Joe Rogan podcast, check it out. The Joe Rogan Experience. Train by day, Joe Rogan podcast by night, all day.
If you want to sort of see a vision of the future, it's like basically the top 20 and even the top 100 is like totally dominated by China. This is like China and a little bit of Korea and Taiwan.
So you in are you in the top 20 in the world? Top 20 in DIA?
Do you want to tell everybody your handle?
No, no, don't tell them, don't tell them, it's not worth it. They actually listed me with my actual name in the list.
Oh did they really? Oh interesting.
There's only two Americans in the top 20. The rest, almost everyone is from Asia.
We were talking about something that I think is really good because people always think that video games are frivolous. But what you were saying I think that's really important is it's so difficult that it requires you to only think about that and it can relieve stress, it can take out the rest of the world because it's so hard.
Yeah, you can only think about that. If I play a video game on extreme difficulty, then I have to concentrate fully on the game and it has a calming effect. It sort of chills down.
You mentioned I think many people like if you play martial arts or you play pool, like something that forces you, I think anything that forces you to concentrate fully actually has a calming effect.
I find it just sort of a mental, a restoring effect mentally. It's good. Jiu-jitsu is like that, archery is like that as well. When you're shooting a bow, there's so many moving things and you're trying, you have to think only of it and it cleans the mind.
I was reading this study about surgeons where they found that surgeons who regularly play video games make less errors.
Well, video games require manual dexterity, so it makes sense. Actually, if somebody was epic at video games, I'd say their surgical skill is going to be very good because in order to be good at video games, any kind of fast reaction video games.
Look at this: 32% fewer errors, 24% faster, and scored 26% better overall than their non-player colleagues.
That's incredible. You should be required in medical school to play video games. If somebody's a top-ranked video game player and they say they're a surgeon, I'd be like plus one, plus two type of thing.
Oh, top ranked for sure. But this isn't even top ranked, this is just people who play.
Your manual dexterity has to be extremely high. So you're looking at things on the screen, you've got, you're reacting and you got like 10 milliseconds to react.
Yes. And so if somebody's got incredible reaction times, manual dexterity, they're obviously going to be a good surgeon.
Imagine if there was a course that you could take that course would promote you, would be 26% better. Everyone would have to take that course. Sure, why would you want a surgeon that's less prepared? You would say, hey Bob, did you take this course? You didn't take this course? Don't you understand this course makes you 26% better? Sure, you would have to take it. Everyone should have to play video games if you want to be a surgeon.
Well, I think it certainly would be a very good test to see if somebody can't play video games well. Because you got to move both hands simultaneously, you got to react to something very fast on the screen, and if your keystrokes or your mouse clicks or whatever are wrong, then you lose the game. So if somebody has a good rank in video games, I would say that their manual dexterity must be extremely good.
Well, it's so hard. Motor skills have to be excellent if you think about like StarCraft or any game like Quake, any game where a lot of people are playing. To rise to the top, you have to be exceptional, period. As a human being, there's something exceptional about you.
Yeah, actually Quake, way back in the day, I was one of the world's best Quake players.
I know, we talked about this. My final semester in college I probably put more time into Quake than all my college classes. When I was on NewsRadio, all of the writers were super nerds. They were very fun guys and they had a LAN set up at the studio where they all played Quake. I had never played video games and I would go in with the writers just kind of hang out with them. We'd get silly and then we would all start playing video games and playing Quake against each other. And I got addicted like hardcore. I got a T1 line installed in my house. I went hardcore.
Exactly. You're checking how many milliseconds of latency.
Oh yeah, I was fully addicted. I was making my own computers, I was going to Fry's hardware and buying motherboards and putting everything together. And you know, it was too much of a time suck though. I'm an obsessive person. I can't get involved, like I can't put golf, no, golf is too slow for me. I mean, I know a lot of people find golf good. I mean, I guess if you think of it like, if you're saying you're going to walk outdoors with friends and occasionally hit a ball, then that's cool. It does require concentration when hitting the ball, but it's too slow for me. Nothing compares to video games in terms of the amount of feedback you get. The sensory overload you get when you're looking at a large high-resolution screen, you have a fast computer, you have headphones on that you're hearing sounds from here and sounds behind you, and rockets are flying by you. There's nothing like that.
Yeah. But I think golf still is like, Jamie will tell you, Jamie's an addict, he's a golf nut. It's super addictive and it takes like eight hours a day.
Yes. Once you get into golf, I think any sport, it gets super addictive. But for me, the intensity of video games is hard to beat.
Yes. And people dismiss it because they think it's just a waste of time, but we're showing real world benefits for people playing video games.
Yeah, if you want to be a drone operator, it's the only game in town.
Really good at video games, for sure. In fact, I can actually tell what my mental acuity is if I just play a very hard video game. So if I'm trying to get an extremely good clear time in Diablo or something like that, or any post-apocalyptic shooter, whatever the case may be. I can tell that I'm tired or my brain's not working as well as it should. It's like a mental calibration. You can tell immediately what is, how good is your mental state. And you know, if you're trying to play really well, if you play late at night and you're tired, you would just play badly. And you can say, you may think that your brain is working well, but it isn't because you play the video game and you're like, you suck.
Yeah, you're putting it under stress. You're really stress testing it.
You stress test it. Sometimes you think, oh, I think I'm fine, but then you play the game, like, okay, I'm like 10% below what I should be.
That's how I feel about workouts for sure. Like that's how I knew I had COVID, or I knew everyone in my family had COVID, and I was trying to not get COVID, and so I was working out. I was like, something's up. Like I felt fine normally, but then during exercise I was like, okay, I can tell there's something wrong here, so let's back off, relax.
Yeah. People who don't stress test their mind, they think they're operating on the same level all the time. Like sometimes I come in here and I can't form a sentence, and I don't know what it is. It's like, what is going on? It's just like sleep, maybe my sleep wasn't that good or something like that. Or I'm too busy and the words aren't coming out. Like I know how to talk, I talk professionally and I can't talk.
I mean, sleep is massive. I mean, like huge. So if I can tell immediately did I get a good night's sleep or not. If I just play a video game for like five minutes, I'm like, okay, my sleep wasn't that good. Because my, you know, and then sometimes your brain will recover through the day. An hour or two after waking up it's better, because your brain does kind of recover from a bad night's sleep a little bit.
You know what it really helps? Creatine, apparently. Creatine is actually a nootropic, believe it or not. There's a lot of benefits of creatine that are really weird.
No, no, it's a natural part of food. Especially for women, apparently. Especially postmenopausal women, it's very beneficial. There's a lot of cognitive benefits and one of the big ones that they found recently is performance when sleep deprived. Mental performance when sleep deprived increases pretty measurably when you supplement with creatine.
