Has the Tide Changed for the Left?

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 a conservative commentator, historian, philologist, classicist, and cultural critic.

And his recent book is The Dying Citizen.

And I know, Victor, you're writing a book and I forget its name.

What's your upcoming book or the tentative name on it?

First of all, it's not tentative.

And how could you forget my name, the name of the book?

It's called It's Everything Should Die.

no no no no way it's called the

the as in th e yeah end

of

everything

oh

wait

didn't you write a book on sparta called the end wasn't it called the end of everything and you're you're gonna

it was if i wrote a book about the end and i wrote a book about sparta it would be called the end of sparta oh okay and I did.

Oh, okay.

Awesome.

That's a fictive, yeah.

Fiction, yeah.

So

this book is about how societies are destroyed dash, utterly dash, in war.

And

I take four case histories of the ancient city-state of Thebes, which was leveled by Alexander the Great.

the destruction of Carthage by Scipio Africa, Scipio Africanus's grandson, adopted grandson, Scipio Aemilianus,

and then the destruction in 15,

excuse me, in 1453 of Constantinople and the end of Byzantine Greek Orthodox civilization as a cohesive unit in Asia, and then the destruction of the Aztecs by Cortes in 1521.

And I'm trying to see if there's a

common paradigm that how do entire civilizations get into the situation where a military defeat would wipe out their, not just their capital, but their whole social, cultural, political, military, economic organization so that in the aftermath they disappear or they're scattered.

I mean, nothing ever.

You know, when you atomize something, there's always particles that go out.

So there are going to be people speaking Punic in Augustine's time, or there's there's going to be people saying Nahutul in

present-day Mexico, but as a civilization, they were wiped out.

And what were the mistakes they made?

And what were the conceptions

of invulnerability?

There's a pattern that's what I've discovered that most of them think there's allies on the horizon, i.e., the cavalry is always going to come and rescue them.

Or

they believe that a momentary victory or

a lapse on the part of the besieging or attacking power presages victory and they get wildly over

optimistic, or they have particular leaders that convince them that it's a cause, their cause is just, which it usually could be interpreted as such, but they're going to win and there's no way they can lose.

Are they inept?

The Theban leaders were inept.

Montezuma was inept.

Hannibal, excuse me, Hasribal the Beotcharch was inept.

And the last emperor of the Byzantine Empire was inept.

They didn't realize who they were up against.

So it was their misfortune to meet some of the greatest military geniuses in history in

Alexander the Great

or Scipio Aemilianus,

or Mehmet II and the Ottoman ascendants, or perhaps maybe

the most deadly man in the 16th century, Hernan Cortez.

So, and then I'm having an epilogue and trying to apply those

findings to the modern world in which we do we have one bomb states

that's a term that Mr.

Rafanjani and Iran used of israel that is

are there vulnerable populations in tough neighborhoods that may find themselves in existential wars against

formidable odds israel armenia greece

uh and maybe even ukraine i'm discussing in the epilogue so the due date is june and because of this bizarre long COVID, I got behind, but I'm making progress and catching up.

And I think I'll make my deadline.

So that's

all you need to know.

Yeah, so great.

So let's go ahead and take a moment for some messages, our opening messages, and come right back and we'll talk about the recent Biden files incidents.

We'll be right back.

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.

Thank you for joining us.

Victor, before we go into the Biden files, I was wondering, you noted that you bought a Tesla recently and you have gas

cars that are powered by gas versus electric.

I was wondering if you had any reflections on that early on.

Well, you know,

I thought I would be

too smart by half, outsmart myself.

So I decided I had a bunch of older cars, okay i hadn't i had a pickup 1906 i mean 2006

and a honda

an old honda cross tour that had 160 000 miles on it so i decided i will get a diesel pickup a gasoline car and electric car and no matter what the fuel shortage one of them will have fuel but i really like this tesla but i'm starting to see that

it says 330 miles the the long range.

And actually, the way that most people drive under particular, in the winter you need, obviously, heat.

And at night, you need lights.

And then

the summer will need air conditioning.

So

it doesn't, it's got about 85% of the actual stated distance.

in reality.

And here in California, you're going up over mountain passes and stuff.

So you have to plan pretty carefully where you would charge it.

But

while I like it, and I bought it in part because I want to support Elon Musk, but what I don't understand is the whole electric craze.

And that is I have a gas car

and it's very efficient

and

you can go anywhere, right?

And unless they make a radical breakthrough with these 440 superchargers that you can charge the entire car in 20 minutes.

But just think about that for a second.

Just think that you're going into a gas station and the gas pump pumps,

I don't know, maybe a gallon every minute,

you know, instead of five gallons.

So you're just everybody's sitting in a long line where it takes 15 minutes to fill up.

