Traveling gone awry

Flu season is here and COVID cases are still climbing across the country.

When people start getting sick, medications disappear fast.

And that's why we trust All Family Pharmacy.

They help you prepare before it's too late.

Right now, they've dropped prices on ivermectin and mabenzazole by 25%.

Plus, you can save an extra 10% with the code VICTR10.

You'll also get 10% off antibiotics, antivirals, hydroxychloroquine, and more of the medications you actually want on hand.

Whether you're fighting off a cold, protecting your family from flu season, or staying ready in case COVID makes its way into your home, having a few months' supply brings peace of mind and control.

They work with licensed doctors who review your order online, write the prescriptions, and ship your meds straight to your door.

Go to allfamilypharmacy.com/slash Victor and use the code Victor10 today.

Hello, and welcome to the Victor Davis Hansen Show.

Victor is the Martin Enely Anderson Senior Fellow in Military History and Classics at the Hoover Institution and the Wayne and Marcia Busky Distinguished Fellow in History at Hillsdale College.

He also does this podcast and this is our Friday news roundup.

So we'll look at as many news stories as we can today and get some commentary from Victor that is who is often sober and judicious.

And so stay with us and we'll be right

If you're a homeowner, you need to listen to this.

In today's AI and cyber world, scammers are stealing your home titles, and your equity is the target.

Here's how it works: criminals forge your signature on one document, use a fake notary stamp, pay a small fee with your county, and just like that, your home title has been transferred out of your name.

Then they take out loans using your equity and even sell your property, and you won't even know what's happened until you get a collection or foreclosure notice.

So, when was the last time you checked on your home title?

If your answer is never, you need to do something about it right now.

And that's why we've partnered with Home Title Lock so you can find out today if you're already a victim.

Go to home titlelock.com/slash victor to get a free title history report and a free trial of their million-dollar triple lock protection.

That's 24-7 monitoring of your title, urgent alerts to any changes.

And if fraud does happen, they'll spend up to $1 million to fix it.

Please, please don't be a victim.

Protect your equity today.

That's home, titlelock.com/slash victor.

We're back.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.

I want to tell our listeners that you said I was sober and judicious.

You've been advised that that

phraseology is a polite put-down.

And I know you have been advised because when I was in graduate school, when I would turn in a Latin or Greek composition,

my professor would say mostly a sober and judicious job, which meant it's not very good.

Oh, but then he only wrote mostly on that, didn't he?

He said as well, mostly possible Latin or mostly possible Greek.

I thought they were brilliant compositions, as every graduate student does.

Yes.

And I look back when I was cleaning out the barn about two years ago and I saw one of my compositions, a translation of a long passage from Paradise Lost by Milton into hexameter verse in Greek and Latin.

It wasn't too bad, but he had it on there,

a sober and judicious job.

Yes.

And then he said to me,

you are a sober, you must, he said to me, sometimes you fly off the handle, and I would like you to be more sober and judicious.

Exactly.

So he admired sober and judicious.

And he gave you.

I interpreted it as, I want you to be a colorless mediocrity.

Well, at least you're not erratic and injudicious is all I can say for that.

But you have recently come back from a trip and been on the airlines.

And I know that you have a short story to share with us.

Well, yes, I've been, we have a kind kind of a regular feature here about the nightmare of Greyhound bus air travel.

And

I had mentioned that somebody wrote a brilliant letter to us about what air travel was.

At some point, we'll read it.

And it was exactly right.

It is a horrific experience now.

It really is, because I mentioned that I had to go to Milwaukee for the Bradley Foundation and the pilots had, there was no food on the plane.

The pilots, you know, we said that, went out to go get coffee.

We were waiting for them.

They came back and then they rolled down the window and it wouldn't roll up.

They said it would be 15 minutes, three hours later.

I just left.

And that's happened a lot.

But this one was very strange.

You know,

you start on the plane, we were leaving from Detroit, and they said one carry-on, of course.

And then the plane, every plane is packed.

So you see these people, the last people aboard, and they said there's no carry-on.

And yet they come on with these huge suitcases that barely qualify as carry-on.

And then they have duffel bags now, and they're as big as the carry-on, but they count as purses because they're on their shoulder.

And they think they're going to go all the way back to the back and put them in.

And they don't fit.

And so we sit there for 10 minutes and we're all worried about connections.

And they push and then they can't do it.

So then the attendant goes all the way to the back and she keeps going back and bringing back six, eight, ten, which then have to be put back into the plane on the outside.

So we get there

and we get to Salt Lake City and we're starting to, I've had this happen one time in my life in Los Angeles when it was really foggy.

The plane has its landing gear.

It's going down.

We're all looking at our watches.

The pilot has heroically made up much of the the initial little slight delay.

We're ready to go in.

And he makes a hard pull-up just as we're going to land.

I mean, hard.

And then veers off radically to the right.

And everybody goes, what the

at least the person next to me was praying.

And he, I think that really helped

because,

and then he doesn't say anything for a while.

And everybody goes, well, what's going on?

And then he says, That plane, this is just a note, that plane was not where it should be.

Wow.

What does that mean?

We almost had a near-miss.

And these are happening with increasing frequency.

And that begs the question: why?

And if you go on any little internet search and you do air traffic controllers, and you look at hiring, FFA, use any combination.

And this is despite the Google paradigms and

algorithms that don't want you to find the truth, but nevertheless, you can find a lot of news stories that A, the FFA has demanded diversity hiring, that they're going to, in order to reach their goals of either repertory or proportional representation, they are getting rid of a lot of the previous requirements about aviation, math, et cetera, and asking for more

biographical information.