Is creatine naturally occurring in like steak or?
Yeah, it's naturally occurring in meat. I think that's where it's coming from. I think it's primarily an animal-based thing. Yeah.
I did switch to steak and eggs for breakfast and I found that's like a power up.
Oh yeah, totally. We're all overrun with carbohydrates. And carbohydrates make this big crash, the rise and the crash, the rise and the crash. You stay flat if you eat a primarily high protein, high fat diet. Your body runs off ketosis essentially. So I just have steak and eggs, no bread or anything, and it's great actually. It's a power up.
I'd say people dismiss this whole carnivore diet thing because in our heads there's a lot of propaganda that put this thing out there that animal agriculture is the number one contributor to global warming. This is rubbish, not true.
Does matter. Not only is it hot, but the real problem is factory farming. Regenerative farming is carbon neutral. If it doesn't sequester carbon, the animals are not going to make any difference to global warming, like none, zero, nothing.
Do you think that's just propaganda because of people that have a vested interest in plant-based meat products and things along those lines?
Green energy, I think it's part of it. You're generally going to get people pushing to avoid meat. Some people maybe they got a financial interest, maybe they're just vegetarians or vegans or whatever, ideological reasons. But it's not going to make any difference to global warming or the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, really. If people eat fewer steaks, it doesn't matter. It's irrelevant. I want to be super clear about that. It will not matter. You will not even be able to measure it. That's how irrelevant it is.
Isn't it funny that that's unmeasurable? Heretic speaking like that's crazy talk nowadays. It's like you have to say we have to eat less meat, that meat is bad.
Totally. Eat as much as you want. It's not going to make a difference.
Sing it, sing it to the world.
Absolutely. And if somebody says it does make a difference, I'm like, how will you measure it? And if you can't even measure it, then it's yeah.
Yeah, literally, you won't be able to measure it. Well, there's so much to talk about today. First of all, all directions, thank you so much for buying Twitter. Thank you so much. I'm not exaggerating when I think you changed the course of history. I really do. I really think you made a fork in the road. We were headed down a path of censorship and of control of narratives that is unprecedented. Forget about what they were able to do back when they had newspapers and the media under control. What they were doing with social media by suppressing information and when you had a combined government effort like with what they were doing with the laptop story. You have 51 former intelligence agents saying that this is Russian disinformation, take it offline, and Twitter complied. If you didn't buy that, we wouldn't have known that. We had no idea.
Exactly. No, the reason I bought it was because I'm pretty attuned. I was like the most interacted with user on Twitter before the acquisition. So before the acquisition I had more interactions than like, there's some accounts like Obama and whatever had higher follower accounts, but I had the most number of interactions of any account in the system. So I was very attuned to like, if they change the system, I can tell immediately. I'm like, something weird is going on here. I just got increasingly uneasy. And obviously when they deplatformed a sitting president, that was just insane.
The things he was posting, he was posting good things. He was saying, hey, do not riot, don't do any destruction of property, please stay calm. That's the kind of stuff he was posting.
And you're like, what's wrong with that?
And then some people say like, oh, that's like some sort of dog whistle, he means the opposite.
I'm like, okay, so we'll give you Trump's account now, you post what you think he should post, because he can post nothing. He can ask people to calm down. It was insane, it didn't make any sense.
Well, it's completely illogical when you say it's dog whistling to tell his followers to not be violent. That's crazy.
Don't you think they'll listen to him? Isn't that the whole point? They listened to him and created violence in the first place. That's what you're accusing him of, right? And then there's the fact that we know that there were agents in the crowd that were agent provocateurs that were encouraging people to do illegal things. We know that for a fact. This was always the big Alex Jones type tinfoil hat conspiracy theory, because Alex proposed that back at the World Trade Organization protests in Seattle in the 90s. And they sent in agent provocateurs, started smashing things, lighting things on fire. Now all of a sudden a peaceful protest is no longer peaceful. They move in the cops, they shut everything down. They had it set up where it was a no-protest zone where you couldn't even have a pin that had the WTO with a red line through it. They wouldn't let you go in to go to work. You couldn't exercise your first amendment rights, you couldn't even have a peaceful protest, a sticker on your car, you couldn't have that.
So no, I think we're very much at a fork in the road in destiny. The reason I did the Twitter acquisition was like, man, if I don't do this, I think we're screwed, is the issue.
Well, if you didn't do it, no one else was going to do it because it wasn't a financial winner. It was kind of a crazy move.
It's a crazy move. The thing was way overpriced. Long term, I think we can ultimately make it a win for investors, but boy, this is a hard way to make a living.
Well, there's also a concerted effort to suppress it. There's a concerted effort with the advertisers.
We had and still have a massive advertiser boycott that was organized by a bunch of left-wing NGOs. And you always want, and I should have brought my, I have a hat, Make Oil Fiction Again.
I was going to wear it, I should have brought my Make Oil Fiction Again hat. But yeah, it's just totally nuts.
So if you didn't do it, no one would have. And here's the hilarious narrative that I keep hearing from idiots: Elon's a bad businessman, Twitter is worth 400% less than when he bought it. No, it wasn't worth that in the first place. It wasn't worth $44 billion, you morons. And also you're not taking into account the advertiser boycott.
Exactly. Exactly. So there are these organizations, like you can tell they have an alien name. So like the Center for Countering Digital Hate is a total scam organization, you know, because they're like the Ministry of Truth type of thing in Orwell.
Yeah. And they organized and they pushed the advertisers to boycott. So we still have, some of the boycott is starting to lift. And I think if Trump wins, we'll see probably most of the boycott lift. But if Kamala wins, we'll see that boycott get stronger and they'll freaking shut down. There's no way that the sort of Kamala regime would allow X to exist.
You really think that they'll be able to shut it down? Is there a pathway to that?
Well, I mean, they can just sic the DOJ on you. And say like, they've had this whole thing about hate speech, misinformation, whatever, except they're the ones pushing the misinformation. But that doesn't stop them from filing massive lawsuits and using the DOJ. The DOJ has been attacking SpaceX for example for not hiring asylum seekers, even though it is legal for SpaceX to hire anyone who is not a permanent resident of the US. So we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.
Just an example of what the DOJ can do.
So it's illegal to hire someone who's not an American citizen for what SpaceX, because SpaceX is considered advanced weapons technology. So it's covered by International Traffic in Arms Regulations because we make rocket technology that can be used against the United States. So if North Korea or Iran got SpaceX rocket technology, they could use that to launch nukes at America. That would be bad.
Yeah, that'd be really bad.