And I think nobody's quite understands what the left did to electrical prices and electricity kilowatt charging, because

if you don't build nuclear power and wind and solar are unreliable, many parts of the days are the seasons, and

hydroelectric, apparently we find that a polluting fuel now.

We don't build new dams.

So, and we're going to dismantle natural gas.

and which we thought was the answer to coal and oil burning, then the electricity is up to 28, 30 cents a kilowatt.

So when you actually look at charging in Great Britain, it's almost as expensive to charge an electric car as it is a gasoline.

So then you're into the next paradigm.

Well, you're buying, you're driving an electric car because you don't want to pollute the atmosphere.

But

energy is energy, and I don't know what the difference is of burning a fossil fuel directly vis-a-vis burning it indirectly through power generation is what I'm saying.

And because wind and solar won't do it, and they're not going to, as I said, they won't let you use hydroelectric nuclear.

So you're talking about natural gas in most cases or coal.

Coal is still really big.

And so I don't quite understand.

It's going to be a huge increase in demand for electricity, which will need more plants.

And the left,

left, the left is the left.

So when it says we're going to mandate this,

but we're not going to allow you to do that,

then you can't square that circle.

And, you know, you're going to use electricity for your car, but we're not going to allow you to generate electricity.

You can only generate the type of electricity we approve of, but this type of electricity is not very good, is what I'm saying.

And it's very expensive.

So

it's going to be more expensive.

Then we get into the matter of the precious metals and rare metallers, all of this components necessary for a battery.

Biden's Department of Interior Secretary just put off thousands of acres in Minnesota and other places that are rich with deposits that are necessary for these battery components off limits.

So

I don't quite get it.

And then I do, I guess the other argument is,

well, your truck or your car lets off fossil fuels and millions of them everywhere, whereas the power plant that burns coal or burns oil or burns natural gas is confined to one place.

And the total amount of that versus spreading it everywhere is less.

Or their attitude is, well, we're working on it.

Don't worry.

Once we get rid of your car, we'll find a way to get you cheap electricity.

You're just going to have to pay, you know.

And then the other thing that I was stupid on my part, I ordered it and it said delivery April of 2023, that is in four months.

I think I ordered it last June.

And then I noticed something.

They said at first it'll be January, then February, then March and April.

And that was when Tesla stock was, what, $400 a share and up?

And everybody wanted the Tesla.

But in the meantime, the economy slowed down.

Elon Musk bought Twitter.

The left went from, look at my Tesla Bland on my car.

I'm morally superior to you, to let me put some masking tape over it so I'm not associated with that Prince of Darkness, Elon Musk.

And the result of all that with a slowing economy is suddenly I noticed something and it said, would you like your Tesla in March?

Yes.

Yes, of course.

Would you like your Tesla in February?

Yes, yes.

Would you like your Tesla in January?

Yes, yes.

And would you like your Tesla at the end of the year?

And maybe even December.

Yes.

How about in early December?

I couldn't believe it.

So I did.

And then all of a sudden, I get this notice and says, we've decided to give you, Victor Hansen, a $3,500 rebate.

I thought, wow, this is great.

And then I bought it.

And then in January, it says, uh-oh, we want to tell everybody that you can get $7,500 off or you can get 10,000 something hours or whatever kilowatts of free electricity.

So I only got half of the rebate, I guess.

Nobody ever said Elon Musk wasn't clever.

Well, I mean, yeah, what he was obviously doing was he was looking at the downturn in the economy and the downturn in the market.

And he had all these back orders.

So rather than just, and he's a business person, so rather than just let them follow the original trajectory, he front-loaded them until the bulk of them were right before January, and they paid the full price.

And then as the market got worse and worse, then he offered these huge rebates and he kind of recaptured some interest.

So, but, you know, if you're, if you,

if you got a car just two weeks before the $7,500 rebate and they knew about it and they didn't tell you,

then you seem like a dunce is what I'm trying.

And I don't blame him because that's business business, and Victor has to prepare himself for the vagaries of the marketplace.

So I'm not whining to anybody, but

they have to have a deadline somewhere.

Otherwise,

I've discovered there's a whole Tesla subterranean culture of people who know every inch of the car.

So when I have a question, I just go online and there's some genius that explains: if you do this and do that, and do that, you can do this.

But I'm not acquainted with it fully yet.

And it's the only thing I have only one complaint.

And that is when I drive in the dog into the driveway, I have these Queenslands and they prick up their ears and they're getting kind of old and they can't hear it.

So when I drive, when I drive in the diesel pickup, they hear it and they back off.

This, and you know, they bite the tires and they growl and they kind of look like they're ferocious, but they part like the Red Sea parts, they part and then you drive them.

But not with this thing.

