 campaign where somebody is campaigning in [45:02] Iowa. [45:03] And, like, it's the Iowa State Fair is, like, one of the main things you go to when you're [45:06] running for president. [45:07] And they give somebody a corndog and somebody eats the corndog. [45:12] And it becomes, like, a major news cycle for a long time. [45:16] And I will never forget, in 2024, in 2020- [45:19] This is how immature we are. [45:20] I know. [45:21] I know. [45:21] You got to have a little fun sometimes, though. [45:23] But in 2024, somebody is holding up a sign at the Iowa State Fair. [45:27] I think it may have been Vivek's, one of Vivek's events, Vivek Ramaswamy's events. [45:31] And the sign says, eat the corndogs, you coward. [45:34] And it's one of the best political signs I've ever seen. [45:38] That's funny. [45:40] That's funny. [45:41] Yeah. [45:42] You'd have to be a very manly man to be able to confidently eat a corndog. [45:47] I don't know that I could do it, Joe. [45:48] I eat them. [45:49] They're good. [45:50] Yeah. [45:50] They taste good. [45:51] Are you – I love corndogs. [45:52] I've been photographed. [45:53] You've been photographed eating a corndog? [45:55] I'm sure someone has. [45:56] I've eaten corndog. [45:59] The odds are – [45:59] Much more interesting life that I've led. [46:00] I try to eat my corndogs. [46:03] That's between me and my kitchen. [46:05] I'm not scared to eat a corndog. [46:07] I just think it's funny that people just – they're so afraid of being anything [46:12] that looks like a dick. [46:14] You can't – bananas, corndogs. [46:16] You've got to be careful when you're in politics. [46:19] This is an optics-based business here. [46:21] What are those popsicles? [46:22] The ones that – [46:23] Yeah, yeah. [46:24] Yeah. [46:25] Yeah, I get it. [46:26] I mean, but it's just like that's how crazy we are. [46:29] That's what weirds people out. [46:30] The way someone eats a hot dog. [46:32] That's like, okay. [46:33] Well, that's where we are, man. [46:35] Yeah. [46:38] It's – the difference between, you know, the crazies and the real, [46:45] reasonable Democrats is so stark to me. [46:49] And it's also – with the right, it's like we're always – the party's always defined by the [46:54] worst examples of the right. [46:56] That's right. [46:56] You know? [46:57] Yeah. [46:57] Or of the left. [46:59] You know, whatever it is, whether it's Patriot Front or whether it's Antifa. [47:04] Okay, so who do you think is the worst example of our side? [47:07] Like, who do you read about on our side and your reaction is, holy shit? [47:11] And don't say, J.D. Vance, this is going to be a very awkward interview. [47:13] No. [47:14] I'm screwed with you. [47:16] Well, the people that – you know, one of the things – I had James Tallarico on the [47:21] podcast. [47:22] And one of the things that I think he has a really good point about, even though I know [47:25] you're Catholic and you're very religious, putting the Ten Commandments in schools, [47:32] I don't think is the right way to do it. [47:34] And this is a guy, Tallarico, who was in seminary and is very Christian. [47:39] Mm-hmm. [47:40] And he just thinks that even though he believes in the Ten Commandments, [47:44] if you're just only representing the Christian faith in these schools, [47:48] you're forcing your religion into other people's lives and that this is going to push people away [47:56] from Christianity rather than encourage them to pursue it. [48:01] Yeah. [48:02] I mean, I think you'd ever want to force things on people. [48:05] And I do – I think one of the core Christian contributions to Western civilization is the [48:10] idea of freedom of religion. [48:12] It's actually very much a Christian idea because you recognize the dignity of each individual. [48:17] And part of recognizing that dignity is that each person has to find their own pathway to God. [48:21] You can't force this on anybody. [48:23] I don't think putting the Ten Commandments up in school is like forcing things on anybody. [48:28] But it's public schools. [48:29] So, I mean, if you're going to do that, why not put Buddhist scripture? [48:34] Why not put, you know, Muslim stuff? [48:38] You could make an argument why you should have a bunch of different religious tenets in schools. [48:43] I think in the Supreme Court there actually are a lot of different sort of historical, [48:48] cultural, legal documents that are up there. [48:50] And I want to say that Moses coming down with a tablet is one of them. [48:53] But I think there actually are other cultural, maybe even other religious elements of this, [48:58] like where you recognize that a big part of sort of the law-giving tradition in Western [49:03] civilization is some of these religious texts, not exclusively Christian religious texts. [49:10] Obviously, some Jewish, there's like an important contribution from the Muslim world in this. [49:15] So I guess I don't think of it as exclusionary while also recognizing that, you know, America [49:21] is a society. [49:23] Our founders were people who were very much influenced, even if they weren't Christians. [49:27] A lot of them, of course, were, but were very influenced by Christian culture [49:31] and articulating American law. [49:33] So my argument would be, even if you're not a Christian, like does seeing the Ten Commandments, [49:41] let me put it a slightly different way. [49:42] Does seeing the Ten Commandments force religion on a non-Christian child? [49:48] I mean, my argument would be no. [49:49] And I'd illustrate this by saying, well, there are all of these ways in which you actually [49:55] could try to force religion on a child, right? [49:57] Well, it's not the worst way to force religion on a child, but to have it and not represent any other, [50:02] really, this is Texas, by the way. [50:04] Sure. [50:04] So what he's talking about was that there's these Christian nationalists, these guys that [50:10] are very wealthy, that are trying to fund Christian schools and trying to defund public schools or [50:17] any other kind of religious school. [50:19] And what they want to do, and they passed this to get the Ten Commandments in all public school [50:24] classes. [50:25] And he's fundamentally opposed to that as a Christian, because he thinks it's going to force [50:29] people to have this in their class, and it's going to push people away from Christianity. [50:35] I mean, I understand the argument. [50:36] I just don't see it that way. [50:37] I mean, I guess if... [50:39] I kind of agree with him. [50:39] I hear you, but if I'm a non-religious student and I'm sitting in there and I see the Ten Commandments, [50:46] at the very least, I think I can appreciate it. [50:48] I mean, you know... [50:48] Okay, but what if you're a Hindu? [50:51] What if you're a Hindu? [50:52] What if you're a Muslim and you are seeing that represented, but not your faith? [50:59] Well... [50:59] It's a public school. [51:00] First of all, I think that you... [51:04] I mean, I'm pretty sure Muslims, I'm not hardly an expert on Islam, but I think all of the Abrahamic [51:09] faiths recognize the Ten Commandments as like a significant thing. [51:14] But I think if I was a Hindu looking at the Ten Commandments, I mean, again, it's hard for me to [51:18] say this, right, from my perspective, but I certainly went through an atheist phase in my youth. [51:23] And what I would see that as, as a non-religious person or a different religion, is I would say [51:28] this is like an important cultural element of the Western civilization, which is the foundation [51:35] of the classroom that I'm sitting in. And this idea that the law comes and is sort of above any man, [51:42] even if you don't believe in God yourself, I think that's like an important concept. I mean, [51:46] if you look at the Ten Commandments, probably eight of them or something that I would hope [51:50] that everybody would agree with, even if they're not themselves religious. So I guess, here's my view [51:56] on it. Like, I would not be offended if I sat in a classroom as a Christian or if my kids sat in a [52:02] classroom as a Christian and saw, you know, a religious text that wasn't Christian on the wall. [52:09] I would encourage them to see that. No, I'd encourage them to see that as a learning experience, [52:12] try to understand things. What if it was from the Quran? What are a bunch of [52:16] statements from the Quran? Well, I guess it depends on what it was, [52:18] right? If it's like something crazy, but no, I mean, if it's something that is like [52:24] culturally interesting, I guess I don't have a problem with my kid reading something. [52:29] The problem is it's mandated. Like, if you have a classroom and the teacher is Christian, [52:35] and the teacher wants to have it in their classroom, maybe that's one thing. But if you're [52:40] mandating that you're going to have the Ten Commandments in classrooms, that's a different [52:44] thing because now you're pushing Christianity on kids. And this is Tallarico's position. [52:50] And as a Christian, he's saying, I think this is going to push children away from Christianity. [52:55] So again, I understand what he's saying. I just, I think that part of living in a society [53:02] where you have different people with different perspectives, but you do have, I mean, [53:05] Christianity is the majority religion of the United States. It is the religion that was [53:10] extraordinary influential to our founding, to the constitutional principles. Again, freedom of [53:14] religion is itself not really a liberal concept. It was originally derived from a Christian idea about [53:22] free will and the dignity of the person. I think part of that is that you accept that you're going to [53:28] have exposure to different things. And if a state legislator in a majority Christian state wants, [53:36] it's not like they're putting the Ten Commandments in front of these kids and saying, [53:40] you have to read this and write it 500 times a day. They're exposing kids to something. And I'm [53:46] comfortable with kids being exposed to a lot of different things. I think that's part of living in [53:51] a society where there's a free exchange of ideas. And what I worry about with Telerica's sort of [53:56] perspective here is, is again, I'm not saying that I don't want kids to be exposed to anything [54:02] that is outside of the Christian canon. Like I actually want my kids exposed to things. I write [54:08] about this in the book that I think it's important to have a grounded enough faith that you can engage [54:12] with a lot of different ideas and still ultimately, you know, sort of hold on to your, to your Christian [54:17] faith. But isn't part of just living in a like pluralistic democracy that people are going to [54:25] be exposed to different things? And, you know, I would kind of put it on Telerica in a slightly [54:30] different way, that for a long time in this country, there were actually Supreme Court rulings [54:36] that said that you cannot pray in a school, even a student organization led by the students, or that you [54:43] cannot put the Ten Commandments up, even a teacher who chose to do it in their own classroom. And so, [54:48] I think you're always kind of trying to strike this balance, you know, given that we have the First [54:53] Amendment in this country, between allowing the practice of religious faith in public spaces, [54:58] and possibly forcing religion on other people. I think you have to strike that balance the right [55:04] way. I guess I just say, is that if the Ten Commandments being in a classroom is the thing [55:10] that you think is forcing religion on somebody, was he equally offended when the Ten Commandments [55:16] were like quite literally prohibited from being listed in a public building? [55:19] I don't know. I don't know if he was offended by that, or if he was opposed to that. But the idea of [55:26] being exposed to it is one thing, it being mandatory is another. And to mandate that in classrooms is a [55:33] different thing, because you're promoting, clearly promoting Christianity. And his position is that [55:38] promoting Christianity in that way is going to have an opposite effect on children. You're pushing [55:43] it on them. Instead, you're not just exposing it to them, you're pushing it on them. And especially [55:48] if you're pushing it on children who come from a household that has a different faith. [55:51] I guess I just think the balance in our country the last 30, 40 years has actually been much more [55:55] in the other direction, which is that we try to completely remove religion from the public square. [56:01] And I think that poses its own problems, because, you know, people practice their faith in all kinds of [56:07] ways. But don't you think that that's the responsibility of churches and synagogues and [56:12] wherever that, like, if you want, and in the community, if you want to promote religion, promote [56:16] it that way. But promoting in public schools should be just educational. And if you're in a religious [56:23] class and a class is teaching about religion, that's a different story. [56:27] Well, you're right. It's certainly the responsibility of churches and synagogues and mosques and so forth. [56:33] But I also think that, you know, the late Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist [56:39] sort of said this, that if your approach to religion in public life always and everywhere [56:46] is to push it out of the public square, then you're actually embracing a religion of your [56:51] own in the public square, which is secularism. You're just taking one religion and replacing it [56:55] with secularism. And I guess what I'm saying is I'm kind of comfortable with people of different [56:59] faiths sharing the public square together. But part of that is that if I'm in a 95% [57:05] Christian community and my local city council wants to put up a nativity display on Christmas Eve, [57:11] I'm okay with that. And that was actually, like, for a long time in our country, actually prohibited. [57:17] Yeah. And so what I think is that we got, we sort of put ourselves in this frame in this country where [57:22] we said every public display of religion is somehow illegitimate. But I mean, I don't know, [57:32] I try to live my faith in a way that's consistent across different spheres of my life. You know, [57:36] I don't preach to people. I don't like walk into the White House, tell my employees, you know, [57:40] you need to be, you need to follow Jesus as your Lord and Savior. I just try to live my life in a way [57:46] that hopefully makes people a little curious about what, you know, what motivates me and what [57:51] inspires me. But I also don't think that the expectation should be that we tell religious [57:55] people they're not allowed to be religious in the public square, because I think that's what we've [57:59] done over the last 30 or 40 years. I guess, you know, we can agree to disagree. I see the Texas [58:05] thing as an attempt to correct that. This episode is brought to you by Fox Nation. Real American [58:11] freestyle wrestling is exclusively on Fox Nation. Every month you get every feud, every match and [58:18] every belt. And if you're a fan of MMA, you don't want to miss it because RAF is featuring some of [58:23] the biggest UFC fighters and putting them against the best wrestlers in the world. On July 18th, [58:30] RAF 11 turns up the heat when Ben Askren returns to the mat to take on former UFC champion, [58:37] Bilal Muhammad. Then two undefeated RAF stars finally face off when Armand Saryukian and Colby [58:44] Covington settle their score in the main event. No cages, no gloves, no excuses. RAF 11, [58:51] live from Milwaukee, Saturday, July 18th, streaming exclusively on Fox Nation. Go to foxnation.com and sign up [58:59] today. Well, I think living by example is probably the best promotion of any good way to live your [59:06] life, whether it's Christianity or any other religion. I think that's definitely the way to do [59:10] it. But the point is that this is being promoted by very wealthy people who are Christian nationalists, [59:17] who want this to be... They want it to... What is going on here, Jamie? What do you got? Bible stories [59:24] become required reading in Texas public schools. Yeah, see? Well, now you're taking it to another [59:31] level. So this is June 26th. This is very recently. That is that kind of thinking and that kind of [59:43] mindset is what bothers me the most about some Republicans. I see what you mean. And then there's [59:51] the... There's people that, again, they live their life in a very beautiful way and they follow the [59:59] teachings of Jesus Christ and they're very admirable and I think that's very attractive and it makes [1:00:05] people very curious about that religion. I think that brings people to Christ and I think it brings [1:00:09] people to religion. Sure. But then there's people like... Did you read that report that came from [1:00:18] at the start of the Iran war where there was a guy who was an officer, a non-commissioned officer, [1:00:25] who was at a briefing and this guy came in and was explaining to them that they didn't need to be [1:00:35] afraid because this war was important because Trump had been anointed by Jesus Christ to bring about his [1:00:43] return. And the way they were going to... Jesus is going to return is by bombing Iran. I did not see [1:00:50] that report. That sounds pretty far out there to me. This is the kind of right-wing... I see. [1:00:56] ...thinking. So here it is. Military commander tells troops bombing Iran is part of God's divine plan. [1:01:02] So we started getting calls in the wee hours of Saturday morning from people saying their commanders [1:01:06] were just jubilant about this, trying to tell people, don't worry, it's all part of God's plan. [1:01:10] They promised