Ep 40 | Ami Horowitz | The Glenn Beck Podcast

The search for truth used to be a noble enterprise.

The pursuit of truth inspired everyone from the great philosophers of the ancient world of Greece to the Christians during the first great awakening, and even the scientists of Silicon Valley find the truth.

But today, truth is no longer the metric or the standard that anyone is striving for.

Truth now is relative.

Truth must be politically correct.

The search of and the pursuit of what is true has now become taboo in far too many places in not only this country, but the rest of the world.

The rest of the world is now telling people, conform and carry on.

This isn't who we are or who any human was born to be.

I'm really excited about today's guest because he's made exposing the truth his lifelong mission and he has gone into some very dangerous subjects.

He's covered everything.

He has taken on the UN and exposed the dirt at the UN.

He took on the ISIS empathy or sympathy in the college campuses, anti-Semitism.

He has traveled to Sweden where he was almost killed.

Traveled to Sweden exposing the ramifications of progressive border policies and mass immigration.

He embedded with South American migrant caravans.

He was the first to expose who the organizers really were.

He even has now decided to run for president of the United States as a Democrat.

He's always been an independent, but he's running now as a Democrat because, quote, all of their current candidates are insane.

Even if you're a Democrat, he'll make a good case of that when you hear his explanation, the definition of insanity.

Whether he wins or loses, as is always the case with everything that he does, he will leave more enlightened, and so will everyone around him.

The pursuit of truth.

Next.

So, Ami, I have to start with this because you're an Independent and always have been.

Never been a Republican?

Probably not technically, but I've

voted Republicans.

And you voted.

Sometimes.

And your folks were kind of like that.

Yeah.

Yeah, that's fair to say.

We were

more about ideology than party.

You know, my kind of mantra is country over party.

Party doesn't mean anything to me.

I mean, it's all about the issues and where people's positions are.

And no single party has a monopoly on, I think, the right answer.

Right.

Although, I shouldn't say one party, but

one wing of this bird

is

flying straighter than the other.

The Democratic wing wing is

insane.

It's not even the same,

it's not the Democratic Party, even of Obama.

No, I don't think, I'm not even sure Obama could win the nomination with his positions.

Remember, Obama initially was against gay marriage.

I know.

That wasn't like eons ago.

That was several years ago.

How old were you in 2008?

I know.

It's crazy.

So

you're running because you want to be in the debate, but not as a disruptor.

No, I have things to say.

I have important things to say that the country needs to know.

And frankly, I think the Democratic Party needs to know.

I think they need to take a really hard look in the mirror.

I think what they're going to see coming back at them, they're not going to like because

they're so out of step with never mind the whole country.

And right?

I'm talking about they're out of step with most people in their own party.

And they just can't even see it.

They honestly, they can't see what's happening.

They have, you know, I talked to Joe Lieberman recently and he said,

Glenn, the people that I know still in the Democratic Party and the leadership in the, you know, not the crazy leaders, but the good, decent Democrats.

He said they are terrified of the new Democrats.

He said they don't dare step out of line because

they

know what will happen to them.

It's like the French Revolution.

It is.

That's exactly what it's like.

Yeah, it is.

So

let's start with a couple of things.

I want to go through

your mission statement,

if you will.

You say the United States is facing a crossroads that goes in startingly different directions.

We are a country with deep ideological differences, and both sides of the aisle are trying to frame their choices as binary, but they are not.

Yeah.

I mean, that's exactly right.

It's either or...

It's, you know, it's, it's, look, there's clear that you made the point you're correct about.

There are two parties, and they are different, but there is one that's moving, bless you, in a, in a far more radical position than the other ones.

No, no problem.

And, um, but there's no, again, no party has a monopoly on good ideas.

And I think there are some good ideas in both parties.

When did we become this country where

you couldn't say,

like I remember in the 90s, I lived in Connecticut.

Joe Lieberman was great.

Some of the other people were not great in for Connecticut.

You know what I mean?

Yeah.

And I probably voted for Joe Lieberman at, you know, in the early 1990s and didn't have a problem with it because it wasn't a vote against everything you stand for.

Now, even in the Republican Party, if you don't toe the line, it's not nearly as bad as the Democrats, but if you don't toe the line, even with things that the Republicans have stood against, trade,

you stand against trade wars.

Well, now, if you don't speak highly of trade wars, you're trouble.

When did we become this?

How did we become this?

Or better yet, how do we reverse this?

Yeah, my teachers will tell you I was never a toe-the line kind of guy.

Yeah.

Look,

it's reversible.

There's no question about it.

I think the situation of

how polarized we've become, and there's no question about it, we've become radically polarized.

But I think the important thing to note is the polarization, I find, is really more at the political levels.

And they're not in the grassroots levels.

And yeah, okay, I live in the upper west side of Manhattan.

So yeah, that's a very polarized area.

And there are people who live in very, very red country where it's more polarized.

But if you go to most of the country and ask most people,

they don't think that way.

First of all, it's not even like the major issue for them is politics on a daily basis.

Their daily basis is...

It shouldn't be.

And it shouldn't exactly be right.

It shouldn't be.

And I think the more you make politics part of who you are, the more polarized you become.

And I think that it's important for us to take a step back and say, this is not the end of the world.

The next election is not going to define who we are as a country for the next hundred years, even though it's often framed that way.

And it's not good to frame it that way.

Isn't the polarization really a result of

if we don't win,

the country is doomed.

Yes.

I mean, that's what we were thinking with Hillary Clinton.

That's what they're thinking now with Donald Trump.

And so it's like, I don't care.

So you can push things that are much more radical.

I mean, I don't think that the Democratic voter, the average Democratic voter, is for socialism and the end of the free market.

Not even remotely so at all.

Right.

And, but they can push that because they can say,

fire, bad.

And they point to Donald Trump.

Right.

And so you'll accept it because you don't like that.

So I'll take this, even though we're getting to a point now, it stands against everything you believe in.

I agree.

Look, I was not a fan of President Trump when he was running.

I didn't vote for him.

And I was one of those people saying, this is going to be awful if he becomes president.

And the truth truth is, he became president, and he became a relatively mainline Republican.

If you look at his policies, separate the rhetoric, which is granted, hard to do.

Correct.

But I've learned, I think you've learned, and others to compromentalize this president.

Yes.

What we've seen is that his policies have been relatively

mainline Republicanism.

I think the difference being...

And in some cases.

In some cases, what he's trying to do with

prescriptions and having other countries

dictate what we pay here, negotiate for it.

That's not Republican.

Trade tariffs, that's not Republican.

I mean, he's really,

if it was any other guy,

I think the Democrats, or any other time, the Democrats would go, I like this guy.

I mean, it's crazy to say that, but I'm not sure it's so far from the truth.

Right.

They would have been for Israel.

They would be for the trade tariffs.

They'd be for his big government kind of ideas.

In any other time, even eight years ago, they would have been for his border policy or much of it.

Not necessarily, you know,

shut down all immigration, but get control of the border.

They were talking that eight, ten years ago themselves.

I've always been a fan of blind resume tests.

and just say, you know, here are some positions.

You tell me what you agree with, taking the names off the people who hold those positions.

And I think you're right.

I think if you had a blind resume of what the president has done in the last two years and showed it to, again, like a sensible Democrat, I think they'd look at it and say, yeah, I kind of agree with most of those things.

Certainly a Republican would, no question about it.

I mean, 20%, is it 20% or 30% of the people who voted for Donald Trump were Democrats, voted for Obama at least once.

And by the way, a third of Hispanics voted for the president.

Which is amazing.

You know, to go back to that trade war thing for a moment.

Look,

he was clear about the direction he was going to go in when he was running regarding the trade war.

He doesn't hide the ball.

And so I'm of two minds.

Look,

obviously, I believe we moved back into mercantilism.

That's not good for our country.

That would destroy our economy.

It would destroy the innovation that we are.

That's not a policy that we want.

I'm not certain that's the policy he's trying to pursue.

I kind of think that he is a blunt object, and he's basically playing chicken with the Chinese and saying, because he's right about, in general, where his policies are on the Chinese, right?

The Chinese are eating our lunch, okay?

They're stealing from us left and right.

Yeah, they're bad players.

They're bad players.

And the WTO,

they don't care about

trade norms, okay?

They're going to do whatever they feel is the best interest of their country.

They don't care about patents.

They don't care about

meaningless to them.

So I think it is important that we show them that this is not the way we're going to, a policy we're going to continue to pursue because it's madness.