And when you look at these, and then if you search near-misses, it's almost an epidemic.

And I'm not a mathematician, so I don't know if the near-misses are commiserate with increased mileage, but you'd think that after two years, we didn't fly all that much.

the industry would have been rested and would be prepared for this new demand.

But I can tell you that there's near misses all the time.

So what I'm worried about, it's just a matter of time until there is a radical shake-up in the air traffic controllers or maybe the ground, whatever the problem is, somebody's going to get killed.

And we almost bit it the other day with this sudden pull-up.

And I'm sure that that near miss will not be recorded.

And the airline in question will not say there was a near miss, but it was.

And everybody in that plane was A, freaked out and B, angry that all they were told was a plane was not supposed to be where it was, meaning

we have a landing gear, we're ready for descent, we're almost touching the ground, and we yank up and then make a hard ride.

And

some of your stuff was scattered around your tray table, or not your tray table, but stuff.

And it was really weird.

And I'd had it happen once just two years earlier in Los Angeles.

Same thing.

And so, those, those are going to,

we're not supposed to ask for cause and effect, why this is happening.

The other thing really quickly is

air travel is a menagerie now.

It's like a zoo.

I mean, there are animals of every sort and kind.

You go on there.

I was sitting in the

waiting in Los Angeles to take off to Hillsdale, where I just returned from, Detroit.

And there was this couple, very nice couple.

They had the most huge matching golden retrievers.

I mean, they were not small.

They were huge.

And how would you get both of them on there?

They had special.

And then, you know, you take a dog.

I have four dogs.

I know they're not particularly well trained or behaved, but how do you get go in for an hour and a half in an airport and then they don't urinate or defecate?

Or you give them an, I don't know, a pill or something.

And then you put them on a

flight and they're supposed to be behaved for that long.

The last time this happened to me was about three years ago.

I was on a flight in a little pekinese, a woman next to me was smiling.

And then I noticed that I was smelling this past wind, you know, from the dog.

The next thing I knew, it was trying to copulate on my ankle.

And I was sitting there and I said, excuse me?

She goes, oh, isn't he funny?

I said, no, he's not funny.

He's horny.

And

I don't understand this.

Why we allow all of these animals to go onto the flight?

Some of you are going to say, well, we have pets and we move.

Take a bus, drive,

you know, but this idea that you're going to bring all these animals on and you're not going to have a lot of trouble.

And some of them don't have muzzles on them.

And some of them are bigger.

They're not in cages and cats, et cetera, parakeets.

So I don't know what's happened to the airline industry, but

I have a rule that if it's a question, any maximum driving time, I know that you're you're going to say, listeners who are very informed, and say, Victor, of all the miles traveled,

you're safer in an airline than a car, perhaps, but at least you're in control of your own destiny.

And you can die, you know what I mean?

Somewhat in control of your own destiny.

You can't control some of the California drivers today.

But nevertheless, it was really, it's getting so that

every time I go on a plane, I just expect the

takeoff to be late.

And then I look at the flight aware flight stats and they'll say 90% on time or 80% on time.

And I just don't believe it.

And then every time I hear a notice from the captain,

the window, oh, by the way, the window, you know, we came back from coffee because there was no food put on the plane last night.

So we had to have something to eat.

And we're all thinking, as I said, we're hungry too.

And then

I rolled down the window and it didn't roll up.

I didn't even know planes had windows that rolled down.

Yeah.

And then he's, you said, but you know what?

15, 20 minutes, we have a mechanic here.

We've already taken care of it.

So just relax.

And then 15 to 20 minutes, they don't say, this is the time I warned you we were going to take off.

They say, oh, an hour later, oh, we've got a little problem here.

Maintenance didn't quite show up, but

somebody's on it, we're told.

That's an hour later, two hours.

There's a little problem.

And I suggest if you want to disembark, but stay near, because at any moment we could get a note to go.

And then three hours.

Just

heck with it.

You know what I mean?

And I don't know what they're taught, but they're not taught to inform the passenger of the actual situation.

Maybe they don't know it.

Maybe they could just say, you know what?

There is a delay and we do not know how long it is.

We're going to do our best.

And some of them do that, but most of them, it's just bait and switch.

One lie after the other.

It is.

And the whole planes, there's no such really thing.

And most of the main routes, there's no thing, such thing as,

you know, standby anymore because it's completely full.

It's completely full.

And

I don't know what the deal is on food, but it's everybody brings food.

And I think on the last three flights, I've sat next to people who pull out

ham and eggs, sandwiches, chili boats.

You know what I mean?

Everything.

And it's just,

it's like when I was a kid and I would take the Greyhound bus, you know,

and my car broke down.

I took the bus home.

The Greyhound bus of 1970 is better than the plane today.

There's no doubt about it.

And because these planes are all full and there's people who don't think that air travel requires a particular code of behavior, that everybody has to get along.

It's getting really rowdy and people are

bringing on animals, as I said.

They're bringing on food.

They're bringing on bags that can't possibly fit.

And the air traffic controllers, something's gone wrong with the air traffic controllers because there's a lot of near-misses now.

And I just experienced one and it's crazy.

No plane with 200 people should be landing with its landing gear down on a completely clear day in Salt Lake City with very little, if any, wind, and then at the last second, pull straight up and to the right and then not explain what was going on other than a just terse

a plane was not there where it was supposed to be.