That would be really bad. So since we are in the most extreme category of weapons technology at SpaceX, under US ITAR law, it is illegal for us to hire anyone who's not a permanent resident, because the presumption is that if they're not a permanent resident, they're going to return to their home country and take the rocket technology with them. So it's illegal for us to hire anyone who's not a permanent resident. They can have a green card or be a citizen, they just have to be a permanent resident of the United States. Then there's another law that says if you discriminate against asylum seekers, that's also, you're also breaking the law.
So the DOJ can only do a small number of big lawsuits every year, and they launched a giant lawsuit against SpaceX saying that SpaceX discriminated against asylum seekers.
And we're like, but it's illegal for us to hire anyone who's not a permanent resident. So we're in this, this is what I mean, it's like the Orwell situation is getting insane, like you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't.
Can you imagine history looking back? When you watch the robot arms catch the rocket and you realize this is one of the greatest accomplishments in the history of aerospace, like it is one of the wildest accomplishments. When you watch that thing come and you see all the people cheering and it catches it perfectly. Like holy, imagine how history is going to look back at the DOJ going after that company.
Yeah, how insane it is. A big lawsuit with an army of lawyers. This was not some minor thing. It doesn't even make any sense logically. How can it even get brought to court if it's illegal?
That's exactly, so that's what I mean.
Basically if the government wants to go after you, they'll just find a reason. It's like that famous quote from Beria, you know, Stalin's chief torturer, the head of Stalin's secret police. And he's like, truly evil human being, this guy Beria. One of his famous quotes was, 'Show me the man and I'll show you the crime.' They just decide that you're the target and then they figure out the crime afterwards.
That's the issue. They decided SpaceX was a target, they just figured out the crime afterwards. Which is so crazy because that's exactly what they're saying Trump is going to do if he gets into office. They're doing all the things that they accuse Trump of doing.
Openly, openly. Yeah, the sheer number of hoaxes that the Democratic Party is pushing over and over again. It's like, look, I understand politicians are going to exaggerate, they're going to misspeak, and they'll tell occasional untruths, whatever, that's how it is in politics. But when you have deliberate, repeated pushing of hoaxes, you're like, wait a second, come on man, this is too far.
And you're supposed to be the good guys.
You're supposed to, and you claim to be the good guys.
You're supposed to be the progressives.
The Dems are like, oh, we're the good guys, we're the honest people. No, no, hang on, you can't claim to be the good guys, you can't claim to be the honest people if you're deliberately pushing hoaxes that have been debunked thoroughly. Even Snopes, which is a liberal thing, says it's bogus.
Like the fine people hoax. Obama just said that on stage. Just said that. I was like, what the fuck? He doesn't give a fuck.
He doesn't give a fuck. They're just flat out lies. Flat out lies.
How about the other one where Kamala's campaign used what Trump was saying about protecting women from illegal immigrants. Remember that?
What he was saying is, the women like it or not, I'm going to do it.
Yeah, when he was saying that, they were trying to say that he was taking away women's right to choose, whether women like it or not. That's not what he was saying at all.
Absolutely, he was literally talking about protecting them from dangerous people that are sneaking in through the border.
Yes, exactly. They'll take like not even a full sentence, like a half a sentence from Trump and then they'll push it on every ad, every speaking event, every, and it gets repeated on the news.
This is what's crazy. They'll talk about it on these quote news shows.
Exactly. I mean, a recent one that came up, which had a lot of people because a lot of people reached out to me was like, they're like, oh, Trump says he wants to execute Liz Cheney.
I'm like, that is utter, it's not what he said at all. It's not what he said at all. All he said was that look, if Liz Cheney actually had to fight at the front lines, she'd think twice about going to war.
Exactly. It's easy to go to war, it's easy to be a warmonger if you don't have to risk dying at the front lines. If people are having fancy dinners in Washington DC while people are being slaughtered in trenches, you're not feeling the pain, exactly. You're not taking the risk. It's someone else dying. That's cruel and lacking in empathy.
And all Trump was saying was that Liz Cheney would be much less of a warmonger, because she's a huge warmonger just like her dad, if she actually had to go to the front lines and fight herself.
And meanwhile they're saying that he's saying she should be shot.
Yes, which is a total lie. But I had tons of people call me this weekend saying, oh, Trump says he's going to put Liz Cheney in a firing squad. I'm like, that is an outrageous lie. And the legacy media ran with that lie big time.
Yeah, it's crazy. It's just wild to see. And if it wasn't for Twitter or X now, I don't think we would know about all this stuff. I think it would be very difficult. I think YouTube throttled, they did something weird, they won't say what they did, but they did something weird with the Trump interview that I did. Where you couldn't find it. It doesn't make sense. It was like the biggest interview on Earth and you can't find it. Not only that, it wasn't trending. It wasn't trending.
It wasn't trending. You're like, there's just no excuse for that, man. No excuse. There's no excuse. It was getting a million views, 1.4, 1.5 an hour. And it wasn't trending.
And it's like, your channel is a known channel. It's not like it was started yesterday. It's like this is a high trust, yours is a high trust channel. It's not like you're trying to sell scam crypto coins or something.
Well, thank God we put it on X as well, because I think just with your account and my account alone, it's like 70 million views.
Yeah, exactly, yeah. Well, it's like you can't hide things anymore.
Because of you. And if it wasn't for you, I think they would have had total control of social media by now. They would have, they banned so many accounts during the pandemic, so many dissenting scientists and doctors and physicians, they banned so many conspiracy theorists, so many people that colored outside the lines. They would have done that everywhere. And it probably would have, I think even what's going on at Facebook, they're being more lenient. You hear Zuckerberg talking about taking a more libertarian stance, that's entirely a reaction to the way Twitter has kind of moved the watermark.
Exactly. So as soon as any company steps out of line and is willing to actually have the truth debated on their platform, it forces the other platforms to allow things to be more truthful, to not censor, because their censorship becomes glaringly obvious.
Yes. And you know, the best thing I found as a rebuttal, like if somebody, if there's a hoax, is just go to the source material. You know, if somebody thinks, oh, Trump said we should put Liz Cheney in a firing squad, I'm like, let me send you a link to X so you can watch his video. That's the best way. Don't take my opinion for it, don't take anyone's opinion for it. Go to the source material. And community notes.
And community notes. Community notes is the best. It's awesome. It's incredible.
Because everybody gets checked.
Including me. And with community notes, all the software is open source and all the data is open source. So you can recreate any given note independently.
That's amazing. That's total absolute transparency in every way.