a 200 mile long river that is four and a half feet deep filled with nothing but the [1:01:18] blood that their weaponized version of Jesus will spill at the battle of Armageddon, Weinstein said. [1:01:24] What was the one... There was an article where the guy was explaining the actual quotes that the [1:01:31] the one officer was telling him, the one commander. Yeah, but it's not that. It was very specific. [1:01:40] It was very specific what he said. I mean, for what it's worth, my attitude on this stuff is, [1:01:49] I mean, first of all, as a Christian, you sort of believe that everything is part of God's plan, [1:01:54] even things that are ultimately very terrible. I mean, you kind of have to make a combination. [1:01:58] Let me read the quote. He urged us to tell our troops that this was all part of God's divine plan, [1:02:03] and he specifically referenced numerous citations out of the book of Revelations referring to Armageddon [1:02:09] and the imminent return of Jesus Christ. He said that President Trump had been anointed by Jesus [1:02:14] to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to earth. [1:02:19] Okay. [1:02:20] If I'm in that meeting, I'm like, hit the brakes. Hit the brakes. What? [1:02:26] That's where you need some of the psychedelics we talked about at the last Joe Rogan, [1:02:30] J.D. Vance conversation. That would definitely help. [1:02:32] That would definitely help. [1:02:33] I mean, my response, first of all, obviously, do I endorse that? No. Do I think that it's important [1:02:40] that people rein it in a little bit? Because I'm sure you're right. There were a lot of troops there, [1:02:43] probably a lot of Christian troops there were like, I'm not sure this is exactly right. [1:02:47] Right. But the important point is, I think it's important as a Christian leader, as Christians, [1:02:54] period. One of the things we have to do is just have humility in the face of God's plan. There's [1:02:59] a lot that we don't understand. There's a lot that we don't get. And I think especially on matters of [1:03:04] war and peace, the approach that I try to take is you try to make the best decisions that you can. [1:03:10] You hope that you're on God's side. You don't assume that God has taken your side. That's a very [1:03:15] famous Abraham Lincoln quote. And that's the attitude that I take. So for that, what I would [1:03:21] encourage that NCO to say is, you know what? God is in control. We don't know what's going to happen, [1:03:26] but let's pray and try to do as good of a job as we can, trusting in God. If I was speaking to [1:03:32] a group of Christian troops, that's what I would say. But you're speaking to a group of troops. [1:03:36] Sure. You don't know if they're Christian. [1:03:38] Yeah. I mean, you're essentially letting these people know that you believe that Trump was [1:03:44] anointed by Jesus to bomb Iran so that Jesus can come back to earth. So that Jesus can come back in [1:03:49] a fire of Armageddon. If I was there, I'd be like, can I get the fuck out of here? [1:03:53] Yeah. No, I hear you, man. I hear you. Look, yes. And that is the first that I have ever heard of this [1:03:59] particular story. How have you not heard of this and Biden's two brain surgeries? Apparently, I live in a [1:04:04] bunker, man. How do you not know about these things? That's crazy. [1:04:10] Okay. Here's the other thing I'll say is, having heard about this for the first time just now, [1:04:17] to your point about the media, I do think it's possible, let's be honest, that whatever that [1:04:24] dude said, maybe it was good, maybe it was bad, has been misreported by the press. [1:04:29] It's possible. [1:04:30] I always have a filter on this stuff. I don't automatically assume. [1:04:34] It's also possible that this is the other thing. He said the commander supposedly had [1:04:37] a big grin on his face when he said all this, which made his message seem even more crazy. [1:04:42] And I think that's, again, I don't think anybody should have war is sometimes necessary, [1:04:51] but it's never a good thing. And I think that's like a fundamental Christian principle is there [1:04:55] are just wars, there are necessary wars, but war is always something that you try to avoid. [1:05:00] Right. But saying that this is what's being referenced in the book of Revelation. [1:05:04] Yeah, dude, I think that's, I think that is nuts. I also don't know that that, you know, [1:05:08] I want to be, I want to confirm that this person actually said that before teeing off on it, [1:05:13] because what that sounds to me is like somebody butchering or misrepresenting something that, [1:05:21] you know, somebody that I know might have said. [1:05:23] Quite possible. [1:05:24] Quite possible. [1:05:25] You got to be skeptical about this. That's all I'm saying. [1:05:27] Also quite possible that you got a really loony [1:05:28] guy who is a Christian nationalist, who is a commander and who is in this position where [1:05:34] he's actually excited because he does think that this is a holy war and this is going to bring back [1:05:41] Jesus. [1:05:41] Well, it's certainly possible. I mean, America's got 330 million people and we've got a lot of [1:05:45] people who believe in a lot of things, but I can assure you that we don't encourage people to talk like [1:05:51] that. And again, all I can do as a Christian leader, I'll look into that story certainly, [1:05:55] but all I can do as a Christian leader is talk about how I think about questions of war and peace, [1:05:59] which is we try to do the right thing. We try to figure out what it is that is consistent with [1:06:07] Christ's moral teaching and we try to, you know, comport our foreign policy with the cause of justice. [1:06:13] And that's what we try to do, recognizing it's always going to be imperfect, but I don't think [1:06:17] that we should ever have an attitude towards war. Like, this is a great thing. I'm going to grin [1:06:22] and smile about that. All I'm saying is I'm skeptical that anybody took that approach because [1:06:26] the media misrepresents everything. [1:06:27] Do you think that this, the way that you just described it, aligns with our campaign in Iran? [1:06:33] Well, I think that the goal is certainly good, which is to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear [1:06:40] weapon. And I think that there are obviously a lot of questions about how best to achieve that. [1:06:47] There's both a short term and a long term piece of it. I think the short term piece of it is [1:06:52] effectively what's already been done, which is you destroy the nuclear sites and you destroy [1:06:56] and eliminate the ability to rebuild the nuclear sites. I think there's a longer term thing, [1:07:01] which is where like a lot of the debate is focused on right now, which is that building [1:07:05] a nuclear program is hard, but it's not impossible. And it's expensive, but it's actually not even [1:07:10] that expensive. If you look at, I mean, you could go on YouTube right now and find out how to [1:07:14] build an atomic bomb. So part of our Iran policy, and this is where I get frustrated with the people [1:07:19] who say you should never negotiate with Iran. Part of our Iran policy is like solving the long term [1:07:26] problem that if we could create the sort of circumstance where Iran would commit, not just [1:07:32] to not have a nuclear weapon right now, but over the long term to not try to rebuild that capacity. [1:07:37] Like, yeah, I think that that is a good and valuable thing. [1:07:42] If it was your call, would you have done exactly the same thing? [1:07:45] Well, what did the president said publicly that JD was less enthusiastic about it, [1:07:52] I think was the exact phrase that he used. I mean, my attitude towards this man, as you know, [1:07:57] is the vice president, I'm not a public commentator. Like my job is to give the best advice I can to [1:08:03] the president of the United States. I think he's said a little bit about what that advice was. [1:08:06] But once the president makes a decision, so long as I think that it's, you know, legal and ethical [1:08:13] and all that stuff, and I certainly think whether you agree or disagree with it, what we've done has [1:08:16] been has been legal. My attitude towards it is, I try to make it as successful as possible. [1:08:23] And I've got friends, of course, I think, you know, you've expressed some skepticism of this, [1:08:27] I've got a lot of friends, both in private and public who expressed skepticism of this who say, [1:08:32] well, this is terrible, we disagree with the decision, et cetera, et cetera. I'm not a public [1:08:36] commentator. My approach to this is not to Monday morning quarterback a decision that was made three [1:08:42] months ago. My approach to it is to try to make it as successful as possible, which is why I poured [1:08:46] my heart and soul into these negotiations, which is why I've tried to make that goal, Iran not having [1:08:52] a nuclear weapon, something that's not true both, not just now, but is true in the long term. And that's [1:08:57] the way that I try to approach it. So what is going on with Iran where it seems like [1:09:03] the president keeps saying that a deal has been reached, negotiations have been successful, [1:09:10] and then it all falls apart and we start bombing them again? [1:09:13] Yeah. So how long do we have here? Because this is a long conversation. [1:09:17] We have as much time as you need. [1:09:18] So I have to explain a couple of things in the background so you sort of fully appreciate, [1:09:24] people fully appreciate what's going on here. So number one, it's a bit of a simplification, [1:09:28] but you have two elements within the Iranian system. You have, and you sometimes hear hawkish [1:09:33] Americans say this, that they're all crazy people. They want to bring about the 12th Imam and the [1:09:38] apocalypse and all that stuff. There are people in Iran who believe that. They're also pragmatists. [1:09:43] You've got the crazy people, you've got the pragmatists, okay? So when we struck this MOU, [1:09:48] and really what the MOU says, and it was misrepresented more than almost anything that I've ever worked [1:09:53] on in public life, what it says is Iran is going to open the Strait of Hormuz, the violence is going [1:09:59] to stop, and then we're going to negotiate to see if we can come to a broader deal on the long-term [1:10:04] nuclear issue. That's what we wanted. And what the Iranians wanted, of course, was long-term economic [1:10:09] and sanctions relief. Now, here's the problem with where we are right now. And I guess my summary view, [1:10:18] Joe, is that I, of course, can't predict the future. I don't know exactly where this is going to go. [1:10:23] But I think, fundamentally, we are on the right trajectory. It's just going to be really messy, [1:10:28] and there's going to be a lot of stops and starts. So what happens? The first week after we sign the [1:10:32] MOU, we get 20 million barrels a day of oil out of the Strait of Hormuz. That's what it was before the [1:10:37] war. The price of oil comes way down. And there are elements, the hardliners in the Iranian system [1:10:43] kind of freak out a little bit. They're like, oh, shit. Did we just give away our major leverage [1:10:48] points? Screw nuclear weapons. We just gave away this so in this MOU. And so there was this kind [1:10:53] of freak out in their system. So they shot at a couple ships. We responded. I think that's [1:10:58] entirely appropriate, of course. If they're going to shoot at ships, we are going to shoot at the [1:11:02] people who are shooting at the ships, or we're going to destroy the facilities that they're using [1:11:05] to shoot at ships. So that happens. Okay. And then the Iranians are like, oh, no, fine. You're right. [1:11:11] We shouldn't have been shooting at ships. So then they come back to the table. And there's a few more [1:11:14] days of negotiation. And then the phase they're in right now is the hardliners have really, [1:11:20] really reacted strongly to all the oil that's coming out of the Strait of Hormuz. And they've [1:11:25] basically said, we're going to try to shut this thing down. We're scared about losing our leverage. [1:11:30] Now, the pragmatists in their system are saying, this was a mistake. Let's keep on talking. And again, [1:11:35] do I know how this is ultimately going to shake out? Of course I don't. But what we're doing [1:11:40] is a delicate diplomatic dance where we're using economic leverage points. We're using carrots and [1:11:46] sticks. We're trying to talk to the pragmatists. And then, of course, when they commit acts of [1:11:50] violence, we're responding to it. And all those things are happening simultaneously to get us on [1:11:54] a better trajectory. Now, that said, yes, right now there's they're shooting right now. Last night, [1:12:00] they shot at some ships. But with all that said, is their nuclear program still destroyed? Yes. [1:12:07] Are the Straits not necessarily fully pre-war traffic? But are we getting enough oil and gas [1:12:13] out of the Strait of Hormuz to prevent a worldwide energy crisis? Yes. And all of these things are [1:12:19] happening in the context of the broader negotiation over the nuclear program. You never know where this [1:12:25] is ultimately going to end up. But that's where we are. And then can I just say one other thing about [1:12:29] this? Because there are people, you know, you see Mike Pence, who's sort of a super hawk, my predecessor, [1:12:36] who say this. There are people, you know, who are super hawkish in the American system who have [1:12:42] attacked the deal and frankly, in some ways have tried to derail the deal. And what I always say to [1:12:48] those people is, what is your proposal? What is your actual argument? So just take the Strait of Hormuz, [1:12:54] like the narrowest, but in some ways the most important part of this back and forth right now. [1:12:59] Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterway. To the extent you shut it down, you shut down 25% of [1:13:04] the world's energy supply. Okay. Joe, you could take $100,000 and go buy a bunch of drones on the [1:13:11] black market and post yourself on an island in the Strait of Hormuz or near it, and you could fire [1:13:17] drones at those ships. Okay. Now, what does that mean? Some oil and gas is still going to get out [1:13:23] because some ships and some ship captains are going to say, screw you. Now, the United States [1:13:28] can help that, right? We can shoot down some of those drones, we can shoot down some of those missiles, [1:13:32] and so we can facilitate the flow of traffic. But the people who are like, you cannot negotiate with [1:13:37] the Iranians, the reason why that's fundamentally idiotic is because so long as you have some person [1:13:45] who's willing to fire off a few cheap drones, you're going to have some ship captains who say, [1:13:50] no, no, no, we're not willing to do this. So we got to kind of use all tools at our disposal. [1:13:55] The military is one tool, but diplomacy is another tool. And I'm very frustrated by the Americans and [1:14:01] frankly, by people in other countries who are like, you cannot negotiate with the Iranians. [1:14:06] Well, then what is your proposal to get people to stop shooting at ships in the Strait of Hormuz? [1:14:11] You can bomb them, you can take away their radar, you can take away some of their drones and some [1:14:15] of their missiles, but it's just too easy to fire at ships in the straits. So you've got to actually [1:14:21] be willing to talk and to try to figure out the problem. What is their proposal, the people who [1:14:26] think you shouldn't negotiate with Iran? I think that their proposal is to bomb and bomb and bomb. [1:14:31] And the honest view, Joe, is that they do not actually have a solution. If you actually ask them, [1:14:38] what do you want us to do? What is the goal that you're trying to achieve? You know, they'll say [1:14:43] things like, we'll just bomb them to oblivion. Okay, we can do that. We can drop a lot of bombs. [1:14:49] But what does that accomplish if there's still a crazy person who's still unwilling to shoot a few [1:14:53] drones at the Strait of Hormuz? What the president has done, I think very, very capably, is said, [1:14:59] we're going to use military force in this situation when it's connected to something we're trying to [1:15:04] achieve. So if you shoot at ships, we're going to shoot at the facilities at which you used to shoot [1:15:10] at the ships. But we're not just going to do something open-ended indefinitely. We're not just [1:15:14] going to bomb and bomb and bomb. We're going to try to use our military force as one of the many tools [1:15:19] that we have to solve the problem. And obviously, like I'm biased, but I think that's exactly the [1:15:23] right approach. I actually, I think you have to read between the lines a little bit, because if you look [1:15:28] at what Mike Pence or some of the conservative hawks, like people who voted for us, but have been very [1:15:32] critical of me, very critical of the administration, if you actually look at what they're proposing, [1:15:39] they just want the military campaign to go on forever, and they can't actually identify what [1:15:44] it is that they're trying to accomplish. None of them can identify what it is they're trying to [1:15:47] accomplish. And I read two things between the lines. I think some of them want us to accomplish a [1:15:54] complete change in the government of Iran, to topple the clerics and to replace those clerics with [1:16:01] somebody who's, you know, much friendlier. But like, look, what is our experience with doing that? [1:16:06] It's not good. It's not good, right? And so like, if the Iranian people want to rise up and change [1:16:12] their