We can't continue down this road and so I like that I like that he took a hard line with them look it um I'm not a tariff expert and I don't know and I'm not by the way I'm not sure anybody is I don't think we've seen this type of tariff war in a long time so we don't know what the net result will be it may very well be that the Chinese say we have look the Chinese have more to lose than we do

their economy is far more sensitive to this kind of trade war than ours is for a whole variety of reasons.

And I'm not sure.

I think he might be right that they can't, they're not gonna be able to stomach this for much longer.

But

I don't like it as a general policy for

our economy.

Free market changed the world.

Exactly.

Free market changed the world.

Let me take you to another place I think the Democratic voter is not at,

not for.

And that is this

really

rabid anti-Semitism.

We've had Ilan Omar say some really horrible things.

The Democrats backed off.

Kerr stepped in and Nancy Pelosi and the leadership, they backed off on Say anything.

Rashida Tlaib comes out and she says, I feel this sense of calm,

this sense of peace when I think of the Holocaust.

Then she goes on, and people are saying, Oh, they took it out of context.

No, no, no.

She's changing history.

She is trying to make it appear as though it was the Palestinians who gave up their land so the Jews could have a safe space.

But that's not true.

And the Democrats are rallying around her, rallying around all of them.

What is happening there?

I mean, the only feeling I have is profound sadness.

What we're seeing with the Democratic Party when it comes to Israel at one

and then Jews.

I mean, it's so weird to say that.

Like, the Jews are a topic of debate.

What's their, I don't understand what the debate is.

I mean, the fact that we're discussing anti-Semitism

writ large and the defense of anti-Semitism across the Democratic Party.

I mean, when Rashiet Talib made her really, they're despicable comments, okay?

Never mind that they're historically ignorant and they're incorrect.

Just despicable comments.

You haven't had, I don't know of a single Democratic voice, certainly not anybody the Democrats running for president.

who said these problems are problem these comments are problematic.

You're seeing a full-throated defense of her.

You're seeing go our Seth Myers, okay, and he has a TV show and he's sitting there saying on NBC and he's saying, I'm so glad you came to get your perspective.

I'm so glad you're here.

So glad of what you're doing.

I mean, these are open anti-Semites.

Glenn, this is not

a debate on Israel or Israeli policy, which is fair to have.

Of course, you can have a debate on Israeli policy.

It does not make you un-American to disagree with our policy on any side.

Absolutely.

Including Israel.

Absolutely.

But there are lines that once you cross,

you're either playing with anti-Semitism or you're just into the open anti-Semitic field.

Well, they said that Donald Trump was playing with the anti-Semites and he was just placating them.

That I disagree with.

But if that was true, these guys have married

the anti-Semites.

I mean, the hypocrisy.

across the Democratic platform is incredible.

Look, I remember 12 years ago when I first started talking about you are going to see the rise of 1930-style anti-Semitism in America because it happens every time there's a rise of socialism.

And this country will be a national socialist movement.

I was torn apart by everybody.

Just everybody, especially the Jewish community.

Well, now you're seeing it.

What happened to those Democrats that have always been not necessarily Israel,

but friends to the Jews?

What happened?

They're dancing to the tunes of the radicals.

That's what they're doing.

Look, do I think Nancy Pelosi is anti-Semite?

Of course she's anti-anti-Semite, okay?

But the reality is, you know, this is what the truth is, that when Alan Omar made her openly anti-Semitic comments about Jews, right, and it's not debatable if if there was anti-Semitic comments.

She gave her cover.

That's the reality.

That's the truth.

I'm sorry to say it, but it is.

She's dancing to their tune because the radicals have taken over the Democratic Party.

So who controls it?

Nancy Pelosi, because

the party opened this can

of radicalism and said, let's just unite with anybody who we can unite with.

Okay.

And so they opened that radical can, knowing full well, but I really truly believe that the party leadership went, well, we'll be able to stuff them back into that can.

No.

We're now at the place to where you have to ask what crawled out of that can or what opened that can, which one is controlling which.

And I think it's the can.

Okay, I lost your metaphor there.

Somewhere between the can, the other can.

But I see you, I get, I get your point.

And look, who's running the party?

I mean, you can't make a list of party leaders

without putting AOC on that list.

Alexandria Cadillac-Cortez clearly is one of the leaders of the party.

I don't care if she's just a brand new congresswoman, okay?

And Bernie Sanders obviously is the, I think, is the ideological leader of the Democratic Party.

These are two

red radicals.

There's no other way to put it.

Bernie, do we forget where Bernie Sanders took his honeymoon?

No, I know.

The Soviet Union.

I mean, it sounds like a joke, but it's true.

Well, nobody who votes for Bernie Sanders is old enough to remember the Soviet Union.

I'm not even sure they know, right?

That has no resonance to them, no relevance to them.

The only other person that I know of,

a prominent name in American history that took a honeymoon over to the Soviet Union was Lee Harvey Oswald.

I don't know anybody else.

The historical ignorance that you're referring to is exactly what's led us to where we are now, because they have no frame of reference of what the end result of these policies are so they're looking at it and saying oh what socialism sounds great which by the way is exactly what they said a hundred years ago right during prior to the bolshevic revolution it's what they sound great it's what they said eight years ago um before it all started to fall apart in venezuela and then as soon as it fell apart in venezuela They were like, well, that's not socialism.

Wait a minute.

You were telling us that everything they were doing was utopian version of socialism.

Now that you've run out of other people's money and a dictator has to take control because otherwise he and all the other socialists will be dead.

Now you say it's not socialism.

It's what happens every single time.

One of the scariest videos I've ever done, I've done a whole number of very, very scary ones, but one that frightened me more than most, and that's saying a lot, was after I went to Venezuela and I went to Venezuela and I filmed the horrors that is happening there, you know, in real time.

I was there.

I mean, I was walking with a guy.

We opened the video, I was walking with a guy, and I'm like, what are we doing here?

It's nighttime in one of the most dangerous areas in Caracas.

And Caracas, in the best areas, is one of the most dangerous areas on planet Earth.

And he said, there's no more dogs and cats for me to eat in the better areas.

I have to go to these dangerous areas to find the dogs and cats to feed my family.

And after that experience, where a guy was shot on camera in front of me as a cop looked at him and walked away because the violence is out of control.

After that video, I said, I got to see what people are thinking about Venezuela here in the U.S., the left.

And I went to NYU and I was telling people what I experienced in Venezuela.

And I asked them, I said, but the one thing about Venezuela is

everybody suffers equally as opposed to the income inequality that we have here that capitalism supposedly has brought onto us.

And I said, which system do you prefer saying that there's the red lines, there's violence, but they're all in it equally.

And they they looked at me, and 80% of the kids that I talked to, they'd rather have the Venezuelan economic system than the U.S.

economic system.

I kid you not.

That's where we're at right now.

That's where they are.

These kids are so ignorant of the realities of the world and of history that they'd actually make a choice to choose Venezuela over the U.S.

This is not a joke.

They can watch it on, they can watch it on YouTube.

It's insanity.

Insanity.

So how do you get

people without any framework of history

who have been absolutely indoctrinated that socialism is great?

How do you get them to look at the free market and say, meh, I want that.

If they're saying to you,

oh, I'd rather have

the equality of suffering in Venezuela than the inequality of wealth in America.

How do you get them to

see the light?

I have found that people are less jaded than we think they are.

And if you're able to present an argument in a cogent way, in a compelling way, in a truthful way, I find way people turn people.

I see it all the time.

All the time on my videos.

I see the comments on YouTube and Facebook.

Every day I'll get 10, 12 comments saying, you know what, I'm a liberal.

I saw this in a four-minute stunt video you did, you changed my mind on this particular issue.

It is absolutely a winning argument because the argument's a winning argument.

And that you have to be able to, and this is why I'm running this campaign.

I want to go on their stage, in their home, on television, and make that argument that we're talking about right here.

Because

it is a winning argument.

Look, I've said all along, I don't give one hoot about income inequality.

I really don't.

I don't care if they're trillionaires.

Let them be more trillionaires.

It's great for our country.

What I care about, the people on the bottom end of the rung are better off here than anywhere else on planet Earth.

That's what I care about.

That people who are in the poverty level here can raise themselves out of, they have the opportunity to raise themselves out of poverty, that we give them that opportunity from the perspective of education, economically, and every other thing that they need to get out.

And also for the ones who can't take care of themselves, that we are, we are a compassionate country.

We do take care of them.

We take care of them through mostly through charity.

Nobody's eating cats and dogs here.

And nobody ever will.

Not if we stay the course.

Nobody ever will.

And believe me, you'd rather be poor here than poor in the slums of London or Paris or Frankfurt.

Trust, I've been those places.