You know, sometimes I get asked, can you remove a note? Mostly by the left but sometimes by the right. I'm like, I don't even remove notes on my own account. Nothing. And by the way, everything is totally open, so if I did that, it would stick out like a sore thumb immediately. It's not going to be subtle.
It's the best counter to misinformation.
Like let everybody look at it and say, okay, here's what the actual facts say.
Yes, exactly. The counter to misinformation is better information.
Not just that, but having it checked in real time by the community. So you have millions of people that can go over it and debate whether or not this is true or that's true.
Yes. And like I said, the best way to understand the truth of things is don't take anyone's opinion for it. Look at the source material. So it's like look at what someone actually said, look at what someone actually did, look at the real videos of the situation, and then you can actually, you'll know what's real.
So as of today, when you were literally on your way here, you sent me this text saying that they're trying to lock you up in jail in Pennsylvania. Tell me what the fuck is happening.
Well, you know, there's the classic sort of Soros DA situation. So we're making a lot of progress in Pennsylvania. I've been, I've given a whole bunch of talks throughout the state, because Pennsylvania is the linchpin in this election. Whoever wins Pennsylvania wins the election. So I've been giving talks. I spent three years in Pennsylvania. I went to college in Philadelphia, so it's not like I'm a total stranger to the state. I spent three years there.
And we've organized this petition in support of the Constitution, which I think is a good thing. And specifically asking people to, and we wanted this to be registered voters in swing states. Basically we want to send a message to the politicians to say that the people care about the Constitution. Because there have been all these attacks on the Constitution, especially on the Democrat side, they've been repeatedly saying that the First Amendment is an obstacle because they're claiming the First Amendment is enabling disinformation, misinformation.
I'm like, there's a reason for the First Amendment. Freedom of speech. The reason the founders of the country put freedom of speech there is because they came from countries where if you spoke your mind, you would get shot or imprisoned. That's why the First Amendment exists. And the Second Amendment is there to stop the tyranny of government. The Second Amendment, the right to bear arms, is there to protect freedom of speech.
And I've had these debates especially with people in LA because they want to take everyone's guns away. And I'm like, yo, can you guarantee me that we will never have a tyrannical government in the United States? Can you make that guarantee? They're like, well, nobody can make that guarantee. I'm like, then we need to keep our guns because that's what's going to stop it. That sounds crazy for people to hear because they think about gun violence and gun problems and this and that. But that's the reality of the world that we live in. That tyranny is possible and it exists other places and it's slowly rearing its head. In the UK, the number of people that have been arrested for just social media posts is bananas. It's in the thousands.
Yes, several thousand people have been given prison sentences in the UK for social media posts where there was no explicit link to actual violence, but they just said it encouraged violence. Like, well, did anyone actually do anything as a result of that media post? Well, no. And then they have a prison overcrowding situation in the UK, so they're quite literally releasing convicted pedophiles and putting people in jail for Facebook posts. That's an actual thing happening in Britain.
That is so wild. That is so wild.
You know, it's going on and what's insane to me.
But it's all being encouraged by the left. Ketanji Brown Jackson, John Kerry was one of the people who said that, he's on camera like a few weeks ago saying that the First Amendment is an obstacle to fighting misinformation.
Yeah, that's crazy. That's such a crazy thing to say when you have a solution in community notes. You have a solution in something like that that could clear everything up, any confusion, within a day or two. And even without a community note, you can reply to a post with evidence that shows that the post is wrong. You don't even need community notes. I mean, community notes is helpful because it sticks to the original note.
Yes, but in the replies you can say here's why you're wrong, here are the reasons and here's the evidence.
The argument is that people are too unsophisticated, that they're not going to research these things. They're going to be a victim of misinformation. So they're going to read something, it's incorrect, they're going to run with it, people are going to die, the world is going to be ruined because people believed in misinformation. It's a stupid argument. Because it's an argument that they're too dumb to know what's right or wrong.
Because you're saying it's misinformation, why do you think that you're smarter than everybody who reads that?
Exactly. And obviously anyone on the X system knows that things are posted and then there are replies and there are blue checks and it's immediately corrected. But where are the corrections for the legacy media? When broadcast media says false things all the time, but it's a one-way street. There's no rebuttal, there's no counter. Who's apologized for being incorrect? Did Rachel Maddow ever apologize for telling everybody that if you get the COVID vaccine you're never going to get COVID, the virus stops with you? Never. No one ever. It was not true at the time, there was no evidence to support it at the time, it's pure propaganda. And she said it. The Russia hoax. For three years they said that he was Putin's toy and that Putin had him compromised. The Steele dossier was completely fabricated by a lawyer, Igor Danchenko, who was paid by the Clinton campaign.
And still people think the Russia hoax is real. And there's no repercussions. No one had to apologize. Hillary Clinton never came out and apologized for that and people still listen to her. The whole thing is crazy. And it's all coming from the left. Which growing up as a person who was in the left my whole life, it doesn't make any sense.
Same, same. I was on the left until like three years ago. It's not the left anymore. It's just like, I think we obviously want, I believe we want freedom. We want to maximize personal liberty. I think we want to be kind to people, we want to have empathy. But it's very important to have personal freedom and a merit-based society. The left wants to oppress your freedoms, especially freedom of speech. And they want to have a non-merit-based society, with race-based and sex-based preferences.
Wait a second, no, we just want people to succeed based on their skills and their hard work. And if they don't want people to express themselves about particular issues, then they're not doing the will of the people. And if they're trying to suppress people's ability to communicate, they're only doing that because they want to do things that people don't want them to do. And they want to silence opposition. That's all it is. And the fact that people can't see that, they want to call Trump a fascist. The whole thing is through the looking glass. I mean, it's like one hoax after another that they're perpetrating against Trump. Like they try to call the rally at Madison Square Garden like a Nazi rally. I'm like, yo, there was literally an Israeli flag in the audience. I think like a quarter of the speakers were Jewish. There were people of every race, color, creed, religion at that rally. Tell me what about that is Nazi? No. And yet it was portrayed as a Nazi rally. MSNBC they literally showed video of the Nazi rally from the 1930s and then compared it to the Trump rally now. Ignoring the fact that Jimmy Carter spoke there.
There have been dozens of political rallies at Madison Square Garden. Dozens on the Democrat side. And people on X like, here's exactly, here's Jimmy Carter, and here's Bill Clinton, and here's, wait a second, actually it looks like every presidential candidate on the Democrat side has done a rally at Madison Square Garden. Are they Nazis too? But what they're doing is they're preying on low-information voters who aren't engaged actively on social media, who don't have the time to look through everything.
Exactly, yeah. People are living, if people are just looking at legacy mainstream media, then they have a totally different worldview than if they're on X and seeing the actual flow of argument and the actual evidence.