government, that's up to them. But we're not going to send 150,000 ground troops in order to [1:16:17] accomplish a change in a regime, unless the people on the ground themselves want to accomplish that [1:16:25] outcome. Now, we're not going to send the troops in regardless, but like to propose sending in the [1:16:30] troops, you're basically saying that the US military should do the job for the Iranian people. [1:16:38] We're not in that business anymore. We're just not. And then I think a second outcome that people are, [1:16:44] whether they're aware of it or not, is what I call the Libya outcome. So if you look at the end result [1:16:49] of our Libya policy after Gaddafi was killed by the Obama administration, by the way, again, a very [1:16:55] stupid decision, what happened? Libya basically turned into a failed state. You had a refugee crisis, [1:17:01] you had people pouring into Europe, pouring into other parts of Asia, other parts of Africa. [1:17:06] You had a lot of violence, a lot of terrorism come from that. I do think that there are people [1:17:11] who would like that to be the outcome in Iran. But then I say, again, what is in our interest? [1:17:16] How is it in the United States' interest to have 94 million desperate people flooding into Europe, [1:17:21] flooding into the United States, to have the terrorist infrastructure that can get established [1:17:28] when you fan terrorists all over the world? We've run this experiment before. And so our policy right [1:17:35] now, what we're trying to accomplish is get the straits open, ensure the free flow of oil and gas, [1:17:41] obviously want to keep the Iranians from having a nuclear weapons program, and using the tools of [1:17:46] diplomacy and military power to accomplish that. And Libya failing and the collapse of Libya is [1:17:55] a lot of what's fueled the migrant crisis in Europe as well, correct? Exactly. That in Syria, [1:18:01] another failed state that was created by bad Middle Eastern policy. So there is precedent for the United [1:18:06] States doing this. Every time that it has happened, it's caused a refugee crisis, it's caused a spike in [1:18:12] terrorism. And it's also not incidentally to the moral considerations, it's led to a lot of innocent [1:18:17] civilian deaths. Now, what was the talk about, I think the number was like $300 billion in concessions [1:18:25] to Iran to rebuild? Yeah. Yeah. So this is another just bullshit argument that the critics made against [1:18:32] the deal. And again, like I, just to back up a little bit, this is my own little hobby horse, but [1:18:37] look, we, the coalition that Donald Trump piloted to the 2024 election campaign, it was a landslide. [1:18:45] We won seven states. It was historic. Nobody, certainly no Republican had actually led a coalition [1:18:52] like that, at least since the days of Ronald Reagan. So like literally before I was alive. Okay. [1:18:57] So Donald Trump wins this great coalition and look, it's got, man, it's got hawks and it's got people who [1:19:05] hate foreign wars. Okay. It's got people like you and people like Tucker. It's also got people like [1:19:10] Mark Levin and others. Okay. I just accept that as a reality. That's part of the coalition. [1:19:16] I don't say that anybody is welcome or unwelcome. I say that if you're willing to sort of help us, [1:19:20] you're going to get a lot what you want. You don't get everything that you want. What has really annoyed [1:19:25] me about the hawkish side of this thing is they attack any effort to negotiate. They attack the [1:19:35] president. They attack me personally. Donald Trump is betraying me. Wait a second. If you want to have [1:19:42] like a hawkish policy towards Iran, the idea that Donald Trump has betrayed you because he's also [1:19:47] trying to negotiate to get a good outcome for the American people is crazy. And so you've seen a lot of [1:19:52] these people completely flip on him. And that brings me to the $300 billion point. What we did [1:20:00] with the MOU is we actually worked not just with the Iranians, but with the Gulf Arab states. [1:20:06] What is the term MOU? What does it stand for? [1:20:08] Sorry, memorandum of understanding. It's the basic structure that we set up for the negotiation. [1:20:14] So what happened here is, okay, so people sort of think of the Middle East as like Iran versus [1:20:19] Israel. I think a lot of people do. There's also a massive number of Gulf states that are really [1:20:26] important, good allies to the United States. You know, they and Israel don't always see eye to eye, [1:20:30] but we're obviously very close to both Israel and to the Gulf states. And the Gulf states actually came [1:20:36] to us and said, you know what? If the Iranians are willing, really willing to change their behavior, [1:20:42] we'd like to invest in rebuilding their country. Now, whether they change their behavior is something [1:20:48] that's going to be determined over the long term, right? We want to see real changes. We want to see [1:20:52] them to stop funding terrorist organizations. And also, of course, none of that money comes from [1:20:57] the United States. But if Iran's biggest enemies in the region are saying, we'd like to invest if [1:21:05] they've changed their behavior, would the United States let us? Would we release the sanctions that [1:21:09] would make it possible for the UAE and Saudi Arabia and other countries to invest in Iran? [1:21:14] Our attitude was, well, isn't that a victory for us? If Iran's biggest enemies see that they have [1:21:19] changed themselves so much that they're willing to invest in the Iranian economy, isn't that like [1:21:25] the definition of a win-win? And then you had all these people saying, no, no, no, no, you can't give [1:21:30] them $300 billion. It's like, we're not talking about giving them $300 billion. We're talking about [1:21:35] letting other countries invest in Iran if Iran has changed the way that it treats the Gulf Arab countries. [1:21:41] It's fundamentally between them, meaning the Iranians and the Gulf Arab countries. [1:21:45] So there's this line in the MOU that basically says that if Iran meets all of its obligations, [1:21:51] then we will permit other countries to invest in Iran. That's it. And that, like, again, the hawks [1:21:59] attacked us and misrepresented this and lied about it and said the Trump administration is going to [1:22:04] give the Iranians $300 billion. And it's totally fake. It's completely made up. And it was done [1:22:11] purely in order to politically tank the negotiation. So there's been this interesting dynamic here where, [1:22:18] as we've been trying to negotiate, there have been these extraordinarily well-funded efforts to tank the [1:22:25] negotiation, to prevent us from reaching a deal, to change American public opinion, which, by the way, [1:22:31] if you look at the public opinion, people love the idea of actually getting to a final resolution on [1:22:37] this thing. Americans do not, they're not game for long-term, you know, open-ended regime change [1:22:44] wars in the Middle East. They're okay with us using the military to accomplish discrete objectives. [1:22:50] They're not okay with open-ended obligations. [1:22:53] What do you think the motivation of the hawks is? Do you think this is, are they influenced by defense [1:23:00] contractors? Are they influenced, what is, what's the reason why they're so keen on continuing to bomb? [1:23:07] I think with any big group of people you have, you know, you have a diversity of opinions. So, [1:23:13] so sure. I'm sure that, you know, you have people who are influenced by defense contractors. You know, [1:23:20] there's a lot of talk about how, how much is the Israeli government influencing American politics. [1:23:25] And there are certainly certain people within the Israeli government who hate the deal. And we, [1:23:29] we, we see exact evidence. There was a time story that came out yesterday [1:23:35] that basically there are certain influencers in America who are being paid in order to attack the [1:23:41] deal. I think some of it, it's just pure political ideology, right? It's foreign policy perspectives [1:23:48] that is, that are much different from mine. They think that America should just, that we can basically, [1:23:54] you can wave a magic wand with the military and accomplish whatever you want. And you know, [1:23:58] it's, it's not that simple. You actually have to have a very clear objective. Military power [1:24:03] can accomplish a clear objective, but you've got to have that clear objective. You can't just say, [1:24:08] we're going to bomb until something good happens. That never works. The United States has tried that [1:24:12] before. So I think it's a combination of things, but I definitely think you have seen this very [1:24:19] discreet, extremely well-funded campaign to try to derail the negotiation and try to derail the deal. [1:24:27] And you know, there was, again, there's this time article that came out yesterday, a friend sent it to [1:24:31] me. It's like worth reading because it lists a bunch of people who have quite literally been paid [1:24:39] by a former Trump campaign person who was himself paid by certain elements within the Israeli government. [1:24:47] And those people are attacking me viciously for quite literally trying to accomplish the negotiation [1:24:52] objective that the president set for the country. So what is their position? Like, [1:24:56] are they're attacking you? How? Oh, it's, it's social media posts. It's, you know, [1:25:01] they're leaking to reporters. They're attacking me obsessively saying that we should not be negotiating [1:25:07] with Iran. We should just keep the military campaign going indefinitely. And that is, [1:25:12] that is their explicit position and coming after me saying that, you know, people have come out for [1:25:16] me and say that I'm influenced by Qatar, that I'm influenced by foreign governments, that, you know, [1:25:22] I take my marching orders from Tucker Carlson. And there's just so much bullshit out there when [1:25:27] what I'm actually trying to do is accomplish what the president United States told me to accomplish, [1:25:32] which is a settlement of this that accomplishes our objectives. Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon. [1:25:38] We have the free flow of oil and gas. And like, I should be clear, you know, like, I don't actually [1:25:47] mind. I don't mind that the, you know, let's say certain elements of the Israeli government want to [1:25:56] criticize the deal or have disagreements about the deal. I don't even mind an effort to try to influence, [1:26:03] you know, foreign governments try to influence the United States all the time. You know, Israel does [1:26:08] it, other countries do it. It's just sort of the nature of the beast. What bothers me is actually when [1:26:14] Americans allow, meaning American leadership, allows that influence to affect their judgment [1:26:22] and to affect what they are advocating for. That's what really bothers me. People are always going to [1:26:28] try to influence the United States of America, whether they're allies of ours or whether they're enemies of [1:26:32] ours. But again, when I open up the pages of Time magazine, and I see that there's a literal foreign [1:26:39] influence campaign being funded to tank the very deal that I was pursuing. And oh, by the way, many [1:26:45] of the people who were receiving that money were actually attacking me in completely dishonest ways. [1:26:51] You know, my response to that is, well, go to hell. I'm going to do what I have to do for the American [1:26:55] people. I represent Americans first. And that's the way that I've tried to do this job. And I, you know, [1:27:02] Joe, the crazy thing is, I'm like, people don't realize this. I'm actually in this, you know, there's [1:27:09] this massive pro-Israel, anti-Israel debate in the United States of America. I'm like the reasonable [1:27:16] moderate. And I think that's what so many people don't realize is, you know, I've been accused of being [1:27:22] an anti-Semite. I've been accused of... For what reason? [1:27:27] Quite literally for...I've been accused of trying to, I guess, some people say that I've insulted the [1:27:32] Jewish religion, which is insane. Like, I have a ton of respect for the Jewish religion. I mean, [1:27:38] if you talk about... But what specifically did you say? [1:27:40] I don't know. I've never heard a good compelling argument for why I'm an anti-Semite, even though [1:27:46] I've been accused of being an anti-Semite by many people. But what I say to these guys is, [1:27:55] look at public opinion. Look at the way young Republicans versus Republicans over the age of 65 [1:28:02] approach this issue. Like, right now, Israel is losing the public opinion battle in the United [1:28:09] States of America. It is a simple and obvious fact. Donald Trump has said that publicly. It's a [1:28:14] simple and obvious fact. Why do you think that is? Well, let me finish this point. [1:28:18] Okay, go ahead. Okay. My attitude towards this is, [1:28:22] Israel is an ally. Like France or like the United Kingdom, we're going to have disagreements with [1:28:28] them. We're going to have agreements with them. There are areas where we're going to have similar [1:28:31] interests and areas where our interests are going to diverge. So my approach to this is to say, [1:28:36] you know what, when we're partnered, great, let's work together. And we're not, let's just be honest [1:28:41] about it. And I, for that, people attack me for being an anti-Semite or anti-Israel, [1:28:47] and they don't see the writing on the wall that I'm actually just the guy advocating for a normal [1:28:53] relationship with a normal country that's based around shared interest as opposed to based around, [1:28:59] you know, something else. So why is Israel losing American public opinion? [1:29:09] Well, the narrative is that Israel has a very disproportionate effect on American politics. [1:29:15] Yeah, I see that. I see that narrative. I mean, I actually think that they, [1:29:22] look, do they try to influence American politics? Yes. But like I said earlier, [1:29:25] a lot of other countries do. I think some- [1:29:27] To the extent that Israel does though? [1:29:29] I think some are better at it than others. I think the Israels are definitely more effective [1:29:32] at it than most, but I wouldn't say that they're the only effective country by any means that tries [1:29:36] to influence American politics. I just think you have to be self-aware about it. I mean, [1:29:40] why wouldn't you? It's a country of 9 million people. We have 330 million people. And so, [1:29:45] of course, they're going to try to persuade Americans. They're going to try to move Americans [1:29:50] in one direction or another. I think that's just the nature of the beast. [1:29:53] But it's more than that. The concern is that they're spying on American politicians and that [1:29:59] they're, there's concerns about funding. There's concerns about influence. There's concerns about [1:30:06] whether or not politicians are, whether they're aligned with Israel or whether they're aligned [1:30:12] with the United States first. Well, there's certainly, like, I definitely get those concerns, [1:30:18] but my sense is that the way that all foreign influence works in the United States is people [1:30:25] try to manipulate American public opinion. And then from manipulating a public opinion, [1:30:29] they try to get the outcomes that they want. And this thing is a very good example of this. [1:30:33] So, you know, like we know, I'm telling you beyond a reasonable doubt, we know that the negotiation [1:30:42] strategy that the president has asked us to pursue, and again, with limitations, like when the [1:30:48] Iranians hit ships, the president has been willing to knock the hell out of the Iranians in response. [1:30:52] This is not just a negotiation. It's negotiation, it's military, it's all these things. [1:30:56] But I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that there have been people within the Israeli government who [1:31:01] are trying to like actually shift us away from that policy because they want to continue the military [1:31:09] campaign. And by the way, like there are people within their government that I love, I have good [1:31:13] relationships with, I hope, and I don't think that they're part of this. I mean, you know, [1:31:18] the ambassador of Israel to the United States I think is actually a really good guy. Obviously, [1:31:23] he cares about Israel first, I care about America first. But there are some people within their [1:31:28] system we know beyond a shadow of a doubt who are manipulating and trying to change American public [1:31:35] opinion to keep the war going on indefinitely. Again, not towards any objective, but just indefinitely. [1:31:42] So like, does it happen? Yes. But I guess what I would say to the Americans who sort of see this [1:31:48] and are frustrated by it, my attitude would be, you should be frustrated at American leaders who [1:31:54] are, you know, persuaded by this, affected by this. Countries are going to do what countries do. [1:32:00] I really don't, it doesn't bother me that Qatar tries to influence the United States of America, [1:32:03] and they do. I like a lot of the Qataris just like I like a lot of the Israelis. It doesn't bother me [1:32:08] that Israel tries to do this. It frankly doesn't even bother me that Russia or some of these other [1:32:12] countries do it. It's just the nature of being a political leader in 2026. What does bother me [1:32:20] is when those operations, those influence campaigns actually affect American political judgment, [1:32:27] because they shouldn't, because we should be thinking what is in the best interest of the United [1:32:31] States of