The plane was there where it wasn't supposed to be.

Do you think that they're not sorting out the air traffic controllers through testing, et cetera?

No, they know that.

We know that.

The FFA, as early as

2016, I think Walter Williams wrote an article about it before he passed away in 2018.

It was clear then, well before the woke George Floyd, that the current standards that we remember, the standards were created by the FAA.

It wasn't some right-wing group that said an applicant must have some mathematical or computational ability or some background, or we will favor people who come out of the military air traffic control experience.

They set the standards, which they thought at a much calmer, easier time was absolutely essential.

And then the woke revolution and the Obama administration and that name Obama administration will be referenced in many of these articles coming out of the mid-2000s.

They decided that the air traffic controllers didn't look like America, which is that's a legitimate concern in a multiracial democracy.

So you would think you would go to the eighth grade or seventh grade and say, look, we're from the

FAA, and we would like to someday encourage people.

So we're going to encourage all of you to take math and science.

And they don't do that.

They do it on the back end like they always do.

Then they say, you know what?

This is not proportionally representative.

So it's racist.

So we're going to deliberately

change the standards so that we have

an air traffic controller pool that looks like America.

Of course, they don't do this all around.

They don't say to the U.S.

Post Office, you don't represent the demography of America, therefore we're going to change or alter the test so it looks like America.

They do not do that with the Los Angeles Lakers and say, our San Francisco foreign

team, a national pastime does not look like America, so we're going to go on the front end and we're going to change things.

So it does.

And

that's what's crazy about it.

Instead, they say things like, there's not enough African American baseball players in the major leagues.

And

what they mean by that is there's not as much as the heyday of the great period of Roberto Clemente and Hank Aaron.

Willie Mays, Willie McCovey, but they're not saying that there are fewer than 12% African Americans in the major league.

And they're not saying that Latinos make up about 12%, 15% of the population, and they're almost 50%.

They never say that.

Or they never say that whites make up 67%

of the population, but they don't make up 60%, 70%, 67% of the NFL, the NBA, or even the national baseball.

So they don't say that.

So they don't really believe in it.

They don't believe in it.

They just believe in it when they want to believe it, and then they change the rules.

So, yeah, in this case, it's a very dangerous

changing of the rules.

Like a basketball player isn't going to kill 200 people on this.

You can turn off the NBA, like

five out of every 10 viewers from the 1990s have done because they don't want the political messaging.

You can turn off LeBron James.

You can turn off Colin Kaepernick.

You can turn off the Emmys of the Grammys.

You can't turn off the FAA

because if you say, well, I'm not going to fly,

well, it's still going to impact you indirectly, whether it's mail parcels or FedEx or people on the ground or people.

If one of those planes hits something, it's going to go down on an urban area.

So it will affect people.

And we haven't had a major

crash since 2009.

And they cite that, but they're not telling us that the avionics and the computer navigation and the autopilot ability of these planes and sophisticated computer tracking and radar, et cetera, have progressed at a geometric rate.

So what we're using now versus, I don't know, 15 years ago is so much more sophisticated.

And you shouldn't have any near-misses, except we have changed the definition of

what we require for someone to go into air traffic control control training.

And we're doing it not for safety or scientific reasons or matters of efficacy, but

essentially for social engineering.

Yeah.

Well, since we're speaking about travel, recently the Energy Secretary, Jennifer Granholm, went on a trip with an EV to demonstrate the viability of EVs.

And I know that you have a good story on that.

I don't understand her.

There was zero qualifications.

I know that she had been an anchor woman, I think on MSNBC or CNN.

She was attractive, blonde, Canadian-American.

I get all that.

And she was a governor, I guess.

But she had no experience at all as energy.

She had about as much experience to be energy secretary as Pete Buttigig did to be transportation.

So when she was asked,

when Joe Biden began, you know, hectoring frackers and horizontal drillers about and then getting

financial institutions hectoring them about lending for fossil fuels canceling leases on key federal lands putting Anmore off canceling Keystone

and the price of gasoline went up and they were terrified about the midterms what did she say when she was asked somebody said well are we going to pump more oil you think they can pump more oil

it's a world decision and she didn't realize that one of the reasons that the oil was, gas was so cheap was that Trump flooded the world with cheap oil 2018 and 19 to the chagrin of Vladimir Putin.

And it was very important that we were independent from the Middle East and we harmed Russia.

So she took a caravan because we're spending a lot of money on EVs.

She decided that she would, I guess, go from the Carolinas to Atlanta and show everybody that her little caravan could just zoom right through the United States and that would show and reassure everybody that, you know, the new ones have 300 miles.

That's sort of like a 1970s gas guzzler with, I don't know, 15 miles a gallon, 20 gallon gas tank.

So it's viable.

And then she started puttering around.

She learned very quickly there were not enough charging stations for her caravan

in the sense of either they had to work and they were not inoperable because they break down or people vandalize them or there weren't people like her that were searching for them.

You have a Tesla that tells you exactly where the charging stations are and who's using them and how many are available.

So then they come up with a bright idea that to make this caravan work, they've got to scout out ahead that there's open charging stations in an area where it's not reflective of her confidence that there are.

So they come up and say that they're going to get a gas-powered car to go ahead because they see there's an open station and that car, I guess, is going to block entrance so no one else can go on a hot day.

A young family with a baby who has an EV is in the same predicament they are, wants to go in, but she's blocked the access.

And I think the left-wing media said, Well, it's not against the law to block the access with a gas car.

You know, I mean, it's just silly.