Well, what was the pushback like, what happened when you guys released the Twitter files? Because I think the Twitter files is probably one of the most important things in this age of information for understanding the influence that government has on social media and on discourse. Because when we found out that the government was actually asking Twitter to remove posts that were factual. Did they do the same thing to Facebook? They had them throttle pieces of one of Tucker Carlson's shows, they suppressed the views by 50%.
Yeah, of factual information.
No, there was massive government interference in Twitter. But Twitter welcomed it.
Old Twitter welcomed it. I mean, old Twitter was controlled by far-left activists. And they welcomed the government interference. They got paid by the government for it.
They got paid millions of dollars for suppressing information.
That's crazy. They got paid for their time.
Correct. And a bunch of it was flat out illegal. Like the FBI had this sort of magic portal into the Twitter system, and all the communication in that portal was auto-deleted after two weeks, which breaks federal FOIA laws. So we don't even know what was said because it was all deleted after two weeks.
That's insane. That's so crazy. It's so crazy that people thought that was okay.
It's super not okay. It's unconstitutional and no one would want that. No one would want the government to have that kind of access.
Exactly. And what was the blowback like when all that stuff got released? Like you had to anticipate that there was going to be problems when you released that. Like what happened?
Well, we got, we did lose a lot of advertising dollars. Which is crazy because it's essentially one of the most important forms of journalism, exposing government corruption.
Yes. I mean, this is the weird thing. The left used to be big on exposing government corruption, but once they control the government, they no longer want to expose the government corruption. They want to pretend that the left-wing government's incapable of corruption because we're on the good side.
I think maybe whoever's in power doesn't want the other side to hurt. Because as you pointed out, the left historically, up until maybe even 10 years ago or something, was the free speech party, and now it's the anti-free speech party. And they just use words like, oh, we have to be against hate speech and misinformation, disinformation, but these are propaganda words. You know, who's defining hate speech, who's defining misinformation? The government? Do you really trust the government to make that definition?
The whole point of the First Amendment is you do not trust the government. Well, especially when they're wrong and then there's no repercussions.
Like with the whole lab leak theory, you would get kicked off of YouTube if you even presented this argument that maybe the coronavirus lab where they're doing work on the exact same virus that got released.
Yep, hey, maybe that's where it came from since that's where the virus started. What do you think, guys? Yeah, they kick you right off of YouTube.
Yeah, exactly. It's like, do you think maybe it could have come from the place called the Novel Coronavirus Research Institute? That John Stewart bit that he did on Colbert was amazing. What does it say on the door again? Can I see your business card? And to see Colbert resisting it with every fiber of his — what's going to happen to us — he was totally blocking the bit to the point where John Stewart got off his chair and started walking around to try to take control.
Yeah, good on John. And then the left tried to cancel John Stewart, of course. Meanwhile, he was right. He was right.
And no apologies. No apologies.
And you know, the whole Fauci thing — like, any criticism of Fauci, it's like an — freaking demon, if you ask me. If you read RFK's book, The Real Anthony Fauci, if that's correct, if the facts are in there, that's true, it's all referenced, you could find the sources. And on top of it, he's never been sued for that book, which doesn't make any sense. If he just made a bunch of lies up, he would get sued.
Yes, so the guy's a monster.
I think so, yeah. I think so too. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I think like just looking at the lies that he told, the way he tried to define gain of function research to Rand Paul. But I think a lot — maybe a lot of people out there don't realize Fauci funded the bioweapons research that was going on in Wuhan. And he bankshot it off — like, he can't send the money directly to China, he just bankshot it off EcoHealth, right? This just like fake nonprofit in the US, and they sent it to Wuhan. And Obama put the skids on that. He stopped that in 2014.
Yes, I mean, so you know, to give Obama — throw Obama — give Obama some credit, he actually was like looking at this and say, hey, this is crazy, and we need — and he actually did stop the so-called gain of function — again, a propaganda word — because what is the function they're talking about? Death.
Right, right. So if you actually use the right word, gain of function is death maximization. Right? Then you're like, oh hey guys, should we fund bioweapon research into death maximization? Because that's what gain of function means.
Yeah, it means the function — making a disease so that people can get it, give it to people. And by the way, what's that function again? Oh, the function is death. Okay, so just call it a death-maximizing virus if you're doing research on that. And the idea behind this research is so that we can cure these things — how come you don't have a cure? Start with a cure. Cure first, disease second. It doesn't make any sense. Like, you guys had no strategy for dealing with it if it got out, and so you have to like make up this new vaccine in like record time, Operation Warp Speed, released to the people with very little testing.
It's crazy. It was crazy.
The whole thing's crazy and everybody just went along with it.
Looney Tunes, next level.
Well, the scope was fascinating to watch people step in line. That's like one of the biggest psyops of all time.
Of all time, of all time.
And everybody got in line. And when you take it back to when pharmaceutical drug companies were able to advertise on media in the 1990s — that change, one of two countries in the whole world that allows this — and because of that, because we don't have socialized medicine, it's a complete profit scam. And they went hard claiming all sorts of things that were never researched, all sorts of things that were not supported by data — like the fact that it would stop transmission, the fact that it would stop infection, the fact that it was safe for pregnant women, the fact that it was safe for children — all of it. And they pushed it on the whole world. And if you didn't say that at a cocktail party, you were a pariah.
And you were an anti-vaxxer. It was totally psycho. It was like being a Holocaust denier — you get kicked out of polite society.
Exactly. Bananas. And I should say, like, I'm actually generally pro-vaccine overall. You know, I think we should look at these things — but I believe in the scientific method. So you don't have a blanket acceptance that any given medication or any given treatment is 100% good. You should always be it with some skepticism, especially when you're getting the data from pharmaceutical drug companies that have a long history of criminal conduct.
They've got a vested interest. They've got a vested interest in the research. It's sort of like asking tobacco companies about whether smoking is dangerous, you know? Exactly the same thing.
Yeah, according to our scientists, everything's fine.
They lied in court forever.
The same thing they do with OxyContin when they said that it wasn't addictive. Like, they have a long history of being full of it if it makes them money and that's what they do, that's their business. They've literally lost multi-billion-dollar lawsuits.
They're in the — you have amazing scientists, right? You have these clinical researchers, these people that developed these incredible drugs, and this is their job. Their job is to figure out some new way to cure something, some new way to stop things. And then you have the money people.