Do you remember Gorbachev ran a 60 minutes piece on poverty in this former Soviet Union?

Okay.

And he ran ran it.

It was on poverty in America, thinking that I'll show how bad it is in America.

They didn't get it.

They didn't get it because the people of the Soviet Union saw the poor here with microwaves and televisions and cars and went,

they have air conditioning and they're poor?

And it backfired on him.

The Russian people looked at that and went, that's not poor.

It reminds me of a story that Dennis Prager says a lot of times on his radio show.

When he was a kid, he went to a model UN in New York.

And one of his jobs was the Soviet kids were there.

They wanted, they were supposed to give him a tour of New York.

And they only wanted to go to one place.

They said, we want to go to Harlem.

We want to see how your capitalist country, how you deal with your poor and how terrible their lives are.

And he takes them to Harlem and they go, you liar.

You took us to one of the more expensive areas in Manhattan.

That story always stuck with me because that's kind of the point of what I'm talking about here.

I want to make sure that people who are on the poverty line here, aside from having the opportunities, are better off.

They have, like you, like you said, more square footage, more, more cell phones, more cable, more

things than other people do, and they do.

And they do.

I want to give you a chance to plug the

website where you can.

No, no, no, go ahead.

So people can contribute.

So you need 65,000 people to contribute.

Yes.

To be able to.

Any level.

You can give me $1.

$1.

And you will see the greatest.

That's a pretty good deal.

$1, see the greatest show on earth.

If they go to AmiForamerica.com, it'll pop right into a place where they can pop in their information, their credit card information, send me $1,

and I'm telling you, I'm going to give you the greatest show you've ever seen.

Because, and look, I'm saying it's a show, and it is a show, obviously, because that's kind of what politics has become, but also it's real, because we do want to speak truth to power.

We do want to make, they're, listen.

They're not being held accountable for their viewpoints.

Their viewpoints are so radical.

Like we just put before, they're out out of the not in the mainstream of America, out of the mainstream of the Democratic Party constituency and electorate, but they're not being held accountable by the mainstream media.

You don't see these guys going CNN and see Wolf Blitzer go, Can you tell me why you're running away from capitalism, even though that's what they're doing?

I had somebody actually say to me the other day that,

well,

yes,

you might call them extremists, but I will tell you, you hang out with extremists like Mike Lee

it was like Mike Lee is the most milquetoasty kind of guy ever he is rock solid on the con on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and he is not bending on that but when did that become

crazy radical right wing and he was using that

as the opposite end of where they were.

Right.

And I'm like, within it, you're saying there's 86 genders.

He says all men were created equal.

Something's not right.

No, it's like it's like it reminds the whole debate of

the alt-right, the white nationalists.

You want to compare the white nationalists to, let's say,

in terms of the number of people that exist, compared to, let's say, the antifug guys or the hard left.

How many white nationalist neo-Nazis are in this country?

10,000, 15,000?

20,000, maybe?

I think that's overstating it.

There are millions of people.

There's probably a million or two million people on the hard left who believe and follow what Antifa wants.

Chris Cuomo was on CNN defending Antifa, saying there are many good people.

I remember.

I remember.

Right?

I absolutely.

And do you think he was held account to account?

No.

Of course not.

And that's my entire point.

None of these people are held to account.

That's why it takes, I got to do it.

Believe me, this is not something I wanted to do.

My wife gave me a lot of grief over this, okay?

This is not something she wanted me to pursue.

And frankly, my life's going great.

I didn't have to do this, but I felt like I didn't have a choice because who else was going to do it?

They're going to go up there and then go on these debates and they're going to be handled with kid gloves by NBC and CBS and CNN and Univision, whoever else is holding these debates.

Kid gloves.

Nobody's going to push them.

Nobody's going to find out exactly.

Tell me about these policies and why you think these policies are good because they're going to destroy our country.

They're not going to be held to account.

I have to do it.

I have to get on the stage so I can hold them to account.

And you are more of a JFK Democrat.

By looks.

That's farcical.

The only troll in this whole thing is by looks.

Yeah, right.

I made peace with that.

No, yes.

Look, I was always a big fan of Scoop Jackson.

a huge fan of Patrick Moynihan.

Those are the two people I look to in the Democratic Party.

I don't think that either one of them would be.

I mean, Scoop Scoop Jackson,

he represented my part of the country.

And Scoop Jackson would probably be tarred and feathered in the Seattle area now.

Oh my God.

He was so unwoke.

Yeah.

He's so unwoke.

No,

no way they wouldn't make it anywhere near the Democratic debate.

These great thinkers, I mean, Patrick Mornihan, one of the great thinkers of our country, right?

He couldn't make it anywhere near the debate stage these days.

They run him out of town.

Are you kidding me?

But that's the state of the Democratic Party today.

What does it say to you about Howard Schultz, the way he's been treated?

I mean, here's a guy who,

I mean, isn't he like a free the lobster kind of guy?

He should be feted.

Yeah, I mean, courted by the Democratic Party.

Exactly right.

They should be saying, please, we need you.

He is a guy that 10 years ago would have been the

guy outside of the system,

wildly wildly successful.

Everybody knows him and a champion of traditional lefty stuff.

And I don't mean Democratic stuff, I mean lefty stuff.

Oh, he's no Republican.

He's no.

No, he's no, he's no Democrat or Republican.

No, he's not a president.

He's not a guy I want in office.

No.

Although I think he's a smart guy and everything else,

he is not the guy to have,

you know,

for me.

what

how I mean,

no, I mean, it's it's what does it say that he's

doesn't say good things, it doesn't say good things.

I mean,

if you're running a guy like Howard Schultz out, who, by the way, if he was running as a Democrat nominee, I think he'd be the hands-on favorite.

I think he could beat Trump or he'd give him a run for his money for the money.

I think he could, too.

I think he'd give him a run for his money.

Yeah.

But the fact,

it just lays it all bare.

Is that the right?

It lays it all bare?

Yeah.

That this guy has become too moderate for the Democratic Party, and they don't want him anywhere near that debate.

He's not moderate.

Oh, no.

He's a left.

I wouldn't say he's a leftist, but he's a lefty, for sure.

He's Joe Biden.

He was the either number one or number two

most left

in the Senate when he was there.

I mean, that's who he was.

Now he's like, oh, thank God, somebody reasonable.

I I mean, the Overton window has been moved into another state.

I can't even see the window anymore.

That's right.

It's exactly right.

No, it's, it's, and it's, it, they're doing it to their own detriment because

they're just not.

I mean, I don't understand.

They didn't see the writing on the wall when President Trump won, and he won states that a Republican hasn't sniffed in, I don't know how many years.

I think they're betting on

that the Democrats feel the way

the Republicans felt with Hillary.

Yeah, no, I okay, that's was how'd that bet work out?

I mean, it's not a good bet.

He won.

Yeah,

but I wouldn't make that bet if I were them.

I mean, I wouldn't have made that bet if I was a Republican at the time.

I mean, looking back at it, it seemed like a smart bet.

It didn't work out, but I wouldn't make that bet if I was a Democrat.

Certainly not with the economy we're seeing today.

If the economy stays the way it is,

how do you think things fail?

I don't think I could win if the Democrats.

this.

That's how solid I think he will if the economy stays.

Right.

No, look, you know, it's

how in an economy like this,

now everything changes the minute the economy changes.

Yeah.

But in an economy like this, how can you possibly be preaching against the free market system with an unemployment rate of 3.6%?

I think 4% is full employment.

We're below that.

Yeah, we are.

Literally, I'm 50, what, 55 years old.

I was four

the last

five the last time this.

By the way, you don't look at day over 53.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah, it's

look, to be fair, I mean,

numbers go up and down over the course of time.

You know, I'm not sure you can make a generalist policy based on, you know, a year's worth of GDP data, to be fair.

So, yeah, it's a strong economy, but

I see why they can dismiss that.

I mean, frankly,

they're giving all the credit to President Obama, who, by the way,

we had the shallowest recovery we've ever seen out of the Obama.

The recovery was a long time and a shallow recovery.

Considering

how deep the recession was, the numbers should have been far better than they actually were.

I think if we would get rid of these trade barriers,

I think this economy would be off the charts.

Because nobody can compete with us.

right nobody can compete with us across all fields the end of look the secret sauce of the united states economy is all about freedom because freedom is what allows innovation to happen when you get out of people's ways that's when the magic happens right and

the the the

the central planners

They don't believe progressives and we're so far beyond I've I made the statement about a year ago the progressive era is over

we're not in a progressive era anymore we are in a socialist era we have now the the the the progressives are part of the problem when look at what Barack Obama did to this country or for this country if you're on the left

AOC

Talib,

all of these newcomers, they're all coming in and saying, he wasn't that great.