And so they complained.

It was embarrassing.

Her little caravan was a complete dud.

And then we started getting a few other stories, such as

on I-5, there was a report that a major electrical charging station had a lot of stalls, but it has a backup generator to

create electricity for it.

And so,

so there's, yeah, exactly.

Those EVs, I mean, they're wonderful in the short term if you've got a connection at your own home and you can get it charged and not short term, but in short distances.

But,

um, I think that

think about it.

The, you know, Ram came out, and I think

Chevrolet has one, but the Echo Diesel six-cylinder with a turbo, I don't think it's as powerful as they claim it is, but

has a 31, 32 gallon tank, and you put diesel in it, and it has that DEF cleanser.

Sure, that's not as effective on the, it wears on the engine, but you pour it in next to the fuel, and it kind of neutralizes the pollution.

Although, of course, they redefine pollution as heat.

And you fill it up, and you look at the mile approximation of distance capacity, and it's about 820 miles on a tank of gas.

And it gets 32 miles.

I have one, and you get 32 miles a gallon, and they're banning it.

They're not going to make them any next year.

So crazy.

Well, Victor.

Well, Victor, let's go ahead and take a break and then come back and talk a little bit about

Joe Biden's propensity to not tell the truth.

And stay with us, and we'll be right back.

This is only one show.

That's going to take five.

That's true, but we'll just do the latest one.

So stay with us and we'll be right back.

Welcome back.

I would like to remind everybody: you can find Victor at his website, victorhanson.com.

It's called The Blade of Perseus.

Come join us either for a free subscription or $5 a month and $50 a year.

We'll get you a subscription for the VDH Ultra material, which is not just copious, but very diverse topics that are talked about.

Sometimes the recent news and situation, and sometimes farming and sometimes warfare.

So please come join us at the website.

Victor, so Joe Biden did a talk, of course, on 9-11.

There's two things I noticed about it.

One is he does.

have his propensity to make things up and so imagined that he might have been on an all-American basketball or basketball

football team, Yeah.

If the Alaska governor had been on his team as well.

But he said earlier, that was just a riff on if Roger Stauback had not gone to the Naval Academy, then they would have picked Joe.

And then Joe would have been the star quarterback.

It was a complete fabrication, complete.

It's like it's in the same league with Joe Biden, the long-distance semi-truck driver that never existed or

the Joe Biden, the great orator who said that he was the first in his family that had gone to college and they were minors.

That was a complete lie.

And the Joe Biden had had so many million miles of Amtrak and he'd gone so many times to Afghanistan and he'd given this medal to this guy.

They were all lies.

All.

The question is, when he says something, it's not, will he lie, but will he tell the truth?

Because that's rare.

He won't.

I have never, ever discussed anything with Hunter Biden, my son, about his business plan.

This laptop, Donald Trump, is a product of Russian disinformation.

51 experts

have proved that.

Why didn't he say Donald Trump in that first debate?

This laptop

is obviously Hunter's, but I had

Anthony Blinken, my aide or Flack, call up Mike Moral and round up 50 intelligence heads so they could lie to the American people with a little qualifier, has all the

hallmarks.

And therefore,

you know, we know that there's, as I said earlier, there's a lot of gremlins in the Kremlin that they're tinkering around and they 3D printed a perfect laptop and they had everything just looking exactly like Hunter and his girlfriends.

And they knew how to write fake emails to Tony Bobolinski and even, you know, my other daughter, my niece, everybody.

It was perfect.

It was all fake.

That's what he asked us to believe.

And people did believe that.

Yeah.

Yeah.

The second thing I noticed about it was he was in Alaska for the 9-11th and not at the national September 11th memorial ceremony.

He sent Kamala and some of the people.

I don't know why that was.

I don't know why go to Alaska.

I guess it was he's afraid of jet lag.

They wanted to land and let him walk around.

But then he lied about it.

He said,

from Alaska, I looked at the gates of hell the next day when I got to ground zero.

No, you didn't.

The records show you were in Washington, D.C.

all that day.

That's easily provable.

And so why does he do this?

And a lot of people are going to say, well, Victor, he's senile, maybe.

Or Victor, he's just good old Joe from he likes to tell a corn pop story or he slammed the guy down, his head on the counter, lunch counter, and saved the reputation of his sister, or he wants to take Trump outside the basketball gymnasium and beat him up.

He said that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

But he also does this because there's no consequences.

that he knows that this obsequious left-wing media will always contextualize.

Just Joe kind of exaggerated.

Why does Joe Biden exaggerate?

In other words, there's not going to be a permanent column in the Washington Post,

which there was, a table, chronicling Donald Trump's lies.

I think they had 20,000 of them, you know, and they were mostly exaggeration.

Some were lies, but they were a lot

most of them exaggeration.

And they fact-checked everything Trump said.

And so when he went to a Koi pond, they said he overfeed fed them.

That's not true.

And they said that he got on a phone call and said that wasn't true.

And they said he deprecated the sacrifice of the Normandy dead.

One person out of the whole 19 in the room said that because it was too rainy and it was dangerous.

So those guys were sucked.

Remember that?

And so

he does it because they don't do that to him.

And they will say, well, Joe got confused.

He did go to 9-11 a few days later or a month later.

Or, you know, he meant well.

And maybe he was conflating a couple of things.

And maybe his statistics on the economy are a little off or

he said that, you know, that when he came, gas prices were double what they are.

Or he said that, you know, that nobody had gotten a vaccination until he became president.

Kind of true, kind of not true.