They get easily run over.

That's why people like Queenslands.

They make you feel like Jesus.

I don't know what it is, but

I'm getting kind of tired of them, to tell you the truth.

They're so wacky after 30 years of owning them.

Wacky, excuse me, 40 years.

But anyway, that's my Tesla experience.

And I like Elon Musk.

I wholeheartedly recommend,

you know, a Tesla.

Yes, I do.

But it's my criticism, not the Tesla, it's the electric car and the whole principle of why don't we just continue to make improvements on clean-burning fossil fuel engines that they don't really, their heat doesn't really pollute that much.

And

it's a very cheap fuel if you develop it.

We have 50, 80, 100 years of it where we go into fusion, nuclear power perhaps someday, or we find batteries that are not so heavy or big.

We can do all that as we transition.

But this left, it's not about the electric cars, just like it was not about COVID, just like it's not about mass transit per se.

It's about central control.

And I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but these self-anointed bicosto elites, university brands stamped on their rear end, they think they're so morally superior and they're going to organize all of your lives.

And they have no, they're historically ignorant, they don't know anything about Mao's China or the Soviet Union or what's happened to the EU.

And

they really want control and they have contempt for the people that

they desire control over.

And they should be opposed with every ounce of our energy because they're dangerous.

And

anyway.

All right.

So let's then turn to the Biden files.

And they've raided, I guess, not very viciously raided like Trump, but they raided Biden's Delaware beach house.

And I was wondering if you had any reflections on things.

Well, I understand that Trump was in a fight with the government,

but he was a fight about papers that he

had connections with while he was president and while he had the authority to declassify.

And it's not clear if a president has to write a memo and say this particular document is declassified, whether I'm, hey, everybody, this is declassified.

So whether it's an oral or written word, there's some murky, but it's not about Biden.

We're not talking about papers that

are his, that he took home after January 20th, 2021.

We're talking about things that go back 15, 16 years, and maybe in this case, as vice president.

So that's a big difference.

So I know Donald Trump had them, and the archives was arguing with him.

And they were arguing him because they hate Donald Trump.

Let's be clear about it.

So,

what I don't like, though, is

that raid was not

broadcast.

The whole point of the black SUVs and the armed guards

and everything else was a performance art takedown of Donald Trump and hoping

they could fool him and find something.

I mean, when they didn't find something, they spread it on the floor like it was poorly

guarded.

But with Biden,

it was the worst of both worlds.

He was bragging he's fully cooperative, but he wasn't because he's had all these papers at his home, right?

And he's had them.

He knows that he violated the law at his office in Washington, the pen office.

He knows he violated at his other home.

He knows he violated at his garage.

So he knows he was in violation.

He knows the government.

So he's had all of this time.

I'm not suggesting he's a crook quite, but obviously, if the FBI really was concerned that Donald Trump should not be warned of their impending raids so he could hide them or destroy them, why wouldn't you apply the same thing to Biden?

But instead, they gave him all of this time.

He's had since November 2nd to do anything he wants with them.

I don't,

it's just this continual asymmetry.

And then I don't like it when they dress it all up with this, Joe Biden takes National Security very seriously.

And so he cooperated fully with the archivists and the DOJ and the FBI.

No, he didn't.

He did not.

He never told anybody after his senatorial career ended that he took illegally documents home.

He never told anybody after his vice presidency was over that he took classified documents illegally, unless he says he didn't take them.

And he ordered somebody or then that's even more patently illegal.

So he never cooperated.

He never, never cooperated.

He could have told us on November 2nd, I want to, I just discovered that that would have been a lie because he knew it, but he could have said that.

He didn't.

He waited till after the midterm.

He's been as most uncooperative as,

and why is he, Sammy?

Because he depends on a toadish, obsequious press to cover up and say, look at Donald Trump.

And you can see that.

You can really see it, the reaction in the bipostal establishment.

When Donald Trump's

house was raided, I think August, was it?

Or excuse me, it was, I don't know, it was in August, maybe.

I guess it was.

A lot of us went on television.

We were outraged.

And I got a lot of really angry emails.

Oh, there you go again,

covering up for your hero, Donald Trump.

Okay.

But nobody said anything.

Nobody said in Washington, I have some documents too.

And the Trump raid reminds me, I have, this is a very common lapse.

And even though I don't have his powers of declassification,

I think I should come forward.

Nobody.

And then Joe Biden.

And then all of a sudden, Mike Pence, whom I like and I respect.

But if Mike Pence, is Mike Pence trying to tell us?

that suddenly in November, he said, oh my gosh, I have documents at my house.

I don't think so.

I think he knew it when Donald Trump's were raided, but he didn't want to come forward and release that information, given the association with the now hated and disgraced Trump.