He wasn't that great

because he didn't take it and finish the job.

Obama.

Yeah.

I mean, so we're not in a progressive era.

These guys now are the revolutionaries that say, I want this change now.

Look,

okay, now you're now triggering my very pessimistic side of me, which I don't like to reveal so much.

But I do have a pessimistic side, and that side says that Fukuyama got it right and he got it wrong.

Fukuyama famously wrote the book, The End of History, essentially

saying that

we've reached the end of

historical change, that this is what we are, liberal democracies, this is what we're always going to be at this point.

We're not going to see any kind of change.

And I think he was right, it is the end of history, but the problem is I think that once you hit the end of history, you can only go backwards.

And I think when we've become so successful, I think we've become so prosperous.

that it has led to these crazies to say, oh, now

we can do anything.

Now We've become successful, we can rearrange our entire world, and we need to rearrange our entire world.

And I think that this is something that

if this goes forward and these guys win, this will be taking us back to the dark ages.

I believe that to be true.

Reason and enlightenment and

science being completely dismissed.

Have you read about the new monetary policy?

I don't remember what it's called, but there's this new monetary policy.

It's being followed by the leftists.

AOC.

Theory or policy?

Theory.

Okay.

Okay.

But it will be their policy when they get in.

And it is, you can print as much money as you want.

You can borrow as much.

You know, you just print it.

And you just borrow against what you're going to gain.

And it's, it's, I mean, it's Weimar Republic stuff.

It really is the end of all logic and reason.

Do I have to remind you what the Weimar Republic led to?

I know.

I know.

I mean, is that, I don't, you're right?

right?

I saw a study.

I saw a study the other day.

I have to remind them, by the way.

Not you, but I have to remind them.

But people think that's hyperbole.

I know.

No, you, wow, how dare you?

What are you doing?

What are you talking about?

They'll call Donald Trump a Nazi.

But if you say this is the exact monetary policy that led to Hitler,

you are a dangerous person.

Even if you're a Jew, you'll be called an anti-Semite.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, by the way, those people do exist.

Those are not mutually exclusive things.

Trust me.

The self-hatred Jews have is part, there's nobody who has the same self-hatred that we have.

What concerns me is this economy is going to come down.

Just will.

It has to.

Yeah.

I mean, could be tomorrow, could be 2024.

Positive economic gravity.

It's going to happen.

We're going to go through a hard time.

In the study that I saw the other day,

20% of Democrats

said

that

the other side

doesn't have enough quality traits to even be regarded as human

that

18.6% of Democrats, 13.4% of Republicans say we'd be better off if there was a mass death of those on the other side.

I mean, Ilan Omar said that Donald Trump is not a human.

That's what she said.

I mean, she's giving voice to that study.

She said it.

She put that in living reality.

He's not a human.

You know, I did another video.

I can do these.

I do a lot of different kinds of videos, so I can often cite the videos as, and it's all anecdotal, of course.

But after one of the shooting, one of the terrible shootings we had, I can't remember which one it was, unfortunately, I did interview a bunch of Democrats, you know, again,

and I asked them, would you support somebody assassinating Donald Trump?

And the majority of them said yes.

The majority of them.

Right after a shooting, by the way.

We're, again, the majority of the country does not feel this way.

I can stress this over and over again.

The majority of Democrats don't feel this way.

But the problem is the radicalization, we have radicalization creep, okay?

That it is starting to infect more and more people.

And while it's not the majority,

it is not an insignificant minority of radicals.

I mean, just look at the Democratic, just look at the nominees, right?

Most of them, and my wife got mad at me when I said that most of these guys are insane, but it's true.

I mean, it is true.

Well, you're insane to this extent.

Reason and logic and history tell you the things you stand for do not work and lead to real bad problems, if not death.

What's the definition of insanity, right?

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Have we not done this over and over again?

Pol Pot not do this?

Did Stalin not do this?

Did Venezuela not do this?

They all did it.

I know, no, we finally got it right.

We're the smart ones, right?

What did AOC say?

I'm the boss.

I'm the boss.

Okay.

I mean, really?

Really, that's where we're at?

And every time history says, has somebody say, I'm the boss, it was one of the things that really bothered me about Donald Trump.

Donald Trump, during the campaign, said, I'm the only one that can fix it.

The message of a president of the United States always must be, I'm going to get everyone else out of your way because you

can fix it.

You fix it in your own life.

You fix it in your own community.

I'm going to keep the bad guys away.

I'm going to make sure that everything is even, that we apply the law equally, that there's no favorites anywhere, and you go fix it.

That's nowhere.

That's nowhere right now.

What did Barack Obama say?

You didn't build this.

I didn't build this.

this.

Yeah.

Look, there's this weird.

If you ever ask,

like we said before, we said on the radio show, I think it's important, and it bears repeating, that there's this kind of weird undercurrent Democratic Party who actually likes Maduro, right?

And they're defending Maduro, and they're saying

we shouldn't push Guaido there.

There's also

those same people, maybe more, also this weird kind of fondness toward China.

Yes.

And it's bizarre to to me.

Facebook.

It's incredible to me.

Google.

Yeah.

They're looking at China and saying, oh, this is the model we should be looking at, right?

No freedoms.

All they do is steal.

I mean, it's really

one of the most problematic players on the nationalist.

I think I said this the other day.

And

I haven't looked for the comments, so I'm sure people have said stuff.

But I'd be interested in your point of view.

In all of human history,

I think China may be the biggest threat, not to the United States, but to mankind

and mankind's freedom that has ever existed.

With the technology that they have and are working

and their ideology, I think

it's the most dangerous foe we've ever faced.

I don't agree.

Okay.

And I'll tell you why.

China historically, and including now, has never been interested in expansion.

Not including now.

China 2025, their plan of 2025.

What do you mean?

There's two plans that they made back around turn of the century.

And by the way, they do want to expand to historical China.

No, no, no.

No, this is global domination.

There's China 2020, and that is get your house in order by 2020.

Control the population.

You know about their population,

their big brother kind of systems that they're

frightening.

Their social, their black mirror plan.

That's China 2020.

Back 2005, 2006.

They're five-year plans.

Yes.

So 2020 was

get the state to control and help everyone live a very productive life.

China 2025

is to be the dominant player in the world, especially on

surveillance and technology.

So this is why when we're looking at Europe and saying

you're talking about the 5G implementation.

No, no, it's a massive problem.

Yeah, once they control the pipeline of information, then they're everywhere.

Yeah.

And

information is power.

They control everything at that point.

No, from that perspective, only because we're in a state now where technology can have so much influence and power over.

Okay, I see where you're going with that.

I don't disagree.

What I was looking at, they're more...

The reason why I would look at the Soviet Union as the greatest foe we ever had is because it was an ideology that was spreading.

An ideology that people were signing up to.

There is no Chinese ideology that they're kind of preaching to the rest of the world they want to convert them to.

They're bad actors.

Their whole new

belt policy where they're just raping these countries.

And essentially,

after they rape them, they take their land.

They're so indebted to them.

They're so indebted that they actually, I mean,

they own a significant part of the Sri Lankan port because Sri Lanka couldn't pay back the debt.

They're doing this all over Africa.

Building things that

they don't need, they shouldn't want to want to want to want to want to want them.

They don't need, they shouldn't want.

They're so corrupt that they're buying into it.

But that actually ultimately is going to help us long term because I think the country will realize what China has done to them and it'll only come back to us.

Let me ask you,

with groups like Google and Facebook,

their ideology, I think

in some ways

is

progressive at best, socialist

at worst.

No.

Corporatist at worst.

I think

China is doing this.

They're doing it for money.

They're doing it for power.

They're doing it for control.

And they're used to this kind of control of their population.

Google and Facebook and Apple, all of them are getting into bed here.

And I believe they believe much of the same stuff, but it's all corporate greed.

And I think there's a time coming very soon that they will be much more powerful than the federal government.

The federal government will need them much more than Google will need the federal government.

I mean, you're just like out of every dystopian sci-fi movie we've ever seen.

Look,

the Google-Facebook thing is fascinating and it affects me in a very real way.

I think it affects your business as well, but mine in particular, is that my distribution base is totally dependent on Google and Facebook, right?

And it's problematic because they've been using

their technological power to spread their ideology.

And they give you a perfect example of how sick this has become.

I did a video that you and I talked about where I exposed open anti-Semitism at a conference at Duke and UNC.

Just clear, disgusting.

Tell the story again for anybody who didn't hear that episode.