Just a narrative.

They don't do that with anybody else.

So that's what they do.

And that's why nobody wants to read them or listen to them anymore.

Yeah.

Well, I noticed also, if we can move from the lying president to the January 6th trials,

they have sentenced the leader of the Proud Boys to 22 years

for insurrection.

And I was wondering, what does that mean, insurrection, to these people?

It means that you have

a detailed plan to overthrow the U.S.

government.

So on January 6th,

you have a plan, and because the Capitol police were armed

and there's the Pentagon in Washington that these protesters sat down and they said, in advance, we're going to go into the Capitol and besiege it and hold it.

and therefore declare a new government.

And we have the ability to, I suppose, get to the media and the Pentagon.

Otherwise, it's just John Brown's raid, right?

It's crazy.

But they didn't find one person with an armed weapon inside the Capitol.

They didn't find anybody of this crazy group that went in there that hurt anybody other than there was a woman who was killed.

under mysterious circumstances.

And then there was Ashley Babbitt, who was shot, as we said, unarmed, for the misdemeanor violation of going through a broken window by an officer whose name was not divulged.

So my point is, if it was an insurrection, then we would expect

the truth.

But why, if it was a real insurrection, was the lying all on the side of the people?

who were accusing people of being insurrectionary.

By that, I mean, if it's evident that it was an insurrection, why did they have to lie that Brian Sicknick was killed violently, right?

He wasn't.

He died the next year, the next day of a stroke.

Why did they have to do that?

Why did they have to say that there were five officers who were killed when they committed suicide for how many reasons we don't know up to six months later?

Why did they have to suppress the identity of the officer and get that story off the news that an unarmed military veteran, a slightly built Ashley Babbitt, was shot while unarmed.

The various thing that, you know, George Floyd was unarmed.

And he was,

he wasn't shot.

He was in a lot more disputable situations.

Nobody is saying that Ashley Babbitt had tried to have,

was committing a federal felony of passing counterfeit.

I don't know, maybe they upped that misdemeanor to a felony, but going through a broken window without without a military without a criminal record, such as putting a gun into a pregnant woman's belly during a home invasion, doesn't seem quite the same as a military veteran.

But nonetheless, they had to suppress that information.

So, why did they do it?

Why did they have to

come up with this idea of racketeering or illegal parading?

If it was so bad, it would be prima facie.

And it's the same thing with the 14,000 arrests for

the 2020 rioting.

We had 35 to 40 people killed.

We have 15 police officers who, 1,500 that reported injuries.

We had 2 billion in damages.

We had arson.

But can't you, in that

horrid summer, can't you find

somebody who torched the St.

John's church or the federal courthouse or the police precinct?

And so

that's the problem, that insurrection is just a construct for those people.

It's useful to charge somebody with a pre-planned insurrection when they were just a bunch of buffoons that went in to protest and it turned into violence on the part of some.

But when it was pre-planned on social media by BLM and Antifa, they can't find very many people who did that.

They can find large chunks, blocks of urban areas in in places like Seattle or Washington where armed thugs took control of the city with the compliance of the police and the mayor.

That seems to me that that's insurrectionary to say this is Chaz and this is now our sovereign territory of Seattle.

That seems like you're trying to take over public property and create your own little empire.

Yes.

I mean facetious, but the other thing about insurrectionary, they said Donald Trump, part of the Jack Smith January 6th and the January 6th committee was Donald Trump said, as you remember, go over to the Capitol and make your voices heard and demonstrate peacefully and responsibly, something to that effect.

And they consider that was insurrection.

If that was true,

What do they think Barack Obama did in the campaign of 2008 when he, I think he was in Philadelphia and he said, you know what, all of you need to do?

You need to get in their faces and take a gun to a knife fight.

And that was pretty insurrectionary.

Or what do you think that Charles Schumer, then the minority leader of the Senate, meant when he assembled a huge, unruly co-abortion crowd right at the front doors of the Supreme Court and named the justices

by name, called them out, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch,

you reap the wind,

you sow the wind, you're going to reap the whirlwind.

Quote, you won't know what hit you.

What was that?

In front of a mob, basically.

And if you're going to say that insurrection is Donald Trump telling protesters to go over to the Capitol, which he shouldn't have done, but he did add the word peacefully, okay, that's insurrectionary.

Let me just read you what Camilla Harris

said

right at at the height of that violent summer.

I think she said it in June, right before she was nominated.

This is what she said of all those street protests.

They're not going to stop.

They're not going to stop.

And this is a movement.

I'm telling you, they're not going to stop.

And everyone, beware, because they're not going to stop.

They're not going to stop.

Remember how she has no 500, she has a 500-word vocabulary.

So she just repeats herself.

They're not going to stop before Election day in November, and they're not going to stop after election day.

Everyone should take note of that on both levels.

They're not going to let up, and they should not, and we should not.

We.

Notice that.

She's talking about violent protest.

I know the fact checkers all said, well, she didn't mean that.

She meant peaceful, just like that.

reporter with the flames in the sky and he said it with largely peaceful demonstrations today.

So they all fact check that and said, oh, don't say that she was advocating advocating violence.

So, what does she mean when she knows that these demonstrations have been violent all summer?

They've attacked iconic sites like police precincts and federal courthouses and an iconic church.

She knows that.

And then she says they're not going to stop.

And she ties it with Election Day, Election Day, meaning this stuff is going to affect Election Day.

And then she said that, not them.

She says, We, we should not stop.