And the same thing is true of Jimmy Carter.

Why didn't Jimmy Carter, who now says, well, I took them, why didn't you say that, Jimmy, when it happened to Trump?

Because you did not want to, in any way, lessen the severity, supposedly, of Trump's crimes, but you did want to do it for Biden.

And the media is the same thing.

They didn't have one story after Trump that this is a common practice.

I went back the other day and I Googled it to, and as much as you can

trust the order of a Google search, and I wanted to know one thing: was there any articles in the mainstream media saying that the classification process was too strict and needlessly prohibitive?

No, none, zero, zilch.

And after Biden,

everybody, New York Times, Washington, everybody said, we need to re-examine, we need to revisit, we need to reconsider the whole classification that unduly classifies needed information for the American people.

Joe Biden was writing his memoirs.

Joe Biden was in a rush to get out of the vice president's office.

Joe Biden.

And that's what I don't like.

I don't like the asymmetry, but

I don't like the idea that the media and these bicoastal politicians think we're stupid.

We're not stupid.

So don't try to tell us that we're stupid.

You're the stupid ones.

You think that you can get away with asymmetrical treatment.

So what Donald Trump did at Mar-Lago, which is much better defended, as we've talked before, than a garage or the Biden home, was not as egregious no matter what everybody say.

He was in contention, yes.

He was in contention because the documents were under his guardianship as an ex-president and brought out of the White House while he was president and had the ability to declassify them.

That was not true, not true of Senator Biden or Vice President Biden.

Not true.

And then he was subject to an inordinate amount of contention and scrutiny by the DOJ and the FBI.

That was not true.

of Senator and Vice President Biden.

And then he was an oppositional figure that Joe Biden sent through the agency of Merrick Garland into his home with the full knowledge that he had run against him as an opponent in 2020.

And there's a 50-50 chance that both of them will revisit that contest in 2024.

That was not true of Joe Biden.

And so

I get really tired of some people on the left and the right giving us these soapbox, sanctimonious lectures about

how different they are.

You know what I also don't like?

I'm just off the wall.

I don't like.

I know people are saying, well, Victor, we don't care what you don't like.

But what I'm trying to say is this: the journalistic practice is not only politically bankrupt, but

it has no form, no standards, no rules or protocols.

If you notice these articles now, they're not just journalistic, but they're instructional or they're ideological or they're they're partisan in the sense that

Joe Biden's trobe was different than Trump.

Here's how

Joe Biden's stash of documents is not the same as Trump.

Let me say, let's see how.

Here's the reasons.

In other words, the journalist doesn't just report the story.

I guess it came through COVID a lot.

They'll say,

why vaccinations are necessary?

Here's what you have to do.

You know what I mean?

They add that second layer, that second Phillip to an article for advocacy.

So I'm a journalist.

Here's the report, but here's what you, the reader, must do.

You're not supposed to do that.

Yeah.

And I don't like, here's what you have to do.

Let's learn how.

Here's what you need to know.

No, we don't need to know anything from you.

Yeah.

And it leaves them with very

inane observations.

For example, they talk all about, wow, we can't believe how sloppy Joe Biden in all of these houses.

How could it be?

And I'm thinking, well, look at his son.

He left his laptop at a computer shop and does all sorts of sloppy things.

Did they

the leaf falls far from the tree?

I know.

Fruit.

And leave.

I guess Hunter was a fruit and Ashley

Biden and her walking-legged diary was the leaves.

Family's sloppy.

I don't understand this.

So that diary, she abandoned in the guy's house, right?

And now she's, they went after James O'Keefe because he received quote unquote stolen property.

I'm sorry, but I've rented as a student, all sorts of stuff.

And when I moved out and I left a bunch of crap there, I don't think I did.

But if I did, that's not mine anymore.

You know what I mean?

Yeah.

By de facto, unless within a day or two, I called up and said, oh my God, my wallet's there or my checkbook.

But that's not, she just left it.

And somebody found it and said, woo, I can make some money off this.

Sorry.

Same thing with a laptop.

He dropped that laptop off.

The owner repeatedly tried to contact him to no avail.

Hunter never paid, never paid for the procedure to fix it.

And he denied, he denied it was his.

They denied, the Biden family so much denied it that they went out and basically hired James Clapper and John Brennan, two of the most discredited intelligence officials in the history of the Department of

the CIA and the Director of National Intelligence to get 50 has-been intelligence officers assigned a letter right before the election.

It could have been, it should have been, it's probably, it may have been Russian disinformation, wink, wink, nod, nod.

That's what he did.

And now what is he doing?

He's getting a bunch of left-wing GoFundMe people to sue the poor computer operator and say, you stole my laptop.