So I went to Duke and there was a joint Duke-UNC conference on the campus of the University of North Carolina.

And it was ostensibly about the Gaza conflict, which I I knew would devolve into an anti-Israel hate fest, which it did, which it's sad to say doesn't surprise me and for me doesn't even move the needle to do a video because it's so common on our campuses.

I hate to say that.

I hate to say that I'm jaded in that way, but it's just the reality.

But what happened was something far worse than that.

was it just became an open anti-Semitic hate fest.

And what happened was sort of the culmination of the entire conference was they brought this rapper in, who, by the way, just a week before, had

this fawning piece in the New York Times about him by the way a significant piece in the New York Times about him he was despicable

I couldn't believe it and he gets up there and he starts chanting these anti-Semitic chants he's literally saying this is my anti-Semitic song they're going crazy let's get anti-Semitic together they're going crazy you're not being anti-Semitic enough they're going crazy okay this is all on camera right

and okay so the video gets out and it just creates a huge firestorm there are congressional investigations and a DOE investigation into the use of U.S.

funds for this conference.

And I put it up on Google, which is kind of one of the first things, you know, Google and Facebook, one of the first things I do, it's on YouTube.

And within 20 minutes, it gets pulled.

And they send me an email saying, we're pulling this for hate speech, right?

The irony of ironies.

So, and they said it wasn't even like an algorithm thing, that it was reviewed and pulled.

That initially the algorithm tagged it.

And a human watched what I did, exposing anti-Semitism and go, oh yeah,

this is hate.

And they pull it down.

Okay, so I make a big fuss out of it.

Which side was hate?

That's like exposing Adolf Hitler and saying a documentary on how bad Adolf Hitler is is hate speech.

Well, you're abusing his rights.

I was apparently, you know, not being, I was not creating a safe space for anti-Semites.

I guess that's what they're

just saying.

Is that what they were doing?

I think that's what, yeah, I mean, what else could they be?

I mean, it's look, if you watch the video, it's 100% clear that I'm using what he's saying as an example example of anti-Semitism.

The guy saw it and still pulled it down as hate speech.

Because what he was saying was hate speech.

Correct.

He still pulled my video down exposing it.

I know, it's crazy.

It's always hard to comprehend.

So anyways, I make a big fuss

out of it, and I've got some juice there, and they put it back up.

12 hours later, they pull it down again.

Again, even after the fuss.

And ultimately they put it back up.

But they took it down twice.

A video that all it was doing was exposing anti-Semitism.

They pulled it down.

So that is very, very scary stuff.

And this whole argument, and it really is more of an intellectual argument, and I'm not sure even where I come out on it, which is,

are they utility?

Do we look to break them up?

It's a fascinating argument that I'm not sure where I come out on, to be honest.

I mean, I know for...

It's better if you're running for president.

Oh, I guarantee you none of those guys have any formula or anything.

No,

they're generally all for breaking it up.

Well, I know that Elizabeth Warren,

Biden said he would seriously consider it.

Betto, I think, said he would seriously consider it.

I mean,

when you have, if you know history, when you have industries begging for regulation.

That's a trigger for something.

Yeah.

Right?

So if you know history.

Does standard oil beg for

were they for or against it?

I'm not sure about standard oil, but I know that the big three automakers were.

I know that B.F.

Goodrich and Goodyear tires, they were.

And so the big three automakers and the two big tire makers in the 1930s went to the White House and said, you need to regulate us.

You need to regulate us.

And they put every bit of competition out of

works.

If you look at the old Auburns,

You know, you look at

one of the best cars ever made.

You know, the phrase, um,

oh, that's a doozy.

Yes, you know what that comes from?

I have no idea.

Dusenberg.

It was one of the best American-made cars.

It was so well done.

It was the Rolls-Royce competition.

The Dusenberg?

The Dusenberg.

That's a doozy.

That's the worst name for a car.

Yeah, well, it was before the war.

The Hindenburg.

Yeah.

That's a great car.

But

the big three automakers knew if we can get the government to come to us

as the experts,

we can come up with regulation that we can afford,

but no one as a startup can.

So we'll never ever be challenged.

That's why they're begging for regulation.

Please, regulate us.

Please regulate us.

Look at the cable industry.

Look at the way the cable industry is

run.

Right now you can't say they all said well you go start your own thing go start your own thing okay

i did

but there's no way because of the way it's regulated that i could get back in to cable and have a fair shake at all

and then what does facebook and google do

you go ahead start your own thing of course we're going to demonetize you and we're going to make sure the algorithms push people away from you

How do what do wait, what?

The only chance we have to mention, wake me up when you have a hundred billion dollars in startup

revenue to actually compete with us.

Correct.

The only chance we have are in people like Peter Thiel

who can start competitors to those.

Because I'm convinced a competitor that is truly a platform in time, once they really start banning voices, One that truly says, hey, you're going to hate a lot of stuff here.

You're going to hate it.

But you control the algorithm.

You do.

So

you want to say, I don't like that.

Don't flag it for other people.

Flag it for you.

I don't like that.

I don't like this.

I don't like this.

I don't want this.

I want more of this, this, and this.

You control the algorithm.

Why won't they let people do that?

Yeah, like I said, this is very important issue for me and for people like me because we're we're that's that's our only avenue out there I got a great Peter Thiel story I get a Twitter a Twitter message from from Peter Thial and he says love what you're doing I think you're doing is great oh my god Peter Teal yeah I was like Peter I'm a big fan of yours he goes you are I go yeah it's all over Twitter and he said I said I'd love to meet you right this guy can fund me for the next hundred years So he goes, you want to meet me?

I go, yeah, he goes, I'm happy to.

So why don't we meet my place, Wisconsin?

I'm thinking, okay, he's kind of a quirky dude.

He's got a place in Wisconsin.

I don't know.

I booked my tickets, getting ready to go.

Looked up his name.

It wasn't even spelled right.

I couldn't even get the spelling right of the guy.

This Pooh Guy, Wisconsin.

I'm like, I'm sorry.

So I got to cancel my trip to see you.

So funny.

That is so funny.

Wow.

You really want to meet me?

He was super excited.

I met he was.

I met him.

Can you imagine I flew out there?

He picks me up in the holes of the field.

Let me go to

a couple of other topics that you will have to face if you're on stage for the Democrats.

And talk to me as

a person that is appealing to Democrats.

Second Amendment.

Look, I'm not going to talk to you as I appeal to Democrats.

I'm not going to talk to you as I appeal to Republicans.

I'm just going to tell you the way I see all the issues, including the Second Amendment.

Remind which one that one is.

So, the Second Amendment, which is an amendment I think

if you took a poll among everybody on that stage, I think they would all choose to repeal the amendment.

Fair to say?

Okay.

So, I'm a big believer in gun rights.

I'm a big believer in the Second Amendment.

I'm a big believer in it from a whole host of perspectives, including the right to defend oneself.

But also, I find it curious when the high and mighty, hoity-toity intellectual of the world laugh at me and say,

you really need guns to stop an oppressive government?

Are you really that stupid that you think that's necessary?

I look at them and I go, yeah, actually, I do.

I do believe that.

So from those perspectives, both from the one...

Why do you believe that?

Oh, I think there's no question that

we live in a government today, which is great.

The freedoms we have are phenomenal, but they're under threat.

And there's nowhere written in stone that 50 years from now, 100 years from now, it's not going to happen in the near future, that we couldn't have an oppressive government that wants to take away all of our rights.

And the only thing standing between us and them knocking on our doors are guns.

And believe you me, a government will think twice when they know their population is armed.

Okay?

250 million people and 300 million guns in this country.

Yeah,

that is a stopgap measure for

an oppressive fascist government, which by the way can happen anywhere, including here.

Yeah, it's people.

Yeah, I find it interesting that people say, oh, you're going to take on the U.S.

military.

Well, no, I hope not, but

it would at least give people a fighting chance sometime down the road if you had to take on an oppressive government.

That's not going to work.

Seemed to do really well in Iraq, Afghanistan.

I mean, they were taking on the full, I mean, shock and awe.

That wasn't an easy fight.

There wasn't 300 million guns in people's hands.

And as a Jew, I'm particularly sensitive to that argument.

Now, so I do believe that we constitutionally have a right to own guns.

I think it's clear, and I think, and clearly upheld by the Supreme Court.

And I believe that we need one on an individual level to protect ourselves.

Having said that, I don't think the right is absolute.

And I think there should be restrictions and can be restrictions.

And one of the

a waiting period.

I see no reason why we can't have a waiting period to own a gun.

I see no reason whatsoever.

If I need a gun, I can wait four days for it.