America. Do you think that Israel is affecting American political judgment? [1:32:38] Um, I mean, I certainly think that there are a lot of talking points and there are a lot of arguments [1:32:52] that make their way into American political discourse. I think there are a lot of social [1:32:57] media campaigns that definitely influence Americans and affect Americans. Do I think that it's been [1:33:03] dispositive on any particular issue? Like, like, I think that's a much more difficult question. [1:33:08] Do you think that we would have started this war in Iran without the influence of Israel? [1:33:14] I think the president, completely separate from any influence from Israel, believes very strongly, [1:33:21] and again, I agree with this, that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. [1:33:24] Right, but after we bombed them in June, right, that was the initial attack, right? [1:33:30] June of last year. Yeah. Yeah. Right. Do you think he would have continued with the most recent [1:33:37] campaign if it wasn't for the influence of Israel? Yes. Yes, I do. Really? I do. Yeah. [1:33:42] Look, I mean, I think, again, and I see this, and I see it even from people that are in our [1:33:50] coalition, and this would be my flip side, to the hawks who have been attacking me or the president [1:33:55] mercilessly over negotiation, I would sort of turn this back on some of the doves or some of the [1:34:00] realists who have been attacking the president of the United States. [1:34:03] The doves? Those are the peace people? [1:34:05] Peace people. [1:34:06] That's what you call them, the doves? [1:34:07] Hawks and doves. You've never heard that phrase? [1:34:08] I've heard hawks. I've heard hawks. I don't think I've ever heard doves. [1:34:12] Hawks and pigeons, hawks and... I don't know. [1:34:15] I think it's more doves than peace, right? [1:34:16] Doves is good, right? So what I think a lot of people... I've heard this argument [1:34:23] is this idea that Donald Trump was sort of... I've even heard people say he was blackmailed into this [1:34:30] by the Israelis. A lot of people think that. [1:34:32] That's not true, dude. It's just not true. I've seen the decision making up close. Again, [1:34:36] whether you agree or disagree with our negotiation, or whether you agree or disagree with the decision [1:34:41] to launch the campaign Epic Fury to begin with, the idea that Donald Trump is being blackmailed is [1:34:51] crazy to me. Because again, I see the way that he makes decisions. I see the way that he processes [1:34:56] this stuff. The idea that he picks up the phone with anybody and says, hey, I'm going to take [1:35:00] orders from you, no. That's just not how Donald Trump operates. [1:35:03] Can you understand, though, why people would come to that conclusion, especially because of the [1:35:09] Epstein files? [1:35:10] What do you mean? [1:35:12] Well, the Epstein files were supposed to be released, and there was a tremendous amount of resistance [1:35:18] to those files being released. That's concerned a lot of people. Because if you're talking about [1:35:24] very wealthy, powerful people that were engaged in crimes. [1:35:27] I see. You're basically saying the fear is that whatever's in the Epstein files [1:35:33] was used to blackmail the administration into doing the Iran thing. [1:35:38] Or at the very least, the people that were involved in the Epstein files that didn't want them coming [1:35:45] out had undue influence. [1:35:48] Well, again, say this with all candor. We absolutely screwed up the comms of the Epstein files. [1:35:56] Like we just did. But do I think the reason we screwed up the comms is because we were trying [1:36:00] to hide something? No. I think the reason we screwed up the comms of the Epstein files is one, [1:36:06] you know, Pam said, Pam Bondi said, the client list is on my desk, right? [1:36:11] Well, see, they had binders. [1:36:13] They were standing in front. [1:36:15] 100%, right. But those binders were largely documents that had already been released, [1:36:19] right? So here's... Let me try to defend... [1:36:21] Well, what was the purpose of that performative display of the Epstein files? And she was saying [1:36:28] there's tens of thousands of hours of film. [1:36:31] I don't know what the purpose of it was, but I know that the effect of it was to make people [1:36:37] mistrust the entire effort. And what I think was happening... Look, I know Pam. I like Pam. I don't [1:36:42] think there's anything malicious going on. I think Pam was trying to respond to the political moment. [1:36:48] I think she overstated what we had and what we didn't have. And I think that she, you know, [1:36:53] got roasted for it publicly by a lot of people, including me. Like, you know, [1:36:57] you and I have talked about this a lot. I'm like one of the OG Epstein conspiracy theorists. I've [1:37:02] probably gone down every single rabbit hole. We could go down most of them today. Look, the original [1:37:08] sin of the Epstein investigation, and obviously I'm biased here, but it was not what Donald Trump and [1:37:17] the administration did in 2025. It was, you have to go back to 2007, 2008. The original Alex Acosta [1:37:24] investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, where he basically dropped the federal charges. I think Epstein ended [1:37:30] up getting prosecuted on some sort of local thing. But the original warrant, the original warrant back [1:37:36] in 2008, what was he looking for? What was he allowed to look for? What were they collecting? [1:37:42] It was not looking at a broader conspiracy. So that happens. Okay. Epstein gets pinched. I think [1:37:49] he goes to prison or maybe this is when he was on house arrest, but like anything that existed [1:37:56] from the eighties and nineties up to 2006, 2007, anything that existed that we didn't get back then [1:38:03] was disappeared. Right? So like when people say, has, has what you've seen on the inside make you think [1:38:09] that the, you know, that Epstein never blackmailed people or that Epstein never engaged in broader [1:38:15] sex trafficking? No, absolutely not. What I have seen, and I've looked at most of the files is [1:38:20] that there just wasn't dispositive evidence. And if that dispositive evidence ever existed, [1:38:27] it was probably destroyed after 2006, 2007. Now, look again, in our defense, [1:38:32] yes. Was there some, you know, bitching and moaning and was there some back and forth? Yes. [1:38:38] But there, that we eventually collected 6 million documents as part of the effort. The president, [1:38:46] people say the president was forced into releasing the documents. Like again, the idea that Donald Trump [1:38:52] could not have killed that legislation, especially with the United States Senate is a joke. He absolutely [1:38:57] could have killed it. What did he do? He actually said, nope, we're going to release these files. [1:39:02] He thought, you know, he was annoyed by the story. He was annoyed by the Democrats accusing him of [1:39:06] doing things bad. By the way, like, do I think there is any, I've never seen a single piece of [1:39:13] credible evidence that the president of the United States engaged in wrongdoing with minors, [1:39:17] ever. So like when the president says the hoax, that's what he's talking about is this democratic [1:39:23] idea that he somehow was a pedophile. It's absurd. There's no evidence for it. Now, the Epstein, [1:39:30] the Epstein, you know, law gets signed. We find 6 million documents. We find about 3 million of [1:39:37] them are actually responsive, has something to do with the Epstein estate. We release all of them, [1:39:41] with the exception of a few things that are like, you know, the courts have said that we have to redact [1:39:46] certain things or we can't release certain files. But like we did release all these files. Did it [1:39:52] take longer than it should have taken? Yes. But we did release these files. And again, [1:39:58] the problem here is not like anything that's in the files or not in the files. The problem is, [1:40:06] if you go back to the original investigation, it was designed in a way that was way too narrow. [1:40:12] If there was a broader conspiracy, and you know, my view is that there probably was, [1:40:18] the evidence that existed in 2007, that was the opportunity to get it. [1:40:22] So when you say there probably was a broader conspiracy, what exactly are you saying? [1:40:26] I think there are a few different options. I mean, look, man, I, like you could, you and I could [1:40:30] literally do two episodes about this. I've gone on down to every rabbit hole. There's this funny New [1:40:34] York Times story that's somewhat true, somewhat false, but where Susie Wiles, the White House chief of [1:40:39] staff says, well, we know JD is a conspiracy theorist on this. Like I am actually, I've gone [1:40:44] down every, every rabbit hole here. Look, so there's the theory that whether it was American [1:40:50] intel or foreign intel, that Epstein was sort of using, Epstein was using sort of the sex ring to [1:40:59] blackmail rich and powerful people. There's that piece of it. You know, I'm, I think there's a separate [1:41:05] conspiracy that hasn't gotten covered as much, which is that Epstein actually, okay, if you go [1:41:12] back to the original Epstein guy was Les Wexner, okay, who Columbus, Ohio was the wealthiest person [1:41:20] in Ohio, maybe still is the wealthiest person in the state of Ohio. The thing that everybody in [1:41:24] Columbus, I lived there for a time, knew about the Wexner Epstein relationship is that Epstein [1:41:31] was his tax guy, that Epstein was like the genius at identifying weird tax strategies that would [1:41:41] allow you to not have to pay taxes. But if you were being a little skeptical would also say that [1:41:45] it would allow Epstein to either blackmail people or to have a separate nexus of influence and control [1:41:51] on rich and powerful people. And so I think there's an underreported, underexplored story of [1:41:57] is Epstein, was Epstein like doing a lot of tax stuff that was not on the up and up? And is that [1:42:04] one way in which he gained blackmail? It's not opposite of the sexual blackmail story, but in some [1:42:10] ways it's, it's, you know, you could imagine both things being true. I also just think there's an [1:42:17] element of he was a scumbag. He was a very sick person. He built relationships with a lot of other [1:42:24] rich and powerful people who just didn't have any real moral judgment about the fact the guy [1:42:29] was obviously a scumbag. And again, to go back to defending Donald Trump, I know people don't want [1:42:33] to hear this these days, but who was the guy? People say Donald Trump's blackmailed by Jeffrey [1:42:39] Epstein. Who was the guy who narked on Epstein to the Palm Beach police? That's in the Epstein files. [1:42:45] Right. It was Donald Trump. [1:42:47] He also kicked him out of Mar-a-Lago in 2005. [1:42:49] He kicked him out of Mar-a-Lago. It's just... [1:42:51] It's obvious that Epstein was a sick man. [1:42:53] Yes. But if people want to say we mishandled the Epstein release, [1:42:57] guilty. We did mishandle, especially the communications of it. [1:43:00] What do you think should have been done? [1:43:01] I think that we should have just dropped everything at the very beginning. And like, [1:43:05] obviously it takes a little time to review the stuff, to find the stuff, to redact things where [1:43:09] you have victims and so forth, but we should have just done it as quickly as possible. [1:43:12] But some of the stuff that was redacted, some of the names that were redacted weren't victims. [1:43:17] So yeah, I, I, I've looked into this and my understanding of this, having looked at a lot of this, [1:43:24] but not all of it, is that it is sometimes hard to draw a distinction between victim [1:43:31] and co-conspirator. And like, let me highlight this in a very sort of obvious way. Ro Khanna, [1:43:37] who's been one of the most, one of the loudest voices on the Epstein file. Well, [1:43:41] he became very loud on the Epstein files the minute Donald Trump became president, [1:43:44] didn't seem to care about it during the Biden administration. He actually brought one of the [1:43:49] Epstein victims, I think to the state of the union last year, or maybe it was the year before last. [1:43:54] Well, like that victim, and I'm not accusing, I'm not saying she wasn't a victim. I don't know [1:43:59] anything about her particular case. She was also listed as a co-conspirator in some of these documents, [1:44:05] right? So there's an idea that some of the people who were engaged in the sex trafficking [1:44:08] were also, you know, facilitating it as well. [1:44:11] So they were incentivized to get more girls. [1:44:13] Yeah, but what I, but yes, that's right. But the idea is that it's hard to sort of, [1:44:19] it's sometimes a little bit of a gray area between, you know, some of the people who were [1:44:23] alleged victims were also alleged co-conspirators. And so what DOJ tried to do was kind of make that [1:44:30] judgment as best they could and release as much as possible. [1:44:32] But it's clear that he was trying to get in contact with people that he felt were influential. [1:44:39] It was clear that he was trying to get people to get together on the island and meet at parties. [1:44:47] So there was something he was doing where he was trying to either influence people [1:44:52] or compromise people. [1:44:54] Correct. [1:44:55] So it's not, there's some sort of an operation that was going on. [1:44:59] There is a story there. And, you know, I will go to my deathbed believing there's a story there, [1:45:06] but I can't prove it. And I promise you, there's not some document that, at least I'm hiding, [1:45:11] that allows us to prove exactly what was going on and how. [1:45:14] He was also trying to get scientists. And this is one of the reasons, supposedly, [1:45:19] why he got that ranch in New Mexico. [1:45:22] So a friend of mine has this element. Sorry, I should step back. Conspiracy theories. [1:45:28] One of the ways you discredit a conspiracy theory, I thought about this a lot, is try to hide it. [1:45:33] Another way you discredit conspiracy theory is by flooding the zone. [1:45:36] So one of the things I've tried to do when looking at all this stuff is to try to understand [1:45:40] sort of where it fits in and, you know, try to separate the real from the fake. [1:45:46] But one really interesting element of the whole Jeffrey Epstein saga. [1:45:49] Okay. So he dies in 2019, right? This is at the very end of the first Trump administration. [1:45:56] His death coincides very, very closely. This is not my observation. [1:46:02] This is a friend, but I don't want to reveal confidences here. [1:46:06] It coincides very closely with the end of what you might call the era of censorship in academia. [1:46:13] So back in 2019, 2020, we reached sort of peak academic censorship, where people wouldn't publish [1:46:21] a medical study because it might have sort of disparate impact racial undertones, [1:46:26] or people were getting fired from academia for not doing land acknowledgments, stuff like that. [1:46:30] Okay. I'm not saying that stuff has completely gone away, but Epstein, we know, was funding a ton [1:46:36] of scientists. By the way, where did his money come from? He was funding a ton of scientists, [1:46:41] but like when he died, it's almost like the era of censorship started to break. [1:46:47] Because he wasn't just, he was also plugged into a lot of, in academia, but also, you know, [1:46:51] he's plugged into the social media companies. Like this is a dude who knew everybody. [1:46:54] He knew everybody. So look, I don't know. [1:46:59] So where did his money come from? [1:47:00] Well, from given, part of it is suspect tax advice and setting up tax schemes for a lot of very, [1:47:10] very rich people. [1:47:11] Right. But why was he motivated to influence [1:47:15] academia? And what was the purpose? [1:47:19] I don't know the answer to that question. I mean, I have theories. There's, of course, the... [1:47:24] Well, most people think he was Mossad. [1:47:25] Yeah. Mossad or CIA or some other deep state, whether in America or Israel or another country. [1:47:31] Or both. [1:47:31] Or both. [1:47:34] You know, look, he clearly had connections to the upper, the highest levels of American intelligence. [1:47:42] He clearly had connections to the highest levels of Israeli intelligence. In fact, [1:47:46] one of the interesting things the Epstein saga reveals about... And I try to make this point. [1:47:52] One of the reasons why I'm always careful, and I say there are some elements within the Israeli [1:47:57] government who don't like our peace process, because there are a lot of elements within the [1:48:01] Israeli government that actually do like our peace process. They recognize that this indefinite [1:48:05] campaign is not good for them either. And the Epstein thing is interesting, because as much as I know, [1:48:12] you know, Prime Minister Netanyahu, not a particularly popular person in the United States of America [1:48:18] right now, Epstein seemed to be connected to the elements of the Israeli deep state that were left [1:48:25] of center. Like, I've always found that fascinating. It wasn't like he was super connected to the right [1:48:32] of center of Israeli politics. America, he was connected across the board. Like, he had Republican [1:48:37] friends. He had Democratic friends. He had much deeper connections to the Israeli left of center [1:48:43] than right of center. I don't know what that means. He was hanging out with Steve Bannon and Noam Chomsky. [1:48:48] Exactly. He had, again, in America, he had friends across the political spectrum in a way he didn't [1:48:55] necessarily