And I'm thinking,

well, it's not your laptop because the CIA people said it's not your laptop.

And you were on national TV and they said, can you deny it?

And you just kind of smiled.

So you didn't say it was yours.

You had all this chance to say it it was yours.

You're only saying it now when everybody knows it's yours.

And now you're saying, yes, you're right.

We tried to smear you.

We tried to destroy you.

We made fun of you.

We tried to warp an election with it.

And it didn't work.

Well, it worked in the sense that Joe Biden won, but now it's in our interest to say that it's mine.

It's my property.

And you took my property.

Before it was, I don't know whose that is, Russian Ruskies did it.

You know, they colluded once, they colluded again.

That was the attitude.

Again, they think we're stupid.

Yeah.

And you just covered one of the things I was going to talk to you about, which is Hunter has his lawyers out to request

that

Trump officials be investigated for accessing and spreading his personal data via that laptop.

So he does have a court case out against.

I just noticed Giuliani in it, but there were other officials.

so now we're supposed to feel empathy with hunter biden when the fbi went through the underward underwear drawer of melania trump melania and they went through baron trump's you know teenage kids stuff

and by the way the only reason they went into biden's house after weeks of weeks of

basically

I'm not being Adam Schiff and reading something false into the record as if it was a real call, but I'm ad-living everybody.

This is not true.

This is my impressionistic take.

But basically, the FBI said to Joe Biden weeks, weeks, weeks, weeks in succession, we probably won't sort of not go into

your house.

We probably wouldn't want to go in.

in the next two, three weeks because that would, that's what they said.

And the only reason they went into his house to be frank is they know he had plenty of warning and plenty of time to get rid of any class of document i don't know put them in another place or something if they if they exist there but more importantly they wanted to say the following donald trump shouldn't be upset that we went into his house he was an ex-president we went into the sitting president of the United States House.

That's what they're doing.

It's another performance art.

We're symmetrical.

Remember Merrick Garland's little soapbox talk?

Oh,

Republican or Democrat, rich or poor, black or white, we treat everybody the same.

No, you don't.

You just do this post facto after you egregiously and asymmetrically target somebody you don't like.

That's what they do.

Okay, Victor, let's go ahead and take a moment for some messages and then come back and talk about the Columbia Journalism

Review and and its take now on the Russian hoax.

We'll be right back.

Thank you for staying with us.

Victor, so speaking of of our journalists and our media, Columbia Journalism Review has an article by Jeff Gerth and it's a four-part series where they're talking about all of the Russian hoax as the lie that it was.

So he's going over from 2016, all the things that were evidence that there was no Russian collusion on the part of Trump.

I think personally, a little bit too little, too late, but what are your thoughts on that?

It was a very strange thing.

I had to go to Los Angeles

Tuesday and Wednesday.

And I got to Los Angeles airport after giving a talk in Newport

and the power was out.

I don't mean the lights were out.

I don't mean, you know, the screens were off.

Everything was out.

And so I was in this huge long line.

I had nothing to do.

And I stumbled across this Columbia journalism article by

a very liberal

journalist,

Jeff Gerth.

And I remember him because

he incurred the wrath of the Clinton family.

He wrote a book about Hillary Clinton, as I remember, but he incurred the wrath because he did go after Whitewater and a lot of the Clinton shenanigans.

But nonetheless, this guy is, I think, 79 years old.

He is a Pulitzer Prize winner.

He's been writing for ProPublica of all plays, a left-wing,

ideologically driven investigative online magazine.

He was a distinguished New York Times person.

So you would expect

that he hates Donald Trump.

I don't know whether he does.

He's interviewed Trump, but I suppose he voted against Trump.

Nevertheless, in the Columbia Journalism Review, which is sort of the

flagship of journalistic academic scholarship, such as it is, he writes this four-part.

I don't know how long it was, 10,000 words, but I read it in line.

I read it sitting down, waiting for for three hours in a flight very carefully.

And what he does is he systematically goes through the Russian hoax.

He systematically goes through the pings at the Alphabank.

He systematically goes through Christopher Steele and the Fusion GPS machinations, Sussman, Kevin Kleinsmith.

He goes through the Carter page.

He goes through the Hunter laptop.

He goes through the impeachment call.

He just goes through through all of these things.

And he concludes

three things.

Yes, Donald Trump is a showboat.

Yes, Donald Trump hurts his own cause by indiscriminate bannering.

Yes, Donald Trump tries to bait the left in such a way that only enrages them further and causes him more grief.

And number two, Donald Trump,

under any fair analysis, did not collude with the Russians to win the 2016 election, and that was known to the left.

Donald Trump did not communicate through his tower with pings and weird stuff, and that was known to the left.

Donald Trump did not hire, get, make up the laptop in association with Russian disinformation.