In fact, I'm not sure I want a guy to have a gun who needs it that day.

Okay?

I will tell you, and you're in the same situation.

Now you live in New York, so you didn't do this, but I didn't live in New York when I needed a gun that day.

I've had threats on my life where I needed a gun today.

I also have had threats in my life.

I've had people come to my home and threaten my life, literally.

So, but I, and I, and that's why I, I'm not saying whether I do or do not have a gun, but that's why I think guns are necessary and they are a way to protect ourselves.

But generally speaking.

But generally speaking,

there's no reason why you can't wait

for guns to get it.

It's not the really scary black ones.

Really scary black guns.

Yeah.

Those weapons of war.

Yeah.

Instruments of death.

Look, if you're talking a Gatlin gun, then we can have a discussion.

But you're talking about a semi-automatic, which just means it shoots the same rate of fire as a handgun.

I'm not sure what the size of the gun has anything to do with the debate.

If we're talking about bazooka, we can have a conversation.

My daughter and I had a conversation.

She has been, she's just not liked guns.

My family, we have a ranch.

We go shooting every day when we're up at the ranch.

It's, you know, we use it as a sport.

We're long-range shooters.

We're short, you know, handgun shooters.

And we love it.

We love it.

My daughter, she's 26 now.

She does not love it

and never has.

And guns make her nervous

until she had a real problem uh with someone following her home scared her half to death uh she had a pursuer and she came right over to the house to my house and she was very upset she said dad I I want to learn how to shoot so we went to the range that very next day and I had her shoot all different handguns and then rifles and shotguns and she said and I had a like a Henry

and then I had an AR that didn't look like the scary gun.

And then I had the black, scary-looking AR.

She understood the difference between the Henry and the AR, but she said,

but that one's much more deadly than this one.

And I said, why do you think?

She's like, look at it.

That's the way average people are.

I know, and I get it.

They look at it and they're like, that's a scary gun.

They're the same gun.

The same gun.

It's been so distorted

that we're not even taught, we're, you know, it's Ben Shapiro.

Packs don't care about your feelings.

And we're all on feelings.

And if, first of all, I've done

an analysis on the amount of mass shootings.

here in the U.S.

and in Europe, right?

And there's, it's, it's, it's crazy.

It's virtually almost no difference.

I think we're a little bit ahead now than we are of Europe,

but it's virtually no difference.

And if you if you expand that out and just do mass killings, oh, far more mass killings in Europe than we have in the United States.

And if you if you factor in the the truck killings and the knifings and the bombings

just because people are peop

it's so crazy that Europe is practically down to the butter knife or England is.

They're going to find a way to kill you.

You think any person ever who wanted to do a mass killing goes, I don't ask to a gun.

I guess I have to put that one away and I'm going to go about it.

Let me give you a good example.

We had on display here at one of our pop-up museums

Charlie Manson's shotgun.

He had a gun.

You've got some weird stuff.

I know.

He had a gun, had every right to it.

He was naked out one morning out in a field and he was shooting birds.

And some person called the police and said, we've got a naked hippie out shooting birds.

Can you do something about it?

They took away his gun.

Didn't really stop him from killing people, did it?

No, it didn't.

It didn't need a gun.

It didn't.

And look, and also, just if you think about it, just kind of practically,

first of all, the vast majority of crimes are committed with illegal guns.

So you've taken that off the table completely, right?

Because if you're, by definition, if you take away legal guns, eagle guns will still exist.

And

definitionally, who's going to have guns?

People who don't care about laws.

And who's not going to have guns?

You're not going to stop the flow of guns.

We have Mexico on our border.

Practically speaking, it's never going to happen.

We're always going to have illegal guns coming in this country.

So if you're going to take away the right of people to own a gun legally, where does that leave us?

Let's go to the border.

Now?

Yeah.

I think with what I'm seeing happening on the border now, it is so far out of control.

It's not being covered by the press.

They don't, nobody's, nobody's telling the truth on the border.

When I went down to the border under Obama, I saw the cages with the children.

I called every single journalist I know.

I said, you don't even have to quote me.

You got kids in cages.

How you feeling about that?

Nobody wanted to report on it.

Nobody wants to report on what's happening at the border now because they're invested in, you know, there's nothing, there's not a crisis.

It's an absolute crisis on the southern border of Mexico and the southern border of the United States.

How's that going to work out

for the Democrats when it begins to be seen

the ramifications of this?

I mean, Italy just

put a new ban in for NGOs, specifically George Soros, because he's been helping poor immigrants from the Middle East get to Italy.

They banned him.

That's like the what, third country now in the last two years that have banned him over in Europe.

How's this going to work out for them?

Look, the definition of sovereignty is controlling your borders.

I mean, without that, you don't have a sovereign nation.

The fact that the Democratic Party just can't see beyond their own nose as to what this is going to do to this country.

And if they just want to think about it, forget about they don't care about the country, just think about their own hides, their own power, and destroy themselves.

Do you think the majority of people in this country want open borders?

Do you think the majority of people in this country want?

Look, I'm a product of immigration.

Okay, I'm all in on immigration.

Without immigration, I'm not here.

I'm in some godforsaken country somewhere else.

Okay,

so

I'm all in on legal immigration, but

I can't wrap my head around how people could support illegal immigration.

I just don't get it.

I mean, I don't...

Well, Friedman said

you can have

open borders.

You can have socialism, free medical care, free everything,

but you cannot have both.

They are actually now standing on stages all across America, Democratic socialist and democratic candidates, saying

everyone, even illegals,

need to have all the free health care that we have.

That's suicide.

You cannot, mathematically, you cannot do that.

Just print more money.

Don't we own the printing press?

It's the new monetary policy.

They just keep popping it out.

I mean,

their lack of understanding.

of basic economics confounds me.

It truly does.

Well, I don't know.

You know, did you know that Vermont had,

in 2012, they started their own healthcare, Vermont Healthcare, Mountain, I think it was Mountain Care.

Yes.

Failed horribly, right?

Yep.

Somebody asked me the other day,

why do they keep trying it on the federal level when it fails every other place?

Why would you do it when it fails in two, three years?

These people promised us.

What's their mantra?

This time we'll do it right.

That's their answer for everything, which has failed repeatedly.

This time, I think that what they know is the states...

Don't have the right to do one thing that the federal government has the right to do.

Print money.

Print money.

So it'll work if you print money.

You'll never run out of money.

Just print it.

Don't you want to see me say this stuff on the Democratic Debate stage?

I do.

I mean, come on.

I do.

I mean, do I do it?

How are you going to get there?

I mean, you have to have $65,000, let's say, dollars because you'll have to have 65,000.

Individual donors.

Right.

But there's got to be other triggers that are going to keep you off the stage.

So it's interesting.

So I did a deep dive analysis into exactly what it takes to get on and exactly what powers Democratic Party have to keep me off.

So there's a number of games they can, let's assume that I get there, right?

So with the help of your folks sending me a dollar to AmiForAmerica.com,

hopefully I can get that number, and I think we will.

Look, if they keep me off, there's two things they can do.

And either way,

I like putting opponents in a box, and they're in a box.

self-imposed self-imposed they have two choices choice one is they can say um we're gonna have you on because you know that that that's that you made it we're gonna have you on yeah and and god bless them

i'm gonna make the democrat debate stage a very unsafe space for them okay i'm gonna be very unwoke

um

but not

in a completely respectful way i'm not i don't want i don't like trolls and i don't like people who are just disrupting the system.

They have every right to be on the stage and speak their mind.

As long as you are respectful and playing by the rules, but stating what you believe, I'm good with that.

See, I like the term disruptive, actually, because there's two meanings for it.

But the meaning that I am inferring with disruptive is that in the technological sense, in the innovative sense, I'm disrupting something which needs to be disruptive because the process of the...

Creative destruction is imperative.

Correct.

No, this is meant to be a completely respectful rebuttal for the beliefs of many of the people on that stage.

Correct.

No, I'm their proxy.

I'm the proxy of the silent majority of the Democratic Party.

Not the Republican Party, not Donald Trump.

He didn't send me here.

I'm the proxy for the people who say those people on the stage don't represent me.

That's why I'm there for.

And by the way,

if this was Joe Biden circa 1993,

I'm not sure I'd do this.

I think

that Joe Biden kind of represented the middle ground fine enough, you know, well enough.

Or if Moulton had a real shot and was a frontrunner as opposed to being also ran below 1%, I would say he's got this thing.

He's at 25%.

He can handle it.

There's no need for me on the stage.

There's a need for me on the stage while I'm doing it.