have in Israel. I had one of my guests try to get me to meet him. [1:48:59] Really? Yeah. When? 2017. [1:49:03] See, that's crazy to me, because at that point, he'd already gone down for at least one, like, [1:49:06] sex abuse thing. That was my position. I'll show you the emails. [1:49:10] Okay. It's kind of, they're kind of funny. [1:49:12] Which guest? I actually read them on stage. [1:49:13] You want to say, okay, fine. People can find it. [1:49:16] Yeah. I don't want to have the guy, the guy's already ruined. [1:49:18] Sure. But, um, dude, it's... [1:49:21] But I Googled it, and I'm like, what the fuck are you talking about? [1:49:25] See, but this goes back to my original point, which is... [1:49:29] But this is part of what he was doing, right? He wanted to get influential people. [1:49:33] But you go back to the original 2007 warrant on Jeffrey Epstein. [1:49:38] Uh-huh. [1:49:39] All of the really crazy shit happened from the 90s to 2007. [1:49:44] That's when he was at the peak of his power. That's when he hadn't yet gone down on a sex [1:49:49] abuse scandal. Like, it's your point, right? Even if you have some scumbags who are willing [1:49:54] to introduce him to Joe Rogan in 2017, there are a lot of Joe Rogans, or at least some, who are going [1:49:59] to say, wait a second, I'm going to Google this guy and find out that he's a predator. [1:50:02] But a lot didn't. A lot didn't. [1:50:04] A lot didn't. And that was really crazy. [1:50:05] A lot didn't, but some did. And my point is, that would limit his influence. [1:50:09] But if you go back to, like, the 1990s, the early 2000s, that is the stuff... [1:50:16] I think that is like the black hole of the Epstein saga. We don't have nearly enough from that era. [1:50:22] And we had... [1:50:22] Because you think it was destroyed? [1:50:25] I think we had a prosecution that explicitly was so narrow that whatever existed would not [1:50:30] have even been caught up. [1:50:34] Right. So they were specifically going after him for underage sex. [1:50:38] And they didn't look at the full picture of the operation. [1:50:42] They didn't even try to. They didn't even try to. [1:50:45] Well, that was one of the things about the prosecutor was [1:50:47] told that he was above their pay grade. I mean, it was one of the things that he said. [1:50:51] He said he was like CIA or something. [1:50:52] Yeah. [1:50:52] Right? [1:50:53] He said I was told he was intelligence. [1:50:55] Right. And yes, I've asked, [1:50:56] were there documents connecting Jeffrey Epstein directly to our intelligence agencies or anybody [1:51:04] else's? And the answer is no. But if that shit existed, it wouldn't exist in 2026. [1:51:09] What is it like being the vice president? Like, how much access do you have to information? [1:51:14] Because... [1:51:15] So I'll give you another conspiracy. So I have, like, [1:51:17] effectively unlimited access to information. [1:51:19] Unlimited. [1:51:20] Unlimited. But I think that the, one of the things that I've learned about the job [1:51:26] is it's, you're doing so much on the day to day. Like, you're calling senators and trying to get [1:51:32] them to pass a piece of legislation. You're meeting with staff about what should go in [1:51:35] the housing bill. You're negotiating with the Iranians or the Qataris or the Israelis about [1:51:39] something that's going on in the Middle East. And a lot of it, like the UFO thing. Like, I've said [1:51:47] that I am going to like, I'm going to look into the UFO thing. And I've been saying that for a year [1:51:51] and a half and I haven't done it yet because I haven't had the time. And so some of this is like, [1:51:58] you just have to have the time to actually punch through the walls and to like go to the gatekeepers [1:52:03] and say, you have to open up that gate because I'm the vice president. And some of it is just hard [1:52:07] to actually get to because I don't have the time to sort of focus on that one issue for any particular [1:52:12] period of time. So the answer is you have unlimited access to information. The constraint is not [1:52:17] people tell me no. The constraint is you're just so busy doing other shit. [1:52:25] The UFO thing I think would be something that I would want to pursue. [1:52:29] Yes. [1:52:30] I mean, just for my own personal information, I would want to know what is going on. [1:52:34] Correct. [1:52:34] So the question is, are these special access programs that are above top secret and that this is our own [1:52:44] stuff? Or is this something that's far more bizarre and something that is interdimensional [1:52:52] from another planet, whatever, fill in the blank. [1:52:55] Yeah. Is it foreign? [1:52:56] Yeah. [1:52:56] And if it's foreign, is it 6,000 miles away or like 6,000 light years away? [1:53:00] Right. [1:53:00] Yes. [1:53:01] Right. [1:53:02] And that is, I will answer that question eventually. [1:53:06] Really? [1:53:07] Yes. I'll get to the bottom of it. [1:53:09] How are you going to have the time to do that? [1:53:11] Like what would that entail? [1:53:14] Eventually I'll have like a few weeks where I can just sit down and worry about that problem. [1:53:17] You said something that I thought was very bizarre. [1:53:19] Here's the interesting thing though. I will say that is one of those conspiracy theories [1:53:27] that there are a lot of people in our government who are interested in this, [1:53:32] meaning our current political leadership who are interested in this question. [1:53:35] And it hasn't, like nothing has really happened yet, which makes me a little bit less [1:53:44] interested in it because there are a lot of people with access to those files and access [1:53:47] to that information and nothing has changed since Biden left office, which makes me think other [1:53:52] people have looked into it and they just haven't necessarily found something. But anyway, I eventually, [1:53:57] I promise you, I'm going to like sit down and spend a couple of weeks trying to figure out [1:54:02] what's in these files. I actually haven't done it yet. [1:54:05] You said something that I thought was very odd. [1:54:08] Okay. [1:54:08] You said that you thought that they were demons. [1:54:11] Okay. I did say that. [1:54:17] What did you mean by that? [1:54:18] Well, first of all, not just in Christianity, but in a number of world religions, [1:54:28] there are a number of mystical things that happened, extra dimensional, extra... I'm not one of these [1:54:39] people who's like a hyper rationalist. I think that there are things happening in the world that we're [1:54:44] not always seeing. I believe in God. I think that there is a kind of... What's the word I'm looking [1:54:49] for? Not extra real... [1:54:50] Supernatural. [1:54:52] Supernatural. There are supernatural things that are happening. Okay. [1:54:56] So if you look historically at things that are similar to the alien phenomenon, where, oh, [1:55:08] some strange being, it kind of looks like a human being, but doesn't look like, but it's not human, [1:55:14] and it shows a particular interest in human beings. And then it takes the human beings and, [1:55:20] you know, like does weird experiments on them. I think my argument is that's either bullshit, [1:55:25] right? You're either talking to a crazy person, which I don't like... I'm not saying just because [1:55:29] I believe in the supernatural doesn't mean I believe in everything supernatural. But if we're [1:55:35] talking about an extraterrestrial being that is human-like, but not human, that contains effectively [1:55:44] infinite powers and is torturing human beings, you can call it an alien if you want. But I think [1:55:50] there's a lot of historical precedent to call that a demon. [1:55:52] Yeah. Well, a lot of these stories and these accounts... [1:55:58] Oh, look. [1:55:59] We have one right here on the coaster. [1:56:00] Yeah. That's the mothership logo. [1:56:04] A lot of these accounts are not of people being tortured. They're people that are being exposed to [1:56:15] information, like the Travis Walton story is a very famous case from the 1970s. [1:56:18] I don't know this one. I'm going to read about it on the way back though. [1:56:22] There's this guy right here. I got a Travis Walton bobblehead. He's one of the most famous [1:56:27] UFO abduction stories. Okay. [1:56:29] There's a movie with D.B. Cooper in the... [1:56:33] And like, what is the information that they gave Travis Walton? [1:56:36] Was D.B. Cooper the... that was the... D.B. Sweeney. D.B. Cooper was the guy who stole the money and [1:56:42] jumped out of the plane. Fire in the Sky. There's a movie from... [1:56:46] Oh, of course. Yeah. I remember this movie. I don't think I ever saw it though. [1:56:48] 1993. Good movie, but sensational. And Travis Walton says they made a bunch of [1:56:55] shit up and that's not what happened. But the story was that he was a logger in Arizona [1:57:02] and he was leaving a job. They were all together in a truck and these loggers saw this thing, this light [1:57:11] land in this forest and they went to go investigate. He jumps out of the truck and he gets close to it. [1:57:19] And he's hit by some beam of light and knocked to the ground. They take off and then they realize, [1:57:25] like, we've got to go back. We don't know what's going on. Like, they turn around to go back to get [1:57:30] him. They're freaked out and panicked. They go back to get him. He's gone. The police interview them. [1:57:36] They think that they killed him. They, they, you know, there's an investigation. Five days later, [1:57:42] he shows up, uh, wearing the same clothes. Um, and he has this crazy story. And, uh, he had been in [1:57:50] this spaceship for five days is what he said. And that they had fixed him, they healed him. And then [1:57:56] they had communicated with him telepathically. And he had had this very bizarre encounter with these, [1:58:04] these beings that aren't from here. Or if they are from here, they're very different than us. [1:58:10] Okay. So I guess my, my response to that would be extra powerful beings in this case, communicating [1:58:16] telepathically, helping people sounds like an angel. So I guess I might, my here's, let me make the, [1:58:24] like the, the steel man version of my argument. It's that, okay, my dog, there's no real difference [1:58:34] between me and God to my dog. I can literally walk into a room and turn the light on. I can make [1:58:40] food appear instantaneously. I can transport myself across time and space very, very rapidly. [1:58:46] If you're a human being with intelligence, but not supernatural intelligence, I guess my point is, [1:58:51] again, this could all be bullshit. This could all be fake. That's a possibility. But if it's real, [1:58:58] is there really a meaningful difference between an angel or a demon and a space alien with super [1:59:06] technology? I just, to our perception, they would largely just look like the same thing. [1:59:11] I think we're capable of nuance. We're capable of understanding that human beings are far more [1:59:16] complex and evolved than chimpanzees. And we could imagine a world where if we don't blow ourselves up, [1:59:24] and there's not a nuclear bomb, and there's not a, we don't get hit by an asteroid, if we live another [1:59:31] million years, that we would have technology that's indistinguishable from magic, right? [1:59:37] Exactly. That's exactly what I'm saying. [1:59:39] And then we could show up on another planet. [1:59:41] It just means they're hyper-evolved, advanced civilizations from somewhere else. [1:59:48] And what I'm saying is, the perception of those beings to a more simple intelligence, [1:59:56] there's not a meaningful difference. So you're talking about what it is that these things actually [2:00:04] are. And I guess what I'm talking about is, how would a human being with my level of intelligence, [2:00:10] or your level of intelligence in 2026 understand what's going on? [2:00:13] Right. But from a biblical perspective, there's a very big difference between a demon [2:00:17] and a hyper-intelligent being from somewhere else. [2:00:22] I mean, a demon or a hyper-intelligent malicious- [2:00:28] Well, if demons are real, if there really are dark forces in the universe, [2:00:34] and they're disembodied dark forces, these things that exist, these- [2:00:39] Yes. [2:00:39] And then there's also powerful light forces in the universe. [2:00:43] That they don't have to be mutually exclusive to the concept of hyper-intelligent other species. [2:00:50] Absolutely. [2:00:51] When you're looking at an insanely vast universe. [2:00:54] I don't think they have to be, but I think that it is interesting to me that for most of human history, [2:01:03] we would have understood supernatural, hyper-powerful, hyper-knowledgeable things as sort of celestial, [2:01:14] or- [2:01:16] We would have thought of a cell phone as being sorcery. [2:01:18] I mean, that doesn't mean it's sorcery. Maybe it's not. Maybe it's just technology. [2:01:27] That argument doesn't make any sense to me. [2:01:30] Well- [2:01:31] And this is not discounting the possibility of demons or discounting the possibility of angels. [2:01:37] Well, I guess I understand your point conceptually. I don't actually disagree with this. I don't think [2:01:44] we're saying something different. That, you know, metaphysically, there could be two separate things [2:01:50] going on. There could be celestial, there could be extra Earth, outside of Earth space aliens, [2:01:57] and there could also be angels and demons. These could be two totally separate things. [2:02:00] One could be true and not the other. That's, I totally concede and agree with that point. [2:02:05] I guess what I'm saying is, it's a distinction that is conceptually interesting to me. [2:02:14] But if a space alien with like superhuman technology comes to the Earth and has malicious intent, [2:02:21] I don't know how I'm supposed to tell the difference between that and demon. [2:02:25] If they have malicious intent. But I mean, isn't that also the case with visiting people, [2:02:30] right? Like you could have a country and you get visited by the Peace Corps, [2:02:35] or you get visited by pirates. And are the pirates demons as the Peace Corps angels? [2:02:43] No, but I think we're talking about something much different. [2:02:45] Are we? Are we talking about something different? Are we talking about a hyper-advanced version of [2:02:50] that? We're talking about, I mean, as I understand it, we're talking about things that exist outside [2:02:57] the United States, sorry, outside of the Earth, okay? And two different types of beings that could [2:03:02] exist outside. I mean, okay, maybe- There's a lot of people, you know, [2:03:06] Tim Burchette thinks that they're, they're here. There's Atlantis, or there's something else like [2:03:10] that. Well, that they're, they're somehow or another, they're survivors of a long gone [2:03:16] civilization that live under the ocean. Yeah. It's just as kooky as living in space. [2:03:20] Here's the way I would put it is like, there's also a difference between a demon and a ghost, [2:03:23] right? These things are two very different conceptual things. Right. But if I'm a human being, [2:03:28] and I meet a malicious ghost, maybe I think it's a demon. And maybe all I'm saying is, [2:03:34] maybe there's some, there's some point at which the conceptually interesting, this is such a weird [2:03:41] conversation, at which point the conceptually interesting discussion of what it is, is separate [2:03:48] from how it appears to me and how I'm going to understand it as a human being in my particular [2:03:55] social and cultural context in 2026. But if you're looking for me to concede the point that there is [2:03:59] something different or could be something different between an angel, a demon, a space alien, [2:04:04] a supernatural, but non, any of those other things beings, yes, I can see that. [2:04:10] Yeah. The question is, what does, what do these special access programs, like, [2:04:18] what is the information that's available? Like how, according to David Grush and [2:04:24] a lot of these other people that there have been crash retrieval programs. [2:04:28] Okay. And I've, so I've talked to Dave before, I think I called him actually after he was on your [2:04:32] podcast. So there's like the crash retrieval stuff of whether that's, that's real or not, [2:04:42] where is it, et cetera. There's the videos, right? There are all of these videos, some of which have [2:04:46] been released and declassified that seem to me show some pretty weird stuff. And then there might be [2:04:51] other pieces of evidence as well. I'm not saying there is or isn't, I just don't know. I try to keep an [2:04:55] open mind about this stuff. All I'm saying is I'm fascinated by it. I don't have like some secret [2:05:01] sauce, at least not yet that tells me what's true and what's false. I'm just saying this is something [2:05:07] that I'm interested in, but it doesn't, it's because it's, it's like anything in life where [2:05:14] do I have to figure this out this week? No. So I'm going to do the things that I have to like [2:05:20] negotiate with the Iranians and try to get this bill passed. [2:05:22] So let's imagine a world where the Iranian negotiations go swimmingly. [2:05:29] Everything's done. God willing. You know, all these Gulf Arab states decide, [2:05:34] hey, let's invest money in Iran. Let's change hearts and minds. Okay. Avoided a gigantic apocalyptic [2:05:43] scenario. What, what could be done? Like if we have information, who has this information [2:05:52] and why are they holding onto this information? And what, do you know the, the Hal Puthoff story? [2:05:57] No. So Hal Puthoff, who used to work for NASA, [2:06:00] said that he was brought in during the Bush administration where they were