It was authentic.

That was known to the left.

And I can stop there, but he goes all the way to the present

about the documents, everything.

And so the first thing is he paints a picture of Trump as somebody who was able to enrage the left and cause some of his problems because he was indiscreet.

But those problems were ones of

appearance, ideology, comportment,

antithesis from the bicosta elite, but they were not substantive.

He didn't do things that

they would have found fault in in other people.

Anything he did according to journalistic standards was in the, was in the parameters of okay.

They hated him to such a degree, they went after him.

That was the second argument that they lost their credibility.

And he went into the Pulitzer Prizes that the New York Times, the Washington Post got for these collusion stories.

And he basically, in a very polite, scholarly fashion, says that Donald Trump's wild and crazy calls that they should return these Pulitzer Prize is not so crazy.

And then finally,

he laments the fact that,

and he quotes data, that the public,

it's stunning, the percentage, it's up to 75, 80%.

has no confidence in the press.

And he points out that before the whole COVID, Donald Trump controversies, like 2014, the press was gaining, gaining.

I don't know how they could, but they were gaining credibility.

And they completely destroyed it.

They've destroyed a whole generation of

support and confidence in the media.

Americans have no media that they trust anymore.

They've created a new culture or code or an ethos of aggressive, partisan, asymmetrical journalism that's going to be even worse if they don't stop it.

And I can't believe it.

I don't know whether it's his swan song at the end of his life or why he didn't, you said a little, why didn't he write this three years ago?

He tears apart the Mueller investigation.

He tears apart Comey.

He basically says that

the Mueller report, oh,

I should interrupt myself.

He tears apart Adam Schiff and he points out that the new Nunez, I talked to Devin Nunes when he issued that memo.

I I wrote an article about it.

And

he had zero support.

People were furious when he wrote the truth.

It was just a very simple: this is what our FBI did to oppose Donald Trump.

This is who Christopher Steele was.

This is what Fusion GPS was.

This was the steps between

Christopher Steele to Glenn Simpson Fusion GPS to Perkins Co.

to DNC to Hillary Clinton.

And the FBI,

this was the big bombshell, had paid Christopher Steele.

They not only had paid Christopher Steele, but they offered him $1 million

if he could substantiate one thing in that dossier.

He could not.

And yet to this day, Adam Schiff says that there were elements that were accurate in it.

And Adam Schiff said, well, remember the Adam Schiff counter memo, the the minority report, when the Democrats were in the minority?

He wrote this long, verbose, showy, empty, counterfeit, bankrupt counterpart memo in which he said that, you know, the dossier,

the dossier just had very little to do with the FISA warrants.

And so what I'm getting at, when Michael Horowitz came out as the Inspector General, he devastated that entire Schiff memo.

And now, does anybody remember that they

crucified Nunes?

He's kind of a Scott Atlas figure.

Does anybody remember that

75 doctors at Stanford Medical School wanted to yank his license and get him fired and censored him?

Does anybody remember how they treated him when all of a sudden today in Newsweek, there's an article that says, I'm sorry.

I am a PhD, MD student at the University of Texas, and I wrote a lot, and it was all wrong.

I see now that the vaccinations were not ironclad proof of either infection.

or infectiousness.

I'm sorry I realized that natural immunity was superior to the vaccinated immunity.

I'm sorry there were some problems with mask wearing and social distancing.

I'm sorry when we look back and see the suicide rate, the drug rate, the familial abuse, the child abuse, the isolation, the paranoia, the destruction of the economy.

It was a far greater toll on us than the,

I'm so sorry.

They were all right.

And that's sort of, that's sort of what we, what this article is saying now, although

he wasn't a participant in his favor.

And when you look at this, it's part of a larger trend right now.

I know that a lot of listeners are going to say, Victor, don't be stupid and naive, but if you look what Bill Maher is saying right now,

he's starting to get sick sick of it.

Dave Chappelle starting to get sick of it.

You can start to see

this guy, Mr.

Girth, getting sick of it.

You can see Nicholas Wade, the science writer, a New York Times

fired him, getting sick of it.

Barry Weiss getting sick of it.

And you're starting to see people on the left that say, oh, my God.

And you can interpret it two ways.

You can say, my gosh, they're principal liberals, and they have principles, and they see that these hardcore leftist socialists, neo-communists don't.

And they finally are taking a stand and more power to them.

Or, or, or.

It's cynical.

Yes.

You can be cynical, Victor, and say, uh-huh.

And they did what to you, Barry Weiss.

They did what to you, Dave Chappelle.

They did what to you, Bill Maher.

You know what I'm saying?

Now, after you were destroyed by them, you're telling all the rest of us who've been nearly destroyed by them, you were right.