And the problem is when you have this one thing that you would assume they're only doing it to help people, and then they have this other faction that they're all just numbers people and all they give a about is maximizing profits and making sure — they literally have an obligation to their shareholders, they have to make the most amount of money possible. And so they just want to push it on everybody. Like the Vioxx scandal — there's internal emails showing they knew there was going to be cardiovascular events, people were going to get strokes, and they're like, I think we're still going to do well. And they did. They made like 12 billion dollars, they got fined seven, and 50 to 60,000 people died.
Holy. Yeah, one of them was a friend of mine. Got a stroke and died. Yeah, no, he didn't die — he lived. But he was a really healthy guy, never had the same problems, and he took Vioxx and all of a sudden he was slurring his words and he couldn't concentrate. And people like, I think you're having a stroke, and they took him to the hospital. And then you have this giant class-action lawsuit, then Vioxx gets pulled from the market and they get sued and the whole thing's crazy. But there's a long history of this.
I think — what is the number, like one-third of the drugs that the FDA approves gets pulled?
It's bananas. That is crazy. That's crazy. You're shitty at one-third of the things that you say are okay, but yet you're trying to stop MDMA therapy for veterans.
Yeah, they should let MDMA through, honestly. I think that would actually help a lot of people.
It would help a lot of people. There's a lot of different therapies — specifically psilocybin, ibogaine. The fact you have to go to Mexico to get ibogaine therapy for veterans — so many guys I've talked to have gone over there and it's like completely giving them a clean slate, refreshed their mind, a totally new perspective on life. Alleviated depression, cured addictions. Illegal. Oxycotton, go get it.
Yeah, and I know some people whose life was ruined by OxyContin, you know.
Because it really depends on individual biochemistry. Like to me, opioids are not addictive to me. Like, I've had them when I've had operations or something, and they barely affect my pain level and they make me like itchy and uncomfortable.
Exactly. But I'm like — so like, I could never get addicted to alcohol or opioids. It's just impossible, because my biochemistry just does not have — but I love tasty food. Feel like, you know, if there's — I'm addicted to tasty food.
Sure. But like, there can be — like, I have a whole bar of alcohol that's there for decoration, I've never done shit basically.
I feel the same way. I could easily quit alcohol. I mean, I'll go weeks without having a drink and it doesn't bother me at all. But I know some people, they have one drink and they're off to the races.
And that's the difference in the biochemical differences that we all have. Yeah, I mean, I think that's the case with a lot of addictions. I'm not addicted to gambling, but I get it, I see it, I've seen it in people. But I have this aversion to things that I know are going to ruin my life. Like, I see it — that's why I've never tried cocaine. I just saw too many people.
It looks too fun. Like, I don't want to get involved.
Yeah. I mean, I think generally for any given drug, legal or illegal, the question is: can you complete the following sentence — blank made me a better person? Like, I've never heard anyone say meth made them a better person or cocaine made them a better person.
No, never. Made a lot of soldiers better, I think.
I think that's — yeah, I mean, if you're doing — if your soldiers need to go for three days in a row, yeah, it's really effective at that. You know, people give France a hard time about capitulating in World War II, but you know what's worse than the Nazis? Nazis on meth. They're not stopping. Normandy, six bullets, they're like — they're still coming. That book over there, Blitzed, is all about the use of methamphetamines and the different drugs that they gave their soldiers. The guys at the front of the line, they gave the most meth.
Yes, they have different dosages. Yeah, I mean, you just basically think you're invulnerable on meth. And so it's one thing, like I said, it's one thing to have the Nazis coming after you, but Nazis on meth — you're like, holy, those are not stopping, man. For three days, they're not stopping.
That's not a statement — meth made me a better person — that you hear very often. I've never heard that before. No, you hear a lot of like psilocybin advocates, you hear a lot of people that talk about psychedelics. Exactly, I've actually heard many people say that LSD or mushrooms or MDMA made them a better person. Many people.
Yeah. So that's why I'm like, I think a rule for the FDA should be like, hey look, if you can complete the sentence, legal or illegal, that blank made you a better person, actually, then you got a good drug. And if you can't, you got a bad drug. Also, if there's drugs that are available right now that can absolutely ruin people's lives — the rationalization for stopping other drugs that might ruin people's lives but also can help a lot of people's lives, it doesn't make any sense.
Right. It's basically the same thing as censorship. You're taking away people's ability to discern what's true and not true, and you're taking away people's ability to discern what's good for you and not good for you. And the way to find that out is to have as much information as possible, so to do research and actually to have unbiased, actual objective observers who are looking at all this stuff that give you real data.
Yes. And the opposite of that, or the counter of that, is like, if you don't do that, you're empowering cartels.
Yes, that's the whole reason why they have all that money. It's because it's illegal to sell these drugs in America, the demand is never going away. So instead of limiting the amount of drugs, now you've got toxic drugs because fentanyl and all this other stuff has been — because they're not pure. So you're just killing people, you're not saving anybody by protecting them from themselves.
True. But it's a tricky situation because what do you do? Like, if you just say, okay, now everyone can sell — all these people that have been selling boner pills, now you can sell meth — like, holy, you get the double combo. The Viagra and meth, right?
Jesus Christ. Oh my god. Oh my god. Well, I mean, how many people are already doing that right now?
There's a lot of people out there that are essentially on meth, especially people that abuse Adderall. They're basically on amphetamine up all day long.
Yeah, Adderall is low-grade amphetamine. Yeah, and I've actually seen people become much worse people if they take too much Adderall, like much worse. You know, it's like an anger amplifier. So now, I'm not saying Adderall is something where there aren't pluses and minuses — it's not a clear-cut issue. It does help some people a great deal. But in higher doses, man, that stuff — I've seen people turn into just raging monsters on high doses of Adderall. Just angry, like extremely angry all the time.
Yeah, they're messed up. Yeah, that's what happens if you take meth. It's crazy. Meth turns you into a freaking rage demon. And so many prescriptions — I'm like, Jesus, we Googled it, like one year there was like 39 million prescriptions for Adderall in this country.
Oh yeah. Like once in a while there's like an Adderall shortage and there's like widespread panic, you know? And then what do people do? And then it's the same thing as when they tried to limit the amount of OxyContin — people go to street heroin. And if you're addicted to Adderall and your dealer, the guy who sells you weed, is like, hey man, I can get you like low-grade meth, like the stuff the Nazis took — well, they had I.G. grade meth actually, they had pharmaceutical grade, it was — they had epic, epic meth. It was made by the — like, pharmaceutical grade meth is going to be — if you look at the freaking Wikipedia page, there's like many different versions of meth, not all the same, and they have different effects.
But like pharmaceutical grade, pure meth — you are going to be, oh my God, super productive. Super productive for a certain period of time. And you're not going to sleep for a while. And then you will have some anger management issues. So like, they actually — the Nazis, they did actually roll back how much meth they were using because they had quite a few incidents of the soldiers killing their officers because they were on too much meth.