going, [2:06:06] they, they were proposing disclosure. And they were saying, this is what they were saying, [2:06:12] they're saying, we have biological remains and we have physical crafts. We're proposing disclosure. [2:06:21] And they brought in a bunch of, a bunch of thought leaders, different disciplines, [2:06:27] different schools of thought. And they said, I want you to compile a list of pros and cons [2:06:33] and put a numerical value on what, how this is going to affect society. How is this going to affect [2:06:38] religion? How's this going to affect government? How's this going to affect economy? All these different [2:06:43] things. And when they compiled this list, every one of them had more in the con than in the pro [2:06:52] and they decided against disclosure because of that. Now, if that's the case, what are we talking [2:06:59] about? Like who has this information and what is this information? I mean, if that wasn't just a [2:07:04] thought experiment, if they weren't really just fucking with these people, which I don't understand why [2:07:10] they would do that, but let's assume they, what is known and why would they prevent that information [2:07:18] from getting out? Well, that's, that's a big if. Have you seen the movie, The Age of Disclosure? [2:07:25] I've not. Okay. Well, a lot of people, including intelligence officers, different people in the [2:07:32] government are in this documentary. And one of the things that they're saying is part of the problem [2:07:37] with all this is if they have had these programs going on for so long, that means they've been [2:07:42] misappropriating funds and they've been lying to Congress. So all these people that were involved [2:07:47] in these programs- I've heard this argument. Yeah, I've heard this argument. Yeah. [2:07:50] So Lou Elizondo and all these other people have said, look, what we're going to need is mass amnesty [2:07:55] for people that are involved in this. It's the only way you're ever really going to get to the bottom of [2:07:59] it. The problem with that is if you've got unlimited money and you've got misappropriation of funds [2:08:07] and lying to Congress, I guarantee some of that money has gone to places it shouldn't have gone. [2:08:13] A hundred percent. A hundred percent. [2:08:15] Like it always does. Yeah, yeah. So like, it's always very hard to engage in these like [2:08:21] super generic, super general, I should say, hypotheticals, because, you know, like, yeah, [2:08:27] if, look, we've got remains of space aliens and we're hiding them, then there are a million other [2:08:34] sort of, there are a million possibilities for that. What would explain it, how it would have [2:08:39] happened. I am skeptical that's true. And the reason I'm skeptical that it's true that we have [2:08:44] the physical remains is not because I don't think that's something that like is physically possible [2:08:49] or that the government, like the government's willing to do and able to do a lot of, a lot of crazy [2:08:54] stuff in our history and the history of all governments. I am skeptical of the competence. [2:08:59] I actually made this point to Dave when we talked. I think he's a very interesting guy. [2:09:04] So I don't mean to insult him or say I disagree with him about everything, but [2:09:08] I made this point to Dave when we talked, it's like, if we have literal space alien remains [2:09:15] in the custody of the United States government, there is no way that that wouldn't get leaked, [2:09:19] that wouldn't leak out in some way. Well, it has leaked out anecdotally. [2:09:23] Well, that's, I guess that's the counterargument. [2:09:25] Yeah. Do you know the Nixon story? The Nixon, Jackie Gleason story? [2:09:28] No, I want to hear that. But, but like with cell phones and every way that we have, [2:09:32] like it's plausible to be, you could hide that in an era where you have to have a giant camera [2:09:37] the size of these antlers in order to take a photo of something. But dude, I can take, you know, [2:09:42] like you have cameras now that are like literally this tiny. That's the part that I'm skeptical of. [2:09:49] Okay. [2:09:49] That we're hiding that. [2:09:50] Let me push back against that. [2:09:51] Because you know that if you have any sort of top secret, like if you go into a skiff, [2:09:58] like there's no way you're bringing cameras in there. [2:10:02] Okay. [2:10:02] You're, you're, look, when I came here to this podcast studio, they had a dog check my truck. [2:10:09] And it's your studio? [2:10:09] They had to pop my trunk. Yeah. [2:10:11] Okay. [2:10:12] Like I'm going to blow up my own studio. [2:10:13] Yeah, but okay. [2:10:14] You know what I'm saying? [2:10:15] But the, okay, the counterargument though, is they check that stuff on you. [2:10:18] They don't check that stuff on everybody. [2:10:19] Everybody here they did. [2:10:20] Everybody here. [2:10:21] But I'm saying all you need is one official with like the highest security clearance. [2:10:27] Now, okay. [2:10:29] You're right. [2:10:29] Certain devices like give, emanate signals that they can pick up on Bluetooth and all that [2:10:33] shit. [2:10:34] But like, but to have access to go into a room where they have these things. [2:10:39] And no one did have these things. [2:10:41] I guarantee you they're going to make sure no one's got anything. [2:10:46] They could easily scan you to make sure that you don't have any kind of electronics, [2:10:50] any kind of camera, any kind of recording device. [2:10:53] That's not hard. [2:10:54] I mean, especially if you've got something squirreled away at Area 51. [2:10:58] In the next two and a half years, we're going to run this experiment. [2:11:00] Because I got two and a half more years as VP. [2:11:03] And I swear to you, if there are little green men, like body remains. [2:11:07] Text me, please. [2:11:08] Well, I'm not going to text you. [2:11:11] I'm going to try to smuggle a camera and get a photo of these things. [2:11:14] Well, how would you, the vice president of the United States of America, have to have [2:11:18] a camera smuggled in to do that? [2:11:20] Well, maybe I wouldn't. [2:11:21] But again, I've seen. [2:11:22] Do you think that you have the kind of authority, like, look, let's imagine you find out that at [2:11:27] Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, they have some secure facility somewhere. [2:11:32] Maybe it's not there. [2:11:33] Maybe it's, maybe they've kept it under wraps. [2:11:35] Maybe it's in the mountains somewhere. [2:11:36] Yeah. [2:11:37] And you find out that this thing exists. [2:11:40] Do you think it's as simple as you could just go out and tell everybody? [2:11:43] Or do you think that you get briefed on the implications of what would happen if you disclosed [2:11:49] all this information? [2:11:50] Well, I would definitely get briefed on the implications of what would happen if I disclosed [2:11:53] And they would probably tell you, hey, you have to bullshit people. [2:11:56] Yeah, but dude, I'm not. [2:11:58] You're not going to bullshit people? [2:12:00] Well, look, I have many skills as a politician and some vices, but like one of them is I'm just [2:12:05] not a good liar. [2:12:06] Well, then they're not going to show it to you. [2:12:07] You just fucked up. [2:12:08] You just fucked up on this podcast by saying that. [2:12:15] They'll show it to the ladies on The View. [2:12:18] That's right. [2:12:19] The intellectual leaders of our world. [2:12:20] Trust me, they show it to the ladies on The View. [2:12:21] It will be said two hours later. [2:12:25] Maybe they show it to them just so that no one will believe it. [2:12:27] I do want to look into this stuff. [2:12:29] I'm just telling you, I have not yet seen the evidence that we have certainly extraterrestrial [2:12:35] remains, but there's a lot of stuff before extraterrestrial remains. [2:12:38] It's also interesting, like the flight patterns in some of these videos are super weird. [2:12:43] Yes. [2:12:44] Well, the Commander David Fravor stuff is bananas. [2:12:46] It goes from 50,000 feet above sea level to sea level in like a second. [2:12:50] To what people say, right? [2:12:52] Like, because one of the arguments I've heard, for example, is, you know, could this just be [2:12:57] a visual or on the camera or something like that? [2:12:59] Okay, that sounds to me plausible. [2:13:00] I'm not an expert in cameras. [2:13:02] But then what the pilots, their reaction to it, it's not like they're looking at a visual [2:13:07] or on a camera. [2:13:08] It's like they're looking at something else that's really, really weird and difficult to explain, [2:13:12] given what they know about, you know, physics and aeronautical engineering, et cetera. [2:13:16] So anyway, I am fascinated by this, but I just don't want to tell people like, oh, [2:13:20] I've uncovered the truth or I haven't because I haven't looked at it yet. [2:13:24] Right. [2:13:25] Well, I would, if I was you, that would be the first thing I did. [2:13:27] I'd storm right in there and go, what have you got? [2:13:29] Let's talk about tax policy. [2:13:30] Is that what you want to talk about? [2:13:33] No. [2:13:34] We could talk about tax policy. [2:13:34] This is way more interesting. [2:13:37] I would want to know. [2:13:38] I mean, I think the world wants to know. [2:13:39] I think it would fundamentally change our understanding of what it means to be a living organism. [2:13:44] Okay. [2:13:44] What do you think? [2:13:46] Like, what is your, you know more about this than I do. [2:13:48] I don't think we're alone. [2:13:51] But okay, I agree. [2:13:52] I don't think we're alone. [2:13:53] I just don't understand what it is. [2:13:54] Okay. [2:13:55] I don't know if it's. [2:13:56] So you don't have like a strong view about what it is. [2:13:59] You're just sort of generally curious. [2:14:00] I don't have any data, right? [2:14:03] So I don't have any proof. [2:14:05] So I believe Commander David Fravor. [2:14:08] I believe Ryan Graves. [2:14:09] Yeah. [2:14:09] He was a fighter pilot that said that when they upgraded their [2:14:13] equipment on these fighter jets in 2014, all of a sudden they started seeing these things that [2:14:20] were staying completely motionless at 120 knot winds. [2:14:24] Yeah. [2:14:24] And they were a cube inside of a sphere, a black cube inside of some sort of... [2:14:30] Yeah. [2:14:30] Yeah. [2:14:31] Well, okay. [2:14:31] So this is a... [2:14:32] I know you've talked to Eric Weinstein. [2:14:34] Yes. [2:14:34] And, you know, I haven't talked to you about this lately, but one of the things that Eric [2:14:40] sort of kind of persuaded me of a couple of years ago was... [2:14:44] It's Weinstein. [2:14:44] They get very sensitive because of Harvey. [2:14:45] Okay. [2:14:47] Oh, got it. [2:14:48] Eric Weinstein. [2:14:49] Good thought. [2:14:51] Speaking of pedophiles, I guess Harvey wasn't a pedophile. [2:14:54] I guess he wasn't that. [2:14:54] He had many sins, but not that one. [2:14:56] Candace Owens says he's innocent. [2:14:57] I would say, okay. [2:14:58] Or not guilty of everything that they said he was. [2:15:02] So, okay. [2:15:04] Eric Weinstein, this is probably three, four years ago, persuades me of this actually. [2:15:10] It's an interesting theory. [2:15:12] His argument is, in the same way that I would say, what's the difference between an extraterrestrial [2:15:19] and an angel or a demon, depending on its intentions, from the perspective of a human in 2026? [2:15:25] His argument would be, what's the difference between a space alien and a human being, [2:15:29] but just a human being with super advanced technology, right? [2:15:33] And so, I don't know if this is still his view, but he was like, let's say you had [2:15:40] human beings who just were super scientifically advanced. [2:15:45] Like, what we know of the laws of physics, as I understand it, is that light speed is sort of the [2:15:50] upper limit of what one of our spaceships could travel. [2:15:53] Okay? [2:15:53] You can't go any faster than the speed of light. [2:15:55] Well, that's a problem, because everything else that could support an extraterrestrial [2:15:59] life is many, many, many, many light years away. [2:16:03] Okay? [2:16:04] So, his argument, to me again, back in the day, was if you figured out a new physics, [2:16:10] in the same way that you had an understanding shift from Newtonian physics to Einsteinian physics, [2:16:15] if you have a new understanding of physics that allows you to travel much faster than the speed [2:16:19] of light, you could just have human beings, either from a different planet, or maybe they went to Mars [2:16:24] and started their own civilization, and then that got old. [2:16:27] And they, at this point, they are many millions of light years away, but they can move through space [2:16:33] and time in a way that is quite literally, like, divine, from our perspective, or space aliens, [2:16:39] but they're just human beings. [2:16:40] What could be human beings from the future? [2:16:43] If time travel is possible, why would it also... [2:16:46] But it also, we know that life exists on Earth. [2:16:50] So, if life exists on Earth, Earth is a planet. [2:16:54] There are hundreds of billions of stars that have hundreds of billions of planets. [2:17:01] We have no idea how many planets there are in the known universe that could potentially support life. [2:17:07] And if these things live on these planets, and they live far longer than we have, like, [2:17:13] if you showed a nuclear bomb to someone from 100 years ago, they would say, [2:17:20] that's the craziest fucking thing I've ever seen in my life. [2:17:22] If you show them a reactor, show them a cell phone, show them that television. [2:17:27] Sounds like my dog with a light switch, right? [2:17:28] Right. [2:17:29] Just be able to FaceTime someone in New Zealand. [2:17:31] Like, what is that? [2:17:32] What are you doing? [2:17:33] That's right. [2:17:34] Now, advance that forward one million years. [2:17:36] That's right. [2:17:37] And then, you know, instead of using propulsion, you are instead manipulating space-time. [2:17:44] So, that's exactly right. [2:17:46] And one of the things... [2:17:48] I've talked with Elon about this, and Elon is obviously a super smart dude, [2:17:51] but I've never heard, like, a super satisfying answer to this. [2:17:55] One of the things that worries me, like, I want humans to be a multi-planetary species. [2:18:00] I want us to go to Mars and set up a colony. [2:18:02] And, you know, like, that's sort of... [2:18:04] I love humanity. [2:18:05] I want it to continue. [2:18:07] And the problem with space travel that I've, again, not heard a satisfactory solution to is, [2:18:16] you know, when we're outside of the Earth's gravity, our genes, like our actual DNA, [2:18:24] seems to not function as well when it's not on Earth-style gravity, which makes sense, right? [2:18:29] We developed in these conditions with this gravity. [2:18:34] So, whenever you have somebody who goes to the International Space Station for, like, three months [2:18:37] or six months, and they come back and they are totally jacked up, because, like, literally, [2:18:42] the cells in their body are starting to, like, discombobulate in response to a low-gravity environment. [2:18:48] Right. [2:18:48] I don't...like, we have to figure out a solution to that problem. [2:18:51] That, to me, is sort of the most interesting part of space travel, of going to Mars, [2:18:55] of setting up a colony on another planet, is if you set up a colony on Mars, [2:19:01] but...and what it takes you, like, two years to get there and two years to get back, [2:19:05] or something like that. Right. But in that time, you've gone from a functioning adult, [2:19:10] healthy, to, like, dead. Right. [2:19:12] If you're in space for four years, that part of space travel is very fascinating to me, [2:19:18] and I don't know that I've heard any satisfactory solution to it yet. [2:19:21] I don't think, conventionally, there is a satisfactory solution. Yeah. [2:19:24] But if you're talking about manipulating space-time and not traditional propulsion... [2:19:29] You probably can figure that out. [2:19:30] You could manipulate...you could essentially contain this environment in exactly the same [2:19:35] way it is, and travel to somewhere else with that environment. So this is the idea of them [2:19:41] living under the surface of the ocean. I see, I see. [2:19:44] How can they live in the depths of the ocean? Well, because they have a completely contained [2:19:48] environment. Sure, sure. [2:19:49] I mean, who knows? Yeah. It's all just nonsense. Maybe they figured out how I can eat, like, [2:19:56] steak and graters ice cream and have the blood profile of eating, you know, chicken and salad. [2:20:01] Well, I don't think chicken and salad is the way to go. I know you don't. [2:20:04] I'm a steak guy. I think... So am I. [2:20:07] Just eat a little bit of ice cream every now and then. By the way, ice cream is one of the very [2:20:11] best desserts for you, because it contains fats. Because it's got a lot of fat and protein. [2:20:15] Yeah. That's right. That's right. A little bit of sugar, but it's all...it's a moderation thing. [2:20:20] That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Well, it's clearly working out. [2:20:22] Anybody who doesn't want to eat ice cream is a communist. There's nothing wrong with ice cream. [2:20:27] Speaking of communists. The Democratic Socialists of America, [2:20:30] that's actually what they do at their events, is they throw the ice cream into the Boston Harbor. [2:20:34] Yeah. Those fucking people scare me. I'm really concerned that people think that's a good idea, [2:20:42] and they think that socialism just hasn't been done correctly. That drives me nuts, because I think [2:20:50] a lot of really well-intentioned, really