So she's including herself in with the people who are doing this.

So my point is this.

Do we really want to go this tit for tat?

So after Joe Biden is out of office and let's say Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis wins, do they really want to get a federal prosecutor to go back and look at all of 2020, many of those states, the Statute of Limitations has not run out.

They could easily say they were racketeering and planning insurrection across state lines, and they could take the list of the 14,000 people who were arrested.

The vast majority got up and retry them,

maybe for different counts.

They could say, you know what, this was racketeering.

Or they could say to Kamala Harris, we're going to have an investigation of 2020, and we're going to call you as a private citizen.

You better spend a quarter million dollars at least.

And we're going to bring you before the May, June, July 2020 Select Committee of Congress.

And we want you to explain what you were saying when you were advocating these what turned out to be violent protests, despite your fact-checking friends' disclaimers.

We want you to explain what you meant that they shouldn't stop and why you used the royal we, we, we, and why did you put Election Day in the context of these demonstrations that shouldn't stop until Election Day.

Were you advocating street violence to create turmoil to affect an election and an insurrectionary fact?

Do we really want to do that?

Some of the listeners said, damn it, sure we do.

But we could do all of this.

We can say in the next two, the Republican president gets elected in 2024.

He's up for re-election in 2028.

He says, you know what?

I'm going,

the Democrats are really soft on Iran.

I'm going to hire a British Iranian expert.

He's a foreign nationalist.

He's against the law for him to work in my campaign.

I could care less.

I want him to have a dossier on, let's pick Jennifer Granholm, maybe.

Maybe she'll be running.

Maybe Gavin Newsome.

And we're going to find all the dirt and say that, you know, Gavin went.

to a hotel in Tehran or something.

He urinated on the sheets because Trump had been there.

We'll make up any crazy story and we'll get the FBI to spread spread it through all right before the election.

We could do this all day long.

We'll impeach Joe Biden now in his first term because he lost the House.

We will continue to

peach him the second time.

We'll have no special counsel report in either impeachment.

And you know what?

If he's out of office, we'll try him as a private citizen.

That's what they left us, that legacy.

Yeah.

It's really scary.

Well, Victor, let's turn to one other story about our New New Mexico governor has suspended conceal and carry in Albuquerque in order to fight the rise in violence there.

I was wondering if you had any thoughts on that.

So let's get this straight.

She's saying that as a state official,

she has the right to cancel your Second Amendment and federal right to carry a firearm or to possess one, right?

And she's put on in suspicion

your concealed weapon permit, which was her own state issued.

So just by fiat, she can do that, basically cancel out the Second Amendment.

It's so stupid on so many ways.

It's unconstitutional, obviously.

It breaks her own laws because people go through a very careful process to be able to get a firearm for protection and a concealed carry permit.

She's thrown that out the window.

But who does she think is committing these crimes statistically in the inner city?

That's where most of them are.

Does she think it's Joe Blow that, you know, he drives to work and he goes through a bad neighborhood and he's afraid of carjacking.

So he has to get a permit.

He has to learn, take a test.

He has to show somebody that he knows how to operate a firearm, shoot it responsibly.

Then he has to pay a lot of money and then he has to have a background check.

And then he gets his permit and he just goes on a rampage and he's shooting everybody.

Does she believe that?

Or does she believe that most of this gun violence is a result of people who are

using weapons that they either don't own or they don't register or they stole?

That's the problem.

So if she really cared about gun violence, she would do what Rudy Giuliani and Mike Bloomberg did.

They would go to the areas with the highest incidence of shooting, and they would stop and frisk suspects.

And if they found a firearm with them, they would arrest them.

And they took hundreds, thousands of firearms off the street, and the violent crime rate dipped.

And then we abolished it after George Floyd, and the rest is history.

So it's a larger pattern where when we can't do anything about the felony because it's either

politically incorrect or it's so vast that the remedy is worse than the disease, then we have to have some psychological squaring of the circle.

So we say, hmm,

there's a lot of marginalized people in the inner city that are shooting each other, maybe 8,000 or 9,000 African Americans a year, and they're violent to each other.

But also, you know, 10% of their victims are out of their group, and that's dangerous too, carjacking, smash and grab, all that.

But we can't control it.

We can't go in there because you can't do stop and frisk.

We've decriminalized the criminal code.

We've got Soros prosecutors.

So, if we arrest a guy that's smashing and grabbing, he's got a gun,

it's not registered, we're not going to throw him in jail for a year or two, we're going to let him out the same day.

So, we can't handle that existential problem.

But we have to do something.

So, Billy Bob Smith over there,

who drives a pickup and he's got a legal registered,

38, we'll go after him.

And then we can say, I tried to clamp down on

violence, even though he's not going to shoot anybody.

And that's where we are.

It's even worse than that.

If you were a conspiracy theorist, which sometimes I descend into,

you would think that you want to go after that person that has the concealed weapon so that he can't use the concealed weapon.

And therefore, that fact is known to everybody including in particular the criminal community so then you tell that

that citizen you are dependent on me I have a monopoly on firearms and I have certain ideas about criminal justice and my ideas will affect your safety.

So I want to decriminalize a lot of acts.

I do not want to prosecute people.

And if you feel threatened, you better be nice to me because I control the funding of the police forces on the local, state, federal level.

We have the monopoly and you need to come to me for your own personal safety.

And I'm not going to allow you to be outside my control and armed when my policies put you in danger.

If my policies put you in danger, you come to me.

Give me a campaign donation.

Vote for me.