So take it either way, and it's probably a mixture of both.

But I don't really care the cause.

I'm just happy about the effect because I think that the whole woke movement is so racist, is so bankrupt morally, is so self-centered, is so profit-minded that it's imploding.

And

it doesn't have public support.

It just has institutional support.

That's all it has.

That's a lot with Silicon Valley and Hollywood and professional sports and corporate boardroom and New York Times, NPR.

It has all that, but it doesn't have the people.

Yeah.

Well, Victor, let's go ahead and take a moment for some messages and come right back to talk a little bit about the Memphis murder of that Tyree Nichols.

Please stay with us.

We'll be right back.

Welcome back.

I would like to remind everyone that Victor is the Martin and Ily 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's available too at his website,

victorhanson.com.

That's H-A-N-S-O-N.

And the name of the website is The Blade of Perseus.

And you can subscribe for free and get our newsletter.

And then, you know, there's a lot of free stuff, his articles from American Greatness and his podcasts on the website.

Or you can sign up to get the ultra articles too, which are many.

And they're about everything from farming to military to current politics.

And that is $5 a month or $50 for a yearly subscription.

Now, Victor, on this

topic of lost credibility of the press and the attempts to regain it for whatever their reasons are, I came across, and it's my pleasure for your show to be able to read left-wing press.

And Steve Jobs' wife owns The Atlantic, and there was this very strange article in it for the left-wing bent of The Atlantic on the Memphis killing of Tyree Nichols.

And its title was not every atrocity is about white supremacy and I was wondering if you had any reflection I mean I thought I was just surprised that that we would see that in a left-wing press

so so did you have any thoughts on any further thoughts I guess on that

well before I do there's a problem that the left has and

because they're the left they don't understand the problem.

And the problem is that five African-American cops beat to death an African-American suspect in a police department that is over 60% black with a black chief and a black assistant chief in a town that's almost 70%

black, right?

Yes.

And

the media, I'm going to be very quickly here.

So I'm kind of pausing because I want to emphasize, but the media and the left is saying that given all of what I just said, it's a systemic white racist problem because they can't find, they found one white cop who egged them on or he may have,

and then another black cop.

But

they don't, and I think of the three

first responders who were lax in providing health, one was white of the three.

So they're straining.

But when they say that this was white supremacy

and the black officers were automatons and they were

functioning on white supremacy autopilot and hurting a fellow black, and you can quote James Baldwin and all these people who say in the inner city you were afraid of blacks the most and all this stuff.

Then they think we're stupid because they're basically saying, oh, the fact that this was evil and these people

were evil to do it doesn't matter.

The fact that they lowered hiring standards to hire two or three of these fellows who would never have been

is it doesn't matter.

The fact that you're now suggesting that the five of them might were charged immediately with murder is racist

is insane

because,

and the fact that

the beating was racist, but punishing the beaters is racist.

And if that's true, then you have, they don't understand the consequences.

The consequences are when everything is racist, nothing is racist.

And so your average working-class white person is going to say, let me think now.

Wow, if that's racist, if blacks beating up blacks, is racist and trying blacks for beating up blacks is racist, then I give up.

There's nothing I can do.

It doesn't matter anymore.

It doesn't matter.

And at the same time this was happening, we had the reparations discussion in San Francisco about giving multi-billions and California to people who haven't been slaves in six generations and against people who haven't owned a slave in six generations.

And I'm just being generic and collective like they are, because very few of today's population can trace their roots as slave owners and not all blacks can either and of being enslaved.

So it's getting ridiculous and I think a lot of people are starting to say, you know what?

MSNBC and CNN and these people like Van Jones are nuts.

They're elite, Joy Reed, they're elites.

They're very privileged people.

They, when they talk about racism, they're talking about career trajectories.

They want something in their little narrow, rarefied, mostly white world.

They want a promotion.

They want attention.

They want clicks.

And so they're talking about racism.

But they do not care about the roughly 10,000 blacks that are murdered every year and probably 8 or 9,000 killed by other blacks.

in the inner city.

They don't care about that.

Because if they did, there'd be a Marshall Plan to stop it.

And they don't stop it.

And I guess they say that's systemic racism too, but they don't want to address that systemic racism because it's dangerous.

Very easy to say, these people are racist, these cops, we should do this and this.

It's very hard.

It's very hard to go into Chicago and say, this is racist.

This gang banger went and he shot and murdered this guy and he emptied his clip and he hit three little girls and killed them too.

And I'm going to go after him.

No, you're not, because that that guy is going to call that guy and that guy, and they're going to go after you

as cartels.

So I get really tired of this convenient morality that this is racism.

And it's always, you know, it's always in a context that doesn't involve you.

And it's always an important issue, but it's not the...

the existential issue.