So their choice is either to put me on there.

and I speak truth to power and I hold them accountable for their views, or

they go back on everything they've been saying.

And they, you know, when they announced what the criteria was to get on stage, Tom Perez went on every, he went on Fox News and he said, we want this to be an absolutely open debate process.

They understood that what happened in 2016 with

the Democratic,

I mean, the entire system was rigged for Hillary against Bernie Sanders.

And he understood that

they cannot have a decision-making process of this weight being done in a back room.

But this is what they devised when Reagan came into office.

1980 is when the Democratic Party changed because they saw Ronald Reagan, this upstart, this guy who completely changed the Republican Party.

And they said,

wait, he was an outsider.

He was a radical.

He wasn't supposed to do that.

We don't want this to happen.

That's why they devised superdelegates.

I mean, they have, from the beginning, they have made made it as undemocratic as possible to be able to get on the stage and to become president of the United States.

Now they're saying they've learned from that.

The superdelegates are still in,

but they've learned from that and they want to make it fair.

So he says I want diversity.

I'm going to put it to the test.

I'm diverse.

I'm intellectually diverse, right?

And by the way, I'm also a person of color.

My wife hates my family.

It's true.

My mother's Iranian.

I think by definition, that makes me a person of color.

So I'm diverse, man.

I'm the guy you need on the stage.

As somebody who's been intersected, Iranian,

Jewish,

short.

That was uncalled for, Glenn Beck.

I was below the belt.

Talk to me about

the

debate

of where we are now as science is going this way, Democrats are going this way,

and we're not even, it would be so rational

now, but so unacceptable to the left, to say, let's just hold to the Roe versus Wade standard.

Let's just say first trimester.

How about that?

Are they really playing for is this a death cult?

Or are they moving the Overton window to get us to go, okay, Roe versus Wade is fine?

What are they doing?

Look, let's put aside whether or not Roe versus Wade, from a constitutional perspective, was a good decision.

Because I think there's some fair issues whether or not it really was a good decision.

Not from a policy perspective, where I actually support, but from a constitutional perspective.

Let's put that aside.

I think Roe versus Wade, I think, is a very reasonable standard.

And the standard is quite simple, and they've had a number of addendums to them.

I think the last one was Casey Planned Parenthood in the 90s, where it said, look,

when the child becomes viable outside the womb, that seems like a pretty reasonable standard to say, no more abortion.

I think that's a pretty reasonable standard.

Okay, and we can't fix it to first trimester because as far as we've got to keep up with technology, as long as we're able to keep children, you know, out of the womb healthy and alive, then that's the standard.

They've moved so far, you talk about the overdue window, and you're absolutely right.

They've moved that window so far out of it, there's no sunshine coming in anywhere in the house.

I mean, they're talking about, I mean, they're talking, if we're being charitable, late-term abortion, if you look at

what the governor of Virginia said, he's talking about infanticide.

And by the way, there actually are thinkers on the Democratic side who actually are okay with that.

Okay, there's a professor from Princeton who said,

Peter Singer, who has talked about infanticide being okay.

Being okay up to two years, which he later apologized for.

Do you know this?

No.

He said, you should be able to kill a child up until two years.

And then he came out and apologized for it.

And his apology was, I shouldn't have put a date on it.

Because you should be able to kill anyone that doesn't realize.

That they're alive.

That they're alive or the concept of tomorrow.

Right.

So look, look,

again, these,

when you think about kind of like how right-wing conspiratorialists would talk about Democratic positions, you say, oh, you're a crazy right-winger.

Democrats don't believe that.

They kind of do now.

Like, we're in the position where those conspiratorial theories of democratic belief system is now a reality.

You don't even have to take it to right after birth.

What is the difference between five minutes before birth or five minutes after birth?

Really?

It's still a a baby.

Not much.

Yeah.

In fact, I think nothing.

Nothing.

Nothing.

Except them building.

Yeah.

It's on one side of the womb, the other side of the womb.

Nothing magical happens between that baby.

And they're like, oh, you are a child.

So, like I said, I'm a moderate on abortion.

I think abortion should be safe and legal, but I think we have to keep within the, you know,

Casey versus Planned Parenthood and Roe v.

Wade.

I think that's a reasonable standard.

But

they've blown so far past that.

I remember when I saw the state legislator in

New York when they passed the late-term abortion bill, and I saw them standing up and clapping, clapping.

I thought to myself, this is sick, sick.

I believe that the average American, they don't think about abortion because they don't want to.

Because they don't want to think about that decision with themselves or with their baby or with their daughter.

They just don't want to think about it.

And so they've gotten,

they're comfortable with viability

and, you know, first trimaster

and just

leave it there.

When you're talking about someone shouting their abortion, that's not safe, rare, and legal.

You're now celebrating.

A woman in Seattle was speaking to a progressive conference, and she said, I'm so happy to be back in Seattle.

My first and frankly, my best abortion happened here.

I don't know why I'm laughing.

I mean, it's because

it's a psychotic thing to say.

Can you imagine saying, can you imagine if you went to a vet and a vet put your dog down and came out and went, that was my first?

And, ooh, I have to tell you, that's one of the best things I've ever done.

You would would say that guy's a psycho.

Yes.

Look, I mean, you look at Russia, and in Russia, they really use abortion as birth control, and that's how it's got.

I mean, is that where we want to go here in this country?

And by the way, this is so far afield from what, I mean, even Bill Clinton, what Bill Clinton said about abortion, right?

Want to keep it rare, safe, and legal.

I mean, we're so far afield from that.

And again, it goes back to the same theme.

I'll keep repeating it because it bears repeating.

90% of the country isn't there.

The majority of the Democratic Party isn't there.

They are so outrunning their flank, they're killing themselves.

So what's going to happen during the election?

What do you think we're going to see for this election?

I think you're not going to see Biden as the nominee.

I'll tell you that right now.

Why?

Oh,

you can already see the quivers are all coming out against him.

I mean, he's listening.

He's 30 points ahead.

A year means nothing right now.

It means nothing.

We're a year plus from this thing.

You know how many things are going to come, are going to toss and turn by then?

And he will not be leaving the field.

He said that when Donald Trump, at the same time in the election cycle, actually, it was a month later, it was in June, I think,

because that's when he joined.

He came out and he was eight or ten points ahead.

Everybody said he's not going to win.

It's going to be over.

Donald Trump was a black swan.

You can't use any kind of historical yardstick to Donald Trump because it just was the definition of a political black swan.

This is not what's going to happen with.

But that black swan, the argument on the Democratic side would be that black swan is so damaged now.

It's not 2016.

It's 2020.

He's run his course.

Which is why they're not going to pick Biden.

Biden's only advantage

is electability.

Nobody wants him

for his perspectives.

So if that's true, and I think you're right, that they think the Donald Trump, the country cannot wait to throw him out, they can go, then let's go all in on the woke president.

Let's bring the first woke president in.

But I don't think that, I think the, I think it falls apart in the end if he is the nominee, because I think all the woke people will be like, are you kidding me?

You gave me that again?

Oh, you see a revolution in the Democratic Party if he's elected.

Oh, yeah, I think so, too.

You have to look at Biden and say,

when there's a

10, I'm being

really generous, I think the lowest

spread from him and the other candidates.

I think the lowest poll I've seen is 21 points.

That's a big spread.

Up to 40 points.

Yes.

When you see that, to me,

that says

why you are getting into this race.

That says to me, the Democratic voters are like, thank God, I don't want any of that crap.

That's crazy town stuff.

Thank God, I'll take him.

Yes, I'll take him.

Because who else is there?

Let's remember also that the people who

are in the polls, who are called on the phone, are not necessarily the same people who vote in the primaries.

People who vote in primaries are far more to the left, as all primaries are, not just the Democrats, than the person who's being called on the phone and saying, what's your opinion?

So I'm not sure that I think that spread is a little bit exaggerated as compared to.

Who do you think will be the president 2020?

Yeah, I think that's me.

I think I'll be president in 2020.

Yeah, I mean, I've already been looking at the.

Do all the other candidates have to

become very, very ill?

There has to be a cataclysmic event.

I mean, a comet has to hit and you're like the lone survivor and you're like, it's me, I guess.

I'm the designated guy.

I'm always really bad at

doing the

March Madness.

I always pick my school I went to.

It doesn't matter how bad they are.

So

let's take me out of it for the moment.

I think that there is better than a 50-50 chance the president wins re-election.

And the number goes up significantly if the economy stays where it is or and or if the Democrats elect somebody who is far to the left.

So I think when you, anytime you kind of make this analysis on who you think is going to win, you got to kind of game it through.