And maybe I'll beef up your neighborhood.

But do not arm yourself.

That's what it's all about.

Yeah, it sure is.

Well, Victor, let's go ahead and take another break and come back and talk a little bit about $6 billion for the Iranians.

Stay with us and we'll be right back.

Welcome back.

I would like to give a shout out to John Solomon, the investigative reporter in D.C.

We are hosted on his website, Just The News.

And so please go to it.

Great stories from John.

He's really deep into especially the Hunter Biden, Joe Biden crime syndicate.

And so Victor,

the United States is now going to release funds from South Korea that have been frozen, that are Iranian funds, in order to get back five prisoners in Iran that are U.S.

citizens.

I was wondering if you had any thoughts on this exchange.

Well, Iran

counts on a lot of their expatriates

to be supporters of the Iranian government.

So it particularly hates Iranian Americans who

don't agree with a revolutionary theocratic government.

And every once in a while, it makes a statement about that to deter other Iranians abroad.

So they arrested and basically held hostage.

five Iranian Americans.

And they had money that had been put on ICE given sanctions.

I think it was in the South Korean Bank, is that right?

These assets were

held by South Korea under the international sanctions.

So Joe Biden thought, hmm,

elections coming up.

Hostage releases are always popular.

I know that Iran is getting near a bomb thanks to me.

I know that I'm trying to beg them to get back into the RAN deal.

I know that I'm continuing the Obama policy of empowering Iran as a counterweight to the Sunni moderate regimes and the Gulf regimes and Israel.

So I will reach out to Iran and say, I'm going to give you your $6 billion

that has been held because you're a terrorist government.

And you will give me five Iranian Americans.

And

it's a pretty good deal for my campaign and public relations.

So that's, and I think they've been in there for, I don't know, eight or nine years, some of them.

So that's what it's all about.

And I don't understand what it is about the Iranian

anti-Semitic, angry, revolutionary, anti-American government that probably killed at least 1,500 Americans during the Iraq war by shape charge exports and stuff.

And Soleimani, who Trump took out, his activities inside Iraq to galvanize the Shia resistance.

But they have some weird fixation with Iran.

It goes back to the Shah of Iran.

The Shah of Iran for them is

and the

Mossad and that whole thing is like chili.

So they love Allende and they think that if he hadn't have stepped down and they blame the CIA, even though I think the CIA

liked what was happening, but didn't plan it.

And Allende was on a course.

There's a great chart on power line, I think, that shows you where Venezuela, when it was not socialist, and Chile,

when Allende were there, that's the baseline.

And then it just goes down

in Venezuela.

And then the market reforms that followed Allende show in terms of per capita income or per capita GDP,

Chile just took off and Venezuela went to Cuban levels.

So,

you know,

they know that

what Iran has done to that economy is sort of commiserate with what happened in Venezuela, but it was also a revolutionary regime and they don't really care about the people other than their ideology.

The left doesn't.

So they have a

fond memory

of

Mossadegh, who was not the idealist parliamentarian everybody said he was.

And if he was that, and if he was thrown out, it was usually

conceded that it was a British petroleum, British intelligence operation that had concessions there.

Maybe we welcomed it, but it was mostly a British idea, and he was not

a

civil libertarian, believe me.

And so they,

the Shah, the Shah, the Shah, the Shah, they hate, and they feel he's kind of their pinochet,

and they feel that

they're going to make amends.

And the Iranians know that.

So all they do is

you back the Shah, the Shah, the Shah, the Shah, the Shah.

We had to kill 20,000 of these people, and that was needed.

And now we're revolutionary.

And they have a soft spot for them.

And they don't care about giving them money or empowering that regime with the Iran deal or anything.

And they've made the Middle East a lot.

The thing they hated the worst was the Abraham Accords.

They just detested it because

it took Israel out of their nexus as the cause of all the problems.

When you had some Arab countries, but especially about others like Kuwait, the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan that were likely going to follow and join Israel in a de facto deterrent alliance against revolutionary Iran, they thought, this is just horrible.

This is just terrible because we always said that Zionism is the source of all the problems.

And

if Arab regimes themselves

think that Iran is a problem,

fellow Muslims,

we can't allow that to happen.

So we're going to favor Iran and then by extension, the Iranian crescent, that would include Lebanon, that would include the Assads in Syria, Hezbollah, by association, Hamas on the West Bank.

That is creative, welcome tension.

It plays them off against Israel and against the moderate regimes.

And we tell Israel, you know what?

You're our ally, but don't press us.

We want you to give concessions on the West Bank.

We want you to do this with the Palestinian Authority.

We want you to stop your opposition to Hamas.

And then, if you don't, well, maybe we'll just turn on the spigot a little bit with Iran.

And that's how they envisioned the Middle East.

And they never said, these civil libertarians, these democracy dies in darkness, they never said once:

wait a minute, Tehran

is a fascistic, theocratic, terrorist state who assassinate people all over the world.

And Israel is a constitutional democracy.

They never said that at all.

No.

And since we're talking about it, I think we should note that this is the one-year anniversary, I believe, of Masa Amini, who was killed in custody of the morality police in Iran for showing hair below her headscarf.

I think she was a Kurd, too, wasn't she?

Yeah,

September 16th last year.

So I think this will be published about the time.

Every time that the people go out on the street, the Green Revolution, that was one of the first quote-unquote crises that Barack Obama experienced.

He didn't even pick up the phone.

He didn't say to the Iranians, don't clamp down on these protesters.

He didn't say anything publicly.