kind and empathetic young people think that that's the way [2:20:56] to go. And I do not think they understand the dangers of this ideology, because it always leads to one [2:21:05] thing. It leads to a very powerful military government that controls the population. Period. [2:21:13] End of discussion. And if you play it out, it is literally the only way they can get people to give [2:21:19] up their money. It's the only way they can get them to give up their property. And when you're hearing [2:21:23] like Momdani talk about freezing rents and taking bad landlords and then confiscating their property, [2:21:31] you're like, this is step one of what's happened in every communist dictatorship throughout history. [2:21:39] This is what happened in North Korea. Give the government the land, and we'll make sure that [2:21:44] no one ever has to worry about food. What a great idea. Look how it turned out. [2:21:49] So I don't know who said this, but the whole argument of communism is that you seize the means [2:21:55] of production, but because the means of production, the most powerful means of production is the human [2:22:00] mind. You ultimately have to get into totalitarianism. You have to have control of that most fundamental [2:22:05] element of the human person. You also take away motivation, and there's a thing that people don't [2:22:12] like, which is extreme wealth. But you have to understand that if it wasn't for the motivation of [2:22:18] extreme wealth, you would not have an iPhone. You wouldn't have these things. [2:22:22] Okay. So let me give you my Christian answer to this, and it's a good plug for my new book, [2:22:28] Communion, Finding My Way Back to Faith. Not to be confused with Whitley Stryber's book, [2:22:33] Communion, which is all about aliens. Okay. Did you know that? No. Interesting coincidence, [2:22:37] Joe. Pull up the cover of Communion. Pull up the cover of Whitley Stryber's Communion that I want [2:22:43] all your listeners to buy. The problem is you didn't know about this book. I would have told you to [2:22:48] come up with a different title. Seriously, I should have told you. That's Whitley Stryber's book. [2:22:51] Oh, there we go. Okay. So we want, that is wild. And then there's another one, [2:22:55] my first Communion. Okay. That's like a kid's book. But yeah, we want people to buy the second [2:22:59] one, the one that says JD Vance on it. But yeah. Okay. So this is, one of the things I talk about [2:23:04] in the book is like, there is a Christian idea of political economy that's actually been lost [2:23:10] in American politics, where it's like, we think of it as libertarianism, the hardcore free market, [2:23:17] versus socialism or communism. And there actually is a third way that has existed in pretty much all [2:23:26] Christian economic thinking going back 2000 years ago, which is that, yeah, extreme wealth inequality [2:23:32] does create problems, but you still got to have private property. You still have to have a state [2:23:37] that protects private property rights. And there's a way to balance these things that I think we've sort [2:23:41] of lost in our, in our country a little bit. And when I, when I like, okay, let me play devil's [2:23:47] advocate with, with the DSA, because I think that their ideas are crazy. And I think that you're right. [2:23:51] They will lead to a very totalitarian place. I'm not defending a single thing that they say, [2:23:56] particularly their hatred of ice cream. What I am, what I am saying is, and maybe this is just sort [2:24:04] of the way my mind works. I tend to be a little bit more empathetic. Why are young people attracted [2:24:08] to socialism in 21st century America? One of the best interviews that Charlie Kirk ever gave, [2:24:15] it was right before he died. It was an episode that he did with Tucker Carlson, where he talked [2:24:19] about the fact that if you don't give young people a stake, if you don't give them ownership, [2:24:24] if you don't give them a sense of the American dream and of possibility in the future, they're going [2:24:28] to become socialists. Like if, if you have a zero sum environment for a 25 year old in this country, [2:24:34] they're going to start to say, the only way for me to get anything is to take away from somebody [2:24:38] else. So we have to get away from like the zero sum thinking. I think that's like the root cause of [2:24:43] this. But I also think that, look, we've read an experiment in the United States of America. [2:24:49] You know, I think that we have, we have undone that experiment, taken a different direction in [2:24:53] the Trump administration, where ship all the factories overseas and let low wage foreigners [2:25:00] make our stuff. That was a bad deal for American workers. Again, it takes a long time to reverse that [2:25:05] trend. But I think it's one of the best parts of Trump administration policy is you do see that [2:25:10] trend starting to reverse. This idea that nobody should own anything, we should all become renters. [2:25:15] Whereas what we're trying to do is lower interest rates. You actually have seen housing costs [2:25:20] stabilize in the country over the last year and a half, frankly, because of immigration, [2:25:24] we had way too many people going after way too many homes, you close the border. This is one of the [2:25:29] reasons why rents and housing costs have stabilized a little bit. So I think that unless you go down [2:25:36] that pathway of allowing young Americans to own something, socialism is the inevitable outcome. [2:25:42] Do I think that's good? No. But I really do worry, and I see this, frankly, more in my own party than [2:25:48] I do on the other side. There is this revulsion to socialism that's totally justified without enough [2:25:55] thinking about how did we get here in the first place. And if, man, if we don't fix that, and I [2:26:00] would say if we don't get back to a more Christian sort of understanding of economics, socialism is [2:26:07] the alternative. Like, that is where this goes. If people don't own anything. Well, people think the [2:26:12] game is rigged. Exactly. And in some ways, Joe, the game is rigged. Yes. I mean, if you look at, [2:26:20] I mean, again, I think so much of housing because this happened, I think it was during the [2:26:26] presidential campaign. Maybe it was right before. But I was talking to some family members over [2:26:32] Thanksgiving and just sort of a younger friend of my wife's. They were like five or six years behind [2:26:40] us. They were just about to get married. And this young woman, successful engineer, makes a higher [2:26:47] salary than most Americans. She just sort of like tossed out there that, you know, when her parents' [2:26:53] generation was coming up, it was like possible to own a house and to raise a family and not be [2:26:59] worried that much about things. And my thought was, okay, you're an engineer. You make way more money [2:27:05] than 75% of people your age, maybe 90% of people your age. And you think that it is like this ridiculous, [2:27:11] unachievable objective to have literally what your parents had, which is a decent job, [2:27:16] a nice house and a safe place. Like at that, literally that same dinner, like another guy, [2:27:23] another friend of my wife's was talking about this and he, you know, South Indian family grew up, [2:27:29] you know, his parents immigrated. He was born and raised in San Diego. And he was like, you know, [2:27:32] when I was growing up in Oceanside, this is like a suburb of San Diego where there are a lot of Marines [2:27:37] live in Oceanside. It's close to Camp Pendleton. So when I was growing up, all of my, like the kids [2:27:44] that I played with, that I rode boat bikes with, that I was, you know, playing street hockey with [2:27:47] and football with, all of those kids were the sons of enlisted Marines in Oceanside, California. [2:27:54] And then we went and looked at like Oceanside, California rents. Again, this is a couple of years [2:27:59] ago, rents and housing prices. Like every house was north of a million dollars on the street. [2:28:04] This guy grew up in the listed Marine. Frankly, most Marine officers could not afford to buy [2:28:08] a million dollar house. So like, does the socialism thing scare me? Yes. Is it the wrong solution? Yes. [2:28:14] But one thing I try to persuade my fellow Republicans of is socialism is the alternative [2:28:20] if we don't have a pathway to give people a sense that the system is not rigged and that the American [2:28:26] dream is attainable. That's like our job. That's what we have to do. I'm not saying Rome was built in [2:28:31] a day. It's not going to be easy to undo some of these economic trends. But man, we ran the experiment. [2:28:38] We ran the experiment of offshoring all of our industrial jobs, of becoming a services and finance [2:28:44] economy, and allowing Wall Street to come in and buy every asset of modern life and turn it into [2:28:51] an investable, you know, line goes up asset. And what has that done? It's created a generation of kids [2:28:58] who kind of are attracted to socialism. You have to fix that problem. [2:29:02] Well, with kids that do feel, and you're correct, and I agree with you, the system is rigged. Kids [2:29:09] feel like there are no options other than to burn it down. Yes. And that's the problem. Because they [2:29:15] feel very frustrated. And this is part of our job is to provide an option that isn't burn it down, [2:29:20] but is not just doing the same things that we've done for the past 40 years. They're also terrified [2:29:23] about the future because of AI. Because they feel like jobs are going to be taken away. And there [2:29:28] will be no place for people that have education in very specific avenues, like very specific jobs [2:29:38] are going to just be irrelevant. Yeah. They're going to be completely wiped out by AI. [2:29:43] There is a huge fear over this. So let me kind of give my own spin on this. [2:29:47] Yes. I was talking to a CEO, not of an AI company, but of a tech company. And he's one of the few [2:29:54] CEOs that's sort of right of center. And I was like, well, what do you think? Do you think AI is [2:29:59] going to come and take all the jobs? And his basic take was, the real historical analogy is the [2:30:04] industrial revolution. And did the industrial revolution displace or change a lot of jobs? Yes. [2:30:12] It also created a lot of jobs that didn't exist before. So he was like, my concern here [2:30:16] is not that 50% of Americans are going to be unable to find a job. There will be some displacement, [2:30:24] some sort of churn in the labor market, but that's not the main issue. He said, the main issue, [2:30:28] if you go back to the industrial revolution, is that there was a lot of demand for workers, [2:30:32] but the inequality in the country got completely out of whack. Like this is the era of the robber [2:30:38] barons. And then the robber barons in both Europe and the United States led to fascism. It led to [2:30:43] communism, again, to this point about giving people an option. If you don't give them a good [2:30:47] option, then it leads to fascism and communism. Now, there's this fascinating encyclical written [2:30:54] by Pope Leo XIII. I'll send it to you. It's one of the best things that I think has ever been written [2:30:58] by a Christian leader, where it's written in the late 19th century. And the basic argument of it [2:31:04] is that in the age of industrial churn, there has to be a middle way between six-year-olds working [2:31:12] on the factory floor and socialism. And part of that solution is to give workers a sort of say [2:31:20] in what's going on, give normal people some power in this system. And I think that's the thing we have [2:31:27] to figure out with AI. I won't say that I have all the solutions because I haven't, but I think the [2:31:30] fundamental question is how do you ensure that normal people have some control over this? Control [2:31:38] over what their kids are seeing, control over the economic forces that are being unleashed by AI, [2:31:46] some certainty that they're not going to wake up in a world where they can't buy a home, but some [2:31:50] other guy owns 35 mansions, right? That to me is the fundamental challenge of AI, is it's going to [2:31:57] unleash a lot of wealth creation, but if that wealth creation all goes to some segment of people, [2:32:02] you're going to have communism. That is the choice before us, is a lot of wealth being created. That's [2:32:08] good, by the way. I like wealth being created. But if you don't ensure that there's some broader [2:32:14] prosperity from that wealth creation, we have run this experiment before and it leads to communism. [2:32:19] Right. So if the system is fucked, how do we unfuck it? You have a magic wand. [2:32:26] I mean, look, this is what I'm saying. I'm being honest with you that I don't have a magic wand. [2:32:31] I think there are a few things that we should sort of take from this. I think, okay, the first is [2:32:38] that we should give workers a real say at the bargaining table, okay? So what really worries me [2:32:47] about AI is the fact that private sector unions have largely disappeared from the United States of [2:32:53] America. There are a couple of exceptions. But if you go back to, like, why did the United States [2:32:57] and Britain weather the industrial revolution better than literally every other Western country? [2:33:02] I think you could make a good argument, strong religious institutions. Right now, [2:33:06] we have very weak religious institutions. Number two, I think you could say strong worker participation [2:33:11] institutions. And not just private sector labor unions. That was a big piece of it. But [2:33:15] people don't realize that, you know, Hollywood, major studios would actually work with community [2:33:24] groups and churches to sort of help, like, develop content. Now, this wasn't organic. This was a [2:33:31] natural cooperation. This wasn't mandated by some law. But where they'd go and say, help us produce [2:33:36] content that actually speaks to your membership, that speaks to your community. And there was this sense [2:33:43] of participation in American society that I think we've lost. And that's the thing that I think that [2:33:48] we have to rebuild a little bit. It's interesting that the Trump administration, the president, [2:33:52] personally, certainly me, have been accused of being too pro-labor for Republicans. But one of the [2:33:58] reasons why I'm pro-labor as a Republican is because, and I'm not saying unions are perfect. Some of them [2:34:04] have very serious problems. Like, I'm open-eyed about this. Like, the alternative may very well be [2:34:10] communism in the United States of America. Not next year, but down the road, you've got to give [2:34:16] people a seat at the table. And I think that's one answer to the question. I think a second answer [2:34:21] to the question is competition. So if you go back again to what worked and what was broken about the [2:34:27] Industrial Revolution, hyper-monopolist-style companies that had way too much power...I mean, [2:34:36] Teddy Roosevelt famously talked about how some of the steel trusts were more powerful than the United [2:34:42] States government. So you could vote. Your vote didn't matter as much because the corporations [2:34:48] were more powerful than the government. I think reining that in, making sure that, like, [2:34:53] what's the most obvious way to give normal people participation? It's democracy. But if a single [2:35:00] corporation has monopolized an entire space, then you don't have a real democracy unless you rein in [2:35:07] the power of that company. And I think that is another big risk with AI. It's that we have a [2:35:12] hyper-monopolist who dominates the space and then influences the government, influences the nonprofit [2:35:19] sector, and then real people are effectively cut out of the bargain. So again, I'm not going to pretend [2:35:23] sitting here that I have all the solutions. I think about this more than almost anything else right now. [2:35:29] But it's...the solution has to be giving normal people actual authority over their own lives. [2:35:36] But how can the government get involved in those steps? Like, what could be done on a federal level [2:35:42] to implement that? [2:35:44] Well, you know, I think one of the things...and we've looked at legislation along these lines. We [2:35:49] haven't yet pushed anything. But, you know, one problem with the 20...with, like, the private sector labor [2:35:55] union, one reason why...you know, Democrats will say private unions are at super low participation [2:36:01] rates because the government has, you know, been anti-union. There's like some element of truth to [2:36:06] that. But the reality is that a lot of workers don't see the utility in joining a union because [2:36:11] it's like, in a lot of ways, it's a 20th century institution when you need a 21st century institution. [2:36:17] So I think updating the modern union to be...to make more sense in the 21st century, I think that's...that's a [2:36:24] part of the story. You know, I think... [2:36:27] How would you do that? [2:36:28] I think antitrust... [2:36:28] How would you do that? [2:36:29] Well, a friend of mine, his name's Orrin Cass, actually, very fascinating guy, sort of a right of center [2:36:33] economic thinker. You know, his idea is that 20th century labor law presupposes a sort of zero-sum [2:36:41] conflict between the company and the union. And that where you've seen unions actually thrive [2:36:47] certain places in Europe, it's a little bit more cooperative. And the unions actually have a [2:36:52] little bit more power themselves where they can negotiate with the corporation with a little bit [2:36:58] more breadth and a little