They would, yeah, so they would shoot — many officers got fragged by their platoon that was on too much meth because that happened quite a few times. Like, when someone's on a lot of meth, they can get very angry.
Did you ever pay attention to when John McAfee was cooking meth in a lab in his backyard? McAfee is quite a character.
We had him on the podcast when he was on the run. So he called in from an undisclosed location when he was running from — where was he? Costa Rica, is that where he was? Belize, right? So when he was running from the authorities, he called in, we had him on the podcast on the run. And I was asking him about these posts because there was an online account that was linked to him where he had this very detailed laboratory, like super sophisticated, making the best meth. Like a super genius cooking meth. I think he had his lab — he was making like a wide range of drugs. And there was — I talked to actually a reporter who went down and interviewed him in Belize, and the reporter said, man, that's one of the scariest things. He was quite terrified. So like one of the things — McAfee, he had I guess this trick where he would play Russian roulette with himself. So he'd put a bullet in the revolver and spin the chamber, and clearly he had some trick to know it was not — there's some way that he knows it's not the right bullet. But I do wonder if McAfee is high and he does that, he's not always going to get the trick right, you know?
Do you think he had a trick, or maybe —?
So according to this reporter, when he went to visit McAfee in Belize, McAfee took out the revolver, put a bullet in the revolver, spun the chamber, and then pointed it at his head and went click. And the reporter's like saying, please don't do this, like this is insane. Click, click, click. And then he pointed the gun at the ground and it went click, bang, and shot a bullet in the ground.
Jesus, that's a hell of a party trick.
Jeez, that's next-level party. That's the guy who's seen The Deer Hunter too many times. He — remember that scene where they were forcing — yes, yeah. Woo, that's a heavy scene. That was a heavy scene. Robert De Niro and Christopher Walken — that's one of the greatest scenes in any movie ever. I remember watching that scene just like clawing at my pants.
Wild. And he created brilliant antivirus software.
Yeah, yeah. He may have made some of the viruses too.
Well, didn't he like give laptops to a bunch of government organizations with viruses on them so that he could like pay attention to what they were doing?
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if somebody whacked that guy. I don't know what happened to him, but he would be a guy that would be like, this guy is a little bit too loose. He probably had sensitive information.
I don't know, for sure he did. I mean, I found him to be an interesting guy. I mean, like, I generally feel like if somebody's not harming someone else, they should be okay. Now, there is some suggestion that McAfee killed his neighbor in Belize.
Yeah, so probably did. Maybe the neighbor was a douchebag. I think he probably did. Seems like he probably did. Seems like the neighbor killed his dog.
And then it seems like he killed the neighbor. Yeah, allegedly. Yeah, I mean, it seems likely. It's not a zero possibility.
It's definitely not zero.
It seems more than not. He's a methed-up wild man playing Russian roulette — hey, maybe you kill your neighbor. Yes. I mean, if somebody killed your dog, you'd be really inclined to kill them too.
Yeah. Somebody killed your squirrel.
Yeah, the squirrel thing is bananas.
Yeah, that squirrel thing. So here's the thing about the whole squirrel thing — how can it be that we live in America, supposedly land of the free, and the government can barge into your home with guns, and if you resist you're going to get shot, and then take your pets and execute them. And if they can do that to your pets, what do you think they can do to you?
I know, that's not an exaggeration. Absolutely. It sounds like you're — oh, that's so crazy, how can you make that connection? But it's — why would you kill that cute little squirrel that was obviously a pet and trained from the time it was a baby? If you see the interaction that guy has with that squirrel, it was wonderful, it was really cute.
Yes, absolutely. It was just obviously a pet squirrel and a raccoon too, and doing no harm. And the government comes in, barges into the guy's house, takes his pets, and kills them.
And I think this should really get people out there mobilized, frankly. Because you think, you see like the John Wick movie where John Wick just wants peace — in the first movie he just wants to retire, and they offer him tons of money because they want him to keep being an assassin. They offer him tons of money, they threaten him, he's like, listen, I'm not going to be — I'm out, you know. And they kill his dog.
That was a really — they killed a cute little puppy. And the puppy was his ex-wife's gift to him when she died of cancer.
Yeah. Great movie, great movie. The best revenge movie of all time because it's so ridiculous — he kills everybody. Kills everyone. And you're rooting for him.
Yeah. They shouldn't have killed his dog. Yeah, they f-ed up. And they shouldn't have killed that squirrel. They shouldn't have killed that squirrel.
I mean, how many cases have we not heard about? Look at that little guy, that squirrel clearly had a love relationship with that guy. He would hop all over him and climb on him. I mean, it was — that was his pet. That squirrel thought of that man as his protector, as his companion. There was nothing wrong with that. And in Texas it's totally legal — you could have a zebra out here. You can have whatever you want, and that's the argument for freedom. And the flip side is you get a bunch of people with tigers in their backyard, which is not great. It's like, this was a squirrel. It's not an anaconda or a crocodile or something.
Or a chimpanzee. Did you see Chimp Crazy?
Oh man. Chimps will eat your face. Okay, they will f you up. They will f you, and the thing is, they don't even kill you, they just — chimps don't even kill people, which is really weird. They just bite your hands off and bite your dick off and tear your face apart.
They want to leave you — they could kill you easily. If a chimp wanted to just punch you in the head until you're dead, it wouldn't take long. But they don't kill you, they just rip you apart.
Yeah. And so you can have a chimp — well, you used to be able to have a chimp in a lot of states, and then Chimp Crazy kind of exposed a lot of that. And PETA did a great job of stopping people from keeping chimps as pets, because once they hit like five, you can't control them anymore.
What's totally understandable — if somebody's got a creature that is dangerous to others. But obviously a squirrel and a raccoon are not.
Well, squirrels are everywhere. That's what's so crazy. Like, why can't you have it in the house? What kind of rules are we dealing with? You have rats everywhere. I mean, they're allowing criminals to go free and violent criminals to go free, but they're spending your tax dollars to come in and execute your pets. What the hell is going on?
Exactly. And it's — but it's overreach. It's government overreach. And this just keeps getting worse every year. And that's why we've got to fight back against this. And you know, people say, well, it's just a squirrel. Well, in John Wick's case, it was just a dog.
Right. Yeah, you know, but — well, remember the Russian guy said, it's a dog, it's just a dog.