You know why?

Because he didn't want those people.

He thought they were neoconservatives, I guess.

I don't know what his gripe was, but he had campaigned on he

being

this

transitional figure with this third world or, I don't know, politically correct name, Barack Obama, would have a special resonance as being half black with Iranians.

And therefore,

It was in his power and his power alone when he was to be elected that would have a new detente.

And he comes in and he finds out that his little formula doesn't work because everybody hates the Iranian regime.

Everybody who wants freedom of expression, freedom is out on the street, 2 million people protesting.

He said, this can't be.

I can't support these people.

And he didn't.

Yeah, I know.

It's just sad, sad, sad story for America that we're not behind the people that are for freedom of speech, freedom of being alive.

They're socialists, and and some of them are communist on the left.

And they do not believe, they've never in the history of statism believed in free expression.

They can't because to believe in free expression means that people understand and will voice their understanding that statism, socialism, communism is contrary to human nature.

Everybody knows that if you have no private property or your private property rights

are reduced or your economic activity is limited, then you will not produce as much goods and services for the state or for the community or for anybody.

And forced quality of result always requires lying and suppression of the truth.

And that's what they believe in.

That's why today's...

This isn't, as we said before, this isn't the Democratic Party.

This is a hard left Jacobin movement.

That's why the

governor of New Mexico clamps down on the Constitution.

That's why the ACLU no longer really believes in freedom of speech.

That's why Stanford University can't send out a memo without the word hate speech for free speech.

That's just the way it is.

They do not want free speech because that will convince people that these people

are not democratic.

They don't believe in democracy.

They don't believe in constitutional government.

They believe in a woke revolutionary movement.

That can't be possible under a free society.

And what that means is that they're going to say, we are social engineers.

We know much better than you idiot, deplorables and clingers and chumps, what's good for you.

So we're going to say the following.

You're going to have to give up your truck because we understand that EVs are much better.

Don't complain about it.

We understand that one, vaccination is good, two's better, three booster, four booster, five booster, six.

Don't say that actual deaths this year, more people died that had COVID from COVID that were vaccinated than unvaccinated.

We don't know why, but don't even say it.

Don't even talk about the side effects of vaccination.

Don't even dare mention that we advertise this

vaccination protocol as 96%

effective of being either infectious or infected.

And it's not.

Don't say that.

And you don't have the right to say that.

And we will ban you from social media if you say that.

That's what they believe in.

Yeah, and it's just strange because those are free speech, free critique of society was the very foundation of our constitution.

Constitutional rights.

I know that.

And we've come so far in 250 years.

I know I'm a broken record, but

that was really clear to me when Stanford University and the faculty senate

thought that Scott Atlas, who basically was guilty of

being prescient, of predicting in advance

that the vaccinations which he advocated people take would not be what was promised and the mask would not stop the epidemic and eventually, eventually,

that the combination of vaccinations that had some efficacy but herd immunity in particular would make most of the population resistant and therefore it wasn't going to be a holocaust or if i could use that improper term of the american people but what would be very dangerous was shutting down the schools for two years, denying people of their constitutional rights,

encouraging isolation, loneliness, alcohol, drug abuse, familiar abuse, spousal abuse, missed cancer screenings, missed operations, that that would take a deeper toll.

For that, for that,

they wanted to get rid of him.

They wanted to strip away his, this was Stanford University.

And then by association, Neil Ferguson and myself, we were guilty of the same,

I guess, for, I don't know, I never understood what I did wrong.

I never understood what Neil, he wrote an email, private email.

They went after him.

But that climate of 1990 to 2009, 20 to 21,

they thought they were in control and they could go after anybody they disagreed with and then criminalize free speech.

When they start doing it at universities that are supposed to be the paragons of free expression, it's really scary.

Yeah, sure.

And that's what they represent.

They do.

And

boy, I hope the next Republican administration takes a hard look at universities and says, you know what?

I'm not convinced that you people are offering a competitive education at a competitive, affordable price that creates an inductive mind.

I think you're deductive.

I think you're proselytizing.

I think you're indoctrinating.

I think you're not politically fair.

I think you've destroyed the constitutional protections of your citizens while they're on campus, whether that is due process if they're accused of harassment or, you know, you violating the 1964 Civil Rights Act when you have segregated dorms, segregated safe spaces, segregated graduations.

And you know what?

We're going to tax your endowment and we're going to get out of the student loan business.

You're going to have to back your own loans.

And if you violate the Constitution on campus, we're going to fine you.

I think that would that would be a shock to them when they straighten out.

Yeah.

And hopefully we will get a Republican administration and something will happen along those lines.

So Victor, thank you.

This is the end of our show.

Great show today.

Thank you, everybody, for listening.

And

hang in there.

When Sammy said

we'll have a change of administration, there's two things you got to remember that we're not impotent, we of the traditional America.

You have to vote.

If you have a candidate, give money to them.

If you want to volunteer for community service, do so

to help with

transparency in the election that's coming up.

And then make sure that if the traditional forces were to recapture the Senate, the House, and the White House,

all three would be necessary to stop the woke madness, that we do what we say we're going to do, hold people accountable.

Your politicians that are elected, they have to represent what they said they were going to represent.

And I think it's possible to reverse it.

I think people are tired of it.

Yeah.

And there's going to be a counter-revolution.

Yeah, I think they are in a big way.

Well, thank you to all the listeners, and thank you to Victor.

This is Sammy Wink and Victor Davis-Hansen, and we're signing off.

Thank you.