bit more freedom. Whereas in the United States, we sort of set a floor. [2:37:03] We make...we create a very small number of things the union can actually negotiate over. [2:37:08] And so a lot of people say, well, why would I join a union? Why would I participate in it? [2:37:12] So basically making the union a little bit more cooperative, which requires changing the legal [2:37:16] form of it, I think that's interesting. I think antitrust is a huge piece of the story. [2:37:20] Now, it's a little early with AI because we don't yet know which companies are dominant. But I think [2:37:24] one of the big mistakes, man, we made in the early 2000s is we should have gone after the big tech [2:37:30] companies with antitrust. Like there is like a trust-busting mechanism that exists in the US [2:37:36] government. We just didn't use it. We're gonna have to be willing to use it in the 21st century. [2:37:41] And when it comes to unions, what is wrong with the current structure [2:37:50] in terms of what power the unions have to negotiate for labor? [2:37:56] So this is a concrete example that Oren uses all the time. So in some European countries, [2:38:03] you have a minimum wage, right? In some European countries, the union can actually cut a deal with [2:38:10] the employer to where you pay a brand new employee less than the minimum wage, then you pay a more [2:38:18] senior person higher than the minimum wage. But in order to pay the junior employee less than the minimum [2:38:24] wage, you have to provide them job training and better benefits and so forth. And so the idea is [2:38:29] you turn for the first couple of years, you turn the company almost into an educational institution. [2:38:36] But in order to do that, the union has to have flexibility. That kind of arrangement is effectively [2:38:40] illegal in the United States of America. So it's that you create the ability for the union to be more [2:38:46] flexible in how it negotiates. You don't set all the terms for it. You allow the union to figure out [2:38:51] what's in the best interest of its membership. But people are opposed, like initially, knee-jerk reaction [2:38:56] to lowering wages and lowering minimum wage. I mean, most people feel, and I agree, that minimum wage [2:39:04] is almost impossible to live off of. It is, 100%. Yeah, it is. But what these unions are not asking for, [2:39:11] I mean, you have to kind of trust the labor representation of the people to sort of make the [2:39:17] right arrangement for them. And so it's not, hey, let's create a minimum wage or a wage floor that's [2:39:25] lower than the minimum wage. It's what about taking for the first year of a person coming into the labor [2:39:31] market where, you know, they work an internship for $0, right, at a company. Why don't we allow our [2:39:38] workers to work effectively an internship, get the training they need, get the benefits that they need, [2:39:43] and then join the workforce full-time at a much higher wage? The idea is that you trust the union [2:39:50] to come up with this, or the labor organization, whatever you want to call it, is you actually give [2:39:55] the union the ability to sort of negotiate over this stuff on behalf of its members. [2:39:59] You don't assume, you know, the way the United States, we do it, is we basically take all that [2:40:05] authority away from the union itself, and we try to settle this stuff at the level of the government. [2:40:11] But again, where unions have been more successful, where they actually have higher membership and [2:40:17] participation rates, what you see is these organizations actually have much greater [2:40:24] flexibility. And that ends up meaning that more people want to join, that means these [2:40:29] organizations have more power, and then that means they can figure out the arrangement that works best [2:40:33] for their membership. So you kind of have to trust people. You have to trust that people are willing to [2:40:37] do this thing for their own benefit. And, you know, so long as they've got the right authority, [2:40:45] and so long as they've got the right tools, you can trust people to do what's in their best interest, [2:40:50] and these organizations to do what's in the best interest of their membership. [2:40:53] Well, the problem that people would have with that is that corporations have a responsibility to [2:40:58] their shareholders, and they always want to make the most money possible. And they have to make more [2:41:02] money next quarter than they made this quarter. And one of the ways they do that is by paying people [2:41:06] less. [2:41:07] But that's why I think that you have to give workers some seat at the bargaining table. [2:41:13] There is a theory of economics that dominated in the late 20th century America, which is that [2:41:17] basically that, you know, the labor market was entirely efficient, and maybe the corporation didn't [2:41:25] want to pay their workers more money, but they would be forced to pay their workers more money [2:41:29] purely because if they didn't do that, then they wouldn't be able to get enough workers. [2:41:33] Now, I do think that there's an argument for like, there are all of these ways why we should give [2:41:37] workers more bargaining power. One of them, and we've spent a lot of time talking about labor [2:41:41] organizations, and that's important. And one of the reasons why I'm such an immigration hawk is because [2:41:46] it is really important not to flood the country with low wage immigrants. Because if you give a corporation [2:41:52] a choice between a low wage immigrant and a native worker who's going to require, by the way, [2:41:57] a native worker of any race, they're going to be forced to pay the native worker more if there's [2:42:02] not a pool of low wage workers to go to. And this is like a consistent finding in the economics [2:42:08] literature, but also just common sense, that when you flood the country with low wage immigrants, [2:42:14] this is why I think the DSA types are a little full of shit when they talk about helping normal [2:42:18] people. If you want to help a normal person, don't provide a corporation nine low wage migrants [2:42:26] to compete against them when they're bargaining for wages. You actually give workers more power [2:42:31] when you have a more restricted immigration policy. [2:42:33] Trevor Burrus Well, that's where the real con [2:42:38] is, right? Because you've told me that you had a conversation with someone who was the head of [2:42:45] some corporation that was upset that they were trying to shut down illegal immigration because [2:42:49] he said it's important. [2:42:50] Trevor Burrus Head of a hotel chain. [2:42:50] Trevor Burrus Yeah. [2:42:51] Trevor Burrus Yeah. Because he said, basically, [2:42:52] I want to be able to pay my workers less money. And it's very hard because the native workers expect [2:42:57] higher wages. It's crazy. I mean, there's this story from a few years ago, it was the New York Times. [2:43:05] It was unintentionally hilarious. And it's talking about why Apple would choose to manufacture [2:43:14] in Asia over the United States of America. And it's talking about how the American workers, [2:43:21] and it's almost kind of judgy towards the American workers. It's like, well, [2:43:25] the American workers want to go home and see their kids and have dinner with their kids. And it's like, [2:43:30] by the way, you go to the Foxconn factory in Apple in China, the Foxconn factory that develops [2:43:35] products for Apple in China. And what do you see? You literally see suicide nets around the top of [2:43:40] the building. Because yeah, the workers work 72 hours a week, and they sleep in little apartments, [2:43:47] four to a bedroom. But they also are so miserable, you have to take steps to prevent them from killing [2:43:53] themselves. So what I want out of American life is a little bit more dignity, a little bit more, [2:44:00] oh, yeah, I can afford to feed my family. I can also go home and actually watch my kids' baseball [2:44:06] game. And that balance, I think, if you're looking at it from a pure profit motive, maybe the corporation [2:44:13] isn't going to think like that, which is why you have to give the people real power to push back and [2:44:17] advocate for their own interests. [2:44:18] I think a lot of people in this country, if they had to choose, especially people that have money, [2:44:25] if they had to choose between a phone that was manufactured in America, where people were paid [2:44:30] a very good wage and had benefits, and you have an iPhone that has a little American flag on the back, [2:44:36] and you have one that doesn't, I think a lot of people would buy the one with the American flag on [2:44:40] the back. Because they would feel better about their purchase. I feel weird when I'm holding a phone, [2:44:48] and I know that someone was working in some factory in some foreign country, [2:44:52] working 15 hours a day and being paid nothing. [2:44:55] That's right. I think that's true of our food, by the way, too. [2:44:58] They'd much rather it be made locally. They're willing to pay a little bit more, [2:45:03] so long as it's healthier and it's made locally. There obviously are exceptions to every rule, but [2:45:08] I do, again, I think that we have run the experiment where we just try to do everything [2:45:16] with low wage foreigners, whether they're in the United States via illegal immigration, [2:45:21] or whether they're outside the United States via offshoring and outsourcing. And what it has led to [2:45:27] is, I think, a society where socialism is a bit on the rise. And one of our jobs in the administration, [2:45:34] I think about this all the time, is how do you make things? I'm not saying we're perfect, and I'm [2:45:39] not saying there isn't a lot of work to do, because there is. We were left in quite a hole by 40 years [2:45:43] of bad policy. People always talk about the Biden administration inflation. Yeah, the Biden administration [2:45:48] inflation was terrible. It got up to 9%. By the way, I think today's CPI report is you had deflation [2:45:53] in the United States. We actually had prices coming down, which is good, because the Iran war, gas prices [2:45:58] came down. But like- Gas prices have come down now because of the Iran war? No, no, no. Compared [2:46:05] to where they were a month ago. Right. So they're not down from the beginning of the war, but they're [2:46:09] down from where they were a month ago. So you had a good CPI report, a consumer price inflation report [2:46:15] today. But my point is, yes, I don't ever get to the 9% inflation of the Biden administration. Yes, [2:46:22] the Trump administration has had a much better record on inflation than the Biden administration, [2:46:26] nothing close to 9% even in our worst month. But some of this stuff is actually much longer term. [2:46:32] This is 40 years of failed bipartisan leadership, which has created really a kind of shell corporation [2:46:39] out of the United States of America. We don't make enough of our own stuff. We don't have enough [2:46:43] self-reliance. Our workers don't have enough bargaining power. That has led in a lot of ways, [2:46:49] I think, to this kind of socialism fervor. And we have to keep fixing these problems. Again, [2:46:55] I think that we're going in the right direction. Maybe people disagree, but it's going to take [2:46:59] years to fix this problem. And if we don't, we are going to end up with a socialist president in this [2:47:04] country. I think it's also a narrative change. And the narrative is stopping immigration is cruelty. [2:47:13] Correct. And you're racist or xenophobic, and that we should just instead give these people [2:47:20] citizenship. And it's not a coincidence that... What we dealt with over the last four years was insane, [2:47:29] where they just opened the border and not just encouraged people to come across, but facilitated [2:47:35] it, helped them, got them on Medicaid, got them on Social Security, got people... They told people, [2:47:41] do you have a bad back? Okay. Well, you're permanent disability, and you get free money. Put them in [2:47:47] a hotel, give them a phone. Like, that's crazy. And then move them to blue states. And then you realize [2:47:53] that that has a direct impact on congressional seats because of the census, which is also nuts. The census [2:48:00] should count citizens. It should only count citizens, but it doesn't. And that actually steals [2:48:05] congressional representation away from areas that have lower illegal immigration, which is its own [2:48:10] problem. So yeah, it's... The thing that I don't understand about the democratic socialists of [2:48:18] America, and obviously I disagree with a lot of their ideas, but if you go back to Cesar Chavez, [2:48:23] one of the original founding fathers of the American workers' rights movement, okay, he was a hardcore [2:48:31] restrictionist on immigration because he thought that the bosses would bring in low-wage immigrants [2:48:36] to compete against his workers and that would drive down their wages. And yet the DSA, which says they [2:48:43] care about the wages of workers, is quite literally like an open borders organization. [2:48:48] So I tend to think that it's all BS, that they are actually pursuing a set of policies that are [2:48:55] good for... Corporations care way more about open borders than they do about any other policy the [2:49:06] DSA cares about. So while these people say that they're trying to fight for workers and they're [2:49:10] trying to fight for the working man, the actual end result of DSA policy is to flood the country [2:49:16] with low-wage immigrants, which will destroy the middle class in this country. In fact, we have run [2:49:20] this experiment for decades now and we have a much weaker middle class than we did before it started. [2:49:26] And I think this is a part of the problem that this country has, that there's this narrative [2:49:33] Republicans are cruel and they're anti-worker and that they're anti-lower class people or lower [2:49:39] middle-class people. That narrative, someone has to do a better job of messaging. [2:49:44] I'm trying to, man. I'm trying to, but it's one of those things that it took a long while for it to [2:49:49] set in. It's going to take a long while to get out of it. But what I just, I try to remind people [2:49:53] is that anybody who actually cares about the safety of your community is going to care about [2:50:00] not empowering police brutality, but empowering the good cops to do what they need to do. [2:50:05] Anybody who cares about law and order is going to want to throw violent criminals in jail, [2:50:09] not close down the prison. Anybody who cares about your wages and your safety is going to want to [2:50:14] control the border. So I just, all I can think to do is to remind people that I'm not saying [2:50:21] Republicans are perfect and, you know, I have disagreements of course within my own party all [2:50:26] the time, but fundamentally our party is right now pursuing a much better set of policies when it comes [2:50:35] to safety of your home, your wages, your ability to keep more of your money. I just got to keep [2:50:41] preaching that message and you know, the chips fall where they may. And if you just look at the result [2:50:47] of what you see in these cities where they don't enforce crime, where they don't enforce immigration [2:50:54] laws, they provide sanctuary states, you see disasters over and over and over again. Yeah. [2:51:01] I mean, and I don't understand exactly why people who are voting for these things can't see that. [2:51:09] They can't see that the results have been catastrophic year after year. They keep getting [2:51:15] worse. Yeah. And the idea of voting a new better person to do the same thing is just crazy. [2:51:21] Yeah. It's totally crazy to me too. I think part of it is we haven't done a good enough [2:51:27] job of actually going to some of these places. Part of it is that it is shifting and sometimes these [2:51:31] shifts just take a long time. If you look, the Republican Party under Trump's leadership is [2:51:36] way more working class, way more middle class than the Republican Party of 20 years ago. So [2:51:41] these things are starting to shift. But the public safety thing is very interesting to me because [2:51:47] one of the promises of America is that every man, woman and child, rich or poor, black or white, [2:51:55] deserves public safety. Every rich person ever has had public safety. Every rich person ever has been able [2:52:02] to afford some security guard to make sure that somebody who comes and tries to steal their stuff [2:52:06] or kidnap their kids, they're protected against that. What America did is we democratized public [2:52:12] safety. Every person gets to keep their property. Every person gets to not be stolen from. Every [2:52:19] person gets to walk down their neighborhood at night without being mugged. And obviously, we have [2:52:24] imperfectly applied that. But what the left has done over the last few years, why I think the crime [2:52:31] thing is, it's not just a sort of public safety thing, it's also a class thing, is they have made [2:52:38] working people less safe. Like if you look at my neighborhood, the neighborhood that my working [2:52:44] class grandparents raised me in, it became less safe over time. And really, working class neighborhoods [2:52:53] had much higher rates of violence, much higher rates of carjackings and so forth. That happened [2:52:59] during Biden's administration. That's not a coincidence. No. Anything else? Go by communion, [2:53:10] Joe, and we can talk about religion and faith and the Ten Commandments next time. But thanks for having [2:53:15] me, man. Thanks for being here. Appreciate it. All right. Wrap it up. Bye, everybody. Great.