Yeah. Well, the funniest thing is — I just don't understand how anybody could justify it. I don't understand how any — it seems to me that in a logical world, all that guy would have to do is say, want to see me with this squirrel? This squirrel's a pet. Like, look, he hops on me, he eats, he sleeps. I can have a gerbil but I can't have a squirrel. I can have a guinea pig, I can't have a squirrel. I can have a chinchilla. My daughter has a chinchilla, it's adorable, adorable little thing, climbs all over. Can't have a squirrel.
Even if they did take a squirrel away, couldn't they have released it into the woods or something?
Well, the idea is you have to euthanize it because it's used to being fed, it doesn't know how to forage, it won't be able to find a home. Squirrels are brutal. Squirrels are absolutely brutal to each other — they throw each other out of trees, which is one of the reasons why squirrels can fall from like 30 feet and just kind of bounce off the ground and live. It's a natural adaptation, because squirrels during mating, they bite each other. There used to be like a myth that squirrels bite each other's nuts off, and okay, that seems to be a myth, but it came out of the fact that squirrels are so ruthless during mating. So one female — I have squirrels in my backyard, I watch it all the time — one female apparently goes into estrus and all the male squirrels fight to get to her. So they're running up trees and chasing each other around trees, literally throwing each other off trees. So if this poor little Peanut the squirrel, who's used to living with a guy in an apartment, gets out there in the wild world — well, fair enough, at least he has a chance. But how about just leave him with the guy? Yeah, leave him with the guy for sure. What the f is wrong with you? Why are you killing that squirrel? It doesn't make any sense.
Yeah. And then to add insult to injury, there were a bunch of people on the left who were actually posting that they're glad that MAGA squirrel got killed. Which is — MAGA squirrel? Like, the squirrel has an ideology? It's a cute little fluffy squirrel.
Exactly. Well, it's a nice symbol because most reasonable, compassionate people think that's terrible. And most people who have pets think it's terrible. So I don't know, I mean, I hope people just go out there and vote for Peanut, man, if nothing else. If nothing else, just vote — I vote for Peanut.
You know, they've done such a job of painting Trump as a monster. You know, they've taken the worst things that he's ever said and amplified — and he's not a perfect person, but guess what, no one's a perfect person. They don't exist. This purity test — like, if Obama was a perfect person, he wouldn't be lying on stage about that very fine people hoax.
There's exactly — no one's going to be a perfect person. But the thing that they didn't understand about Trump is he's so crazy that if you tell him he can't do something — like, remember Obama did that during that White House Correspondents' Dinner? There's one thing that I am that you'll never be — president of the United States. You see Trump in the audience going, okay.
You know, funny thing is I was actually at that White House Correspondents' Dinner where it's supposed to be a roast of the president, right? Trump's there. He's actually supporting — if you go to the Correspondents' Center, you're there in support of the president and in support of the press. And it's meant to be roasting the president. Trump's just there, he's like, actually, just here to support. And then they turned it around and just started roasting Trump, and he's just sitting there. I'm like, he's like, yo, I just came to the dinner, I'm just here to support.
We know what it was because of, right? The birther stuff.
Oh, okay, yeah. That's what it all was. It was all — Trump was at the head of a lot of these people spreading this rumor online that Obama's birth certificate was forged and he's actually from Kenya.
What's weird is if you go back to Obama's early days, there are some things that say he's from Kenya. Like, I think in his bio from college said he was from Kenya. But, you know, that could just be — people print things wrong all the time. It doesn't mean he's actually from Kenya. But Trump was one of those guys that was spreading that supposedly false rumor.
Why is he pushing it hard? I'm not — this is the kind of thing where I want to just go and look at, saying, what did he actually say?
No, he definitely was — he was definitely saying, you know, look. I don't think he has the time to go into things like very deeply, and so I think he could probably be influenced by a bunch of people like these Marjorie Taylor Greene type people who come to him with some wild-ass theory. He might be. And I think there's a lot of that stuff that gets fed to people on purpose so that they'll say incorrect things so that they're easy to dismiss. And I think there's also a lot of people that just make up — they tell you the Earth is flat and then a bunch of people watch a YouTube video and they believe it.
Yeah, well, but on that White House Correspondents' — I was there. And the degree to which they attacked Trump at that White House Correspondents' Center was really — it was so over the top. It was like making everyone uncomfortable. Really, it was really over the top.
I mean, I think a few passing jokes are fine, but they twisted the knife big on Trump in that. And you could see Trump just getting like angrier and angrier and more and more upset.
I wonder if — and it's like, man, this is not good karma. You know, that's what I was thinking at the time. I was two tables away from Trump, and I'm looking, I'm like, man, this is too much.
Well, it's kind of crazy what they made out of that, because that's the kind of guy that if you tell him he can't do something, he's going to just keep trying. Like, it was a big mistake to rag on him so much at that White House Correspondents' Center.
Well, just look at the way they've attacked him with just using the legal system — like this thing in New York where the 34 different felony counts, they were essentially misdemeanors that were bookkeeping errors that they decided, even though it passed the statute of limitations, to try him for these. They didn't identify a felony. Abuse of the law is what's going on.
But most people would have quit. Most people, after the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit and this lawsuit and all the other ones — the insurrection thing, the Georgia thing, all these different things, getting kicked off of Twitter — most people would just like, this is too much, I can't take this.
But he's so crazy, he's like, all right, come on, we're going to war. And he just digs his heels in and keeps going.
Yeah. It's the wrong guy to do that to. Just like attacking him at the White House Correspondents' Dinner — most people been humiliated. He got angry. He's like, yeah, all right, say I can't be president? I've been thinking about running for about 15 years. Finally, I'm going to run.
Yeah, yeah. That was a real bad move. But yeah, I mean, I can certainly understand making some jokes about Trump. But man, I was there at that dinner, and they ragged on Trump so much. It was insane.
The reason why I would push back on that is I would say there's a bunch of different speakers, right? And Trump would obviously be a target. And if they all attacked him, it's because — if you're going to make fun of people in the audience, especially in the zeitgeist — that whole birther thing was big, and most people are dismissing it as being a ridiculous conspiracy theory. So who the f is this guy saying this? And so you have eight to ten individual speakers that are writing monologues — of course they're all going to hit Trump.
Yeah, well, anyway, obviously it was a mistake. They shouldn't have done that. And it's like you can buy people to watch that original source material. And I think a few jokes are fine. You know, but it's like he shouldn't be — it felt like he was the primary object of the roast. Which is — that's not the whole point of the thing. It's a roast of the president, not roast the audience.
The thing about it is he's easy to roast. And then on top of that, Obama was like loved and cherished by the left, and most of those people are on the left. There's only so far you can push, you know? You can't ask him about the chef. You know, like, what happened with the chef, bro? You can't — certain things you can't bring up that you want to.