If they choose a guy like Joe Biden or even a Pete Buttigieg, although we're not really sure what he is exactly, I mean, he's been open about it.

He has not formulated all of his policies yet, which is absurd to me.

I don't know how you can run for president and not have every single policy.

Like when I came here, like we're going to talk about policies.

I mean, I just jumped in the race a week ago, and my policies are all formulated.

There's no policy I can say pass.

But if they put somebody who is

not radical, I think it's a 50-50 shot with the president.

I think they take something radical.

I think the number goes 60-40, if not higher, for the president.

Let's go to

well, let me go

to this.

The Democrats don't win with a radical or with Joe Biden.

What happens to the Democrats after the election?

What do you mean?

I mean, you're saying,

I mean, everybody thought, I mean, they were all acting like, gee, Donald Trump won.

We should ask ourselves, what role did we play in this?

And what have we done wrong?

I know what we've done wrong is we haven't become full-fledged communists.

That's it.

I mean,

they learned the absolute wrong lesson from 2016.

The absolute wrong lesson.

Right.

Do they do it again?

Of course.

Of course.

Yes, they do it again.

They do it again.

I don't know why it is.

Maybe it's a mechanism of the Democratic Party.

I don't know why it is.

But the silent majority of the Democratic Party just doesn't have a voice anymore.

And it's the radicals who are running this party.

I mean, Tom,

who don't remember, Tom Perez wasn't the guy who was supposed to win

the head of the DNC.

I mean, they were going to have a radical who was the odds on a favorite, but because anti-Semitism was kind of apparent, they pulled him off and they put Tom Perez there instead.

I mean, all you.

I don't think that would happen today.

I think you're right.

I think you're right.

I mean,

it's...

I just hate repeating myself, but it is true.

They've moved, the Democrats have moved so far to the left that they've changed political physics.

They've changed the political center of gravity just wildly away from the center, wildly away from the center.

And like I said, I did say that

they have over the last 24 years inexorably been moving to the left, but it's been slow,

a slow move.

You talk to a lot of people.

You've done issues all over the world.

I don't hear Democrats waking up saying what you're saying.

No, you're right.

And that's.

My gut tells me you're right.

My gut tells me that Democrats are not for this, but I don't hear it.

It goes back to what you said about how politics is not necessarily first and foremost among most people, including Democrats and Republicans.

And I don't think they see what we see.

I mean, we're junkies, right?

We're watching news every single day.

I mean, we wake up with it, we go to sleep with it.

We know what's happening minute by minute, never mind month by month.

I think, unfortunately, it's going to be too late, if not already, for

the

casual Democrat, whatever you want to, however you want to phrase them,

who's going to wake up and say, I don't even recognize this party anymore.

I mean, you remember

famously what Ronald Reagan said.

I never left the Democratic Party.

Democratic Party left me.

That's exactly what I think.

That was one guy.

I think you're seeing that maybe with the majority of Democrats.

I think that

if Donald Trump wins again,

they go full crazy.

They go full crazy.

That's why we didn't win.

We weren't true enough to our beliefs.

You have done some pretty frightening things.

Okay, so now this is a podcast my my wife and children cannot watch.

And yet you're an optimist.

With all that you see,

with all the things that you know,

I guess I'm asking you this personally.

I'm generally an optimist.

People think I'm a pessimist, but I'm not.

I'm a guy who can see over the horizon a bit, see what's coming, and I'm just telling you: hey, that's what's coming.

Exits here, here, and here.

You should take one because you don't want to go there.

But as we pass all those exits, and I see that coming closer and closer, I get a little bummed

and worried

and worried about basic freedoms being lost.

I try not to show that while I'm on the air.

But you see these things coming because you've witnessed them firsthand.

Firsthand.

I've seen the blackness of life firsthand.

Look, I'm a short-term pessimist, long-term optimist.

I think ultimately we make the right decisions.

We don't sometimes in the short term and we learn lessons and we move on from them.

But it's the fact that we learn lessons, which is why I'm a long-term optimist.

It's not written in stone that we will succeed

as a race, as a human race.

It's not written in stone.

We have to make the right decisions.

We have to learn.

If I feel that we've stopped,

let's talk about our country as opposed to the entire world.

As a country, if I think we've stopped learning the lessons of the past, then I will switch.

I'll become a pessimist.

I think at this point we're not there.

I think we do learn our lessons.

I think the American population generally makes the right decisions.

After we've tried everything else, as Hitler said, as Churchill said.

Sometimes.

Sometimes.

Sometimes it doesn't take that long, and usually, hopefully it doesn't.

But yeah, no, no, I've seen the darkness and it's scary.

What does it look like?

I'll tell you, it can look very banal.

I've sat across a guy who was responsible for the Passover massacre in Etanya.

Do you remember that massacre in Etanya where they they was there?

Where they blew up a old age home full of mostly Holocaust survivors.

I sat in front of this guy for an hour talking to him.

And you know what?

You talk to him, and the man sounds

reasonable is not the right word, but he sounds like

for sure lucid.

Oh, this is a guy who went to the University of Alabama, rolled tied.

Okay.

I mean,

this is evil incarnate.

I'm looking at evil incarnate.

I've met with Islamic jihad.

I've met with ISIS.

I've met with neo-Nazis.

I've embedded with neo-Nazis.

I've seen these people.

I was just with the KKK, Leader of the KKK, just in North Carolina just a couple of months ago.

And what's so scary about it is their kind of seemingly normalness on the surface.

You can have a regular conversation about football.

With with the guy, this is a guy who stabbed

another member of the KKK because they had an argument who was the most racist okay that's literally what happened and he went to jail for it but yeah we sat there we could talk about football and kids and normal stuff but you you can just you feel just it's almost tactile underneath the surface the evil below it

i think most americans

who are at all paying attention feel that

it's that unsettled feeling of

something's not right.

Something's just not right.

Don't know what it is, but this doesn't feel good.

This doesn't feel right.

Those who are

just barely awake, I think, see that.

Look,

you know, I have all of these

friends, acquaintances, just people I don't know and on the left, and they just can't wait for Pax Americana to end.

They think that America is the root of all evil we've seen in the world.

They really believe that.

Now, again, I'm not talking about Democrats,

I'm talking about the leftists.

These are my sworn enemies.

The leftists are my sworn enemies.

They're the biggest threat this country has, not the 10,000 neo-Nazis in this country, who everybody kind of shuts aside anyways as psychopaths.

They don't have the university system.

The Nazis don't have the university system.

They don't have any control of any levers, but the leftists do.

What I witness in universities and our campuses, it makes me cry at night.

But these people want Pax Americana to end.

The one thing I can tell them with 100% certainty,

things I can prognosticate on and write and not write on, I don't know.

This thing I have 100% certainty.

One day, Pax Americana will end.

Okay, nothing lasts forever.

And I hope it's not 100 years from now.

I hope it's 1,000 years from now.

But one day, it will end.

And the one thing I know for certain is that historians, when they write the history of that period of time, will say that's when humanity entered a phase of darkness that will last for I don't know how long.

You know,

Churchill wrote the history of the English-speaking people.

I have it on my shelf.

There was a book, and I can't remember the writer now.

It's a great book.

He dared finish it for the century.

It came out about 2005.

And

one of the last paragraphs in the book is so powerful

because he's talking about how

after 9-11,

you know, turn of the century, you started to see America shift and the West shift and it started to look

back at itself saying, ick,

and what have we done and who are we?

Because the rest of the world was saying it to them.

And he said,

there will come a day

that

it will end the rule of the English-speaking people.

And when that day comes, the world will weep and realize

how benevolent, how good,

how decent, how true

that society really was in at least its attempt.

You racist.

You know what?

You belong on stage with the Democrats.

You know what?

Yeah, I'm a Western supremacist.

Sorry.

Sue me.

Yeah, I believe the West has done more for this planet than anybody in the history of the world.

And America among them all.

Okay?

America among them all.

Yeah, I'm an American supremacist.

Yes.

Yes.

Let me tell you something.

A fiat is a crap box.

Nice little car, but back in the, you know, in the day, it was a crap box, just like a Jaguar was a crap box.

The American-made Buick of the 1950s,

next to a Fiat,

that's a superior car.

The American-made Cadillac, the best American-made car, whatever that might be today, the Cadillac, as opposed to a Bentley,

a Bentley is superior.

There's nothing wrong wrong with saying,

you know what?

Something

is better than that.

Apparently there is.

Yeah, apparently there is.

Apparently there is.

Best of luck.

Thank you.

It was a real pleasure.

Just a reminder, I'd love you to rate and subscribe to the podcast and pass this on to a friend so it can be discovered by other people.