The existential issue is not that police, as tragic as this was, are killing suspects that are African-American.

That happens about anywhere from 15 to 10 times a year out of 11,000 arrests.

We've all gone through the data.

About 75% of those who are unarmed and shot while in police custody or interactions are not black.

And yes, that's double the numbers in the population of the 12%, the 13%,

but it's less a percentage of blacks given the number of blacks who are encountered by the police among the 11,000 arrested.

And so, you know, and I wrote an article today, which I guess brings it up.

When you talk about people and collectives, that's a very dangerous thing to do because the collective data always come

back

to bite you.

So you're saying white supremacy, white supremacy, white rage is this pernicious collective that everybody who happens to be not

dark, I guess white.

I don't even know what that means because I see people every day who are hispanic that are whiter than i am you know what i mean yes and i'm supposed to and i see people who are menian that are darker than i am i and they're white and hispanics aren't i don't understand it but nevertheless when you start doing that then the data will bite you and here's some of the data so

if you thought these people were

were white supremacists and this is systematic racism or systemic race and it's then you think they would be homicidal.

No, they're not.

The white suicide race is double, the suicide rate is double of Latinos and black.

How could that be?

I guess they would say, well, it's systemic racism.

And now that we've exposed it, they got caught and they're depressed.

So they're killing themselves.

Okay.

Well, then why are they dying overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan at double their numbers, white males?

Well, these were optional wars that oppressed the poor.

I don't remember that Vietnam is a black man's war and a white man's treasure hunt or something?

So that data.

Okay, well, if it's a white hateful

collective, then there would be two statistics that we really should focus on.

One would be interracial violent crime, i.e.

blacks, just like during the 1920s to 18, they were lynching people.

They lynched about 3,500 people.

in that 80-year period.

Okay, so we should find the same systemic, no, you don't.

Seven to eight percent of all violent crime is interracial.

And guess what?

Blacks are over double.

I shouldn't even say we're double.

I think it's six times more likely in an interracial crime to be the offender than the victim.

Okay, and you say that doesn't matter.

Okay, let's go to hate crimes.

What group is the most overrepresented in the commission of hate crime?

It's African Americans.

How could that be?

And what group is underrepresented?

Asians and whites, especially white Jews.

So when you go look at the data, you just don't get this picture of a systemically violent white oppressive group.

And when you want to look at the actual body count,

it's black on black.

And now you can argue there are causes for that, cultural causes.

And I would agree.

And I have a

sense that

we know the answer.

And I think, you know, I think in other broadcasts, you mentioned Jason Whitlock.

We'll get to that in a second.

But there is a problem when there is not a male husband, father in 75% of these households.

And the illegitimate illegitimacy rate is much higher than any other group.

And the dependency per capita on federal entitlements is much higher.

And how you break that is the great question of our times.

And once you break that nexus,

then everything falls into place because I think people are people.

There's no difference in the races.

And all you would have to break that and then

not mandate equality of result, but keep the equality of opportunity, but really emphasize

emphasis not on rap or sports, but on scholarly excellence.

and bring in Latin-based schools at five years old or English grammar, not critical race theory.

That must have been dreamed up by some racist that wanted to have a watered-down curriculum so that African-American students would not be competitive.

I don't know what they're doing, but as someone who had a classics program for over 20 years for minority youth, I can tell you

that

if you offer a rigorous curriculum, Latin, Greek, modern languages, French and German, history, archaeology, literature, and you insist on standards, you can very quickly, even at the 18-year-old level, not,

I don't mean instantly, but within four to six years, you can obtain parity.

And I think I did with some of the, I don't know what it was, it was 45 to 50 people went to the Ivy League in medicine, history,

PhD programs.

If I count the Ivy League as Berkeley as well as Stanford.

So you can do it, but

nobody wants to do it because what you're told is

that you are erasing the cultural confidence of your group.

You're imposing a Western imprint upon their psyches.

And then once you do that, and your students are better trained than so-called white students in English or or psych or sociology, then they are subjected to a whole array of temptations.

You are a minority when they get to graduate school, law school, med school, business school.

And, you know, I've had, I don't know, eight to ten cases where a former student who was very traditional and accepted this regimen and excelled beyond their wildest dreams and I mean could read Latin and Greek fluently and write English beautifully, and had perfect diction.

When I would encounter them very, in a very successful position, eight or ten, they would say things to me like, I didn't realize that how racist this country was.

Or I didn't understand the oppression, or I didn't understand, and I'm just struck because they're very successful.

The more successful they became because of this education, it was never, I don't think, I think in my entire life I've had four or five former students who were minority students say to me, thank you for spending extra time with tutorials.

Thank you for giving me an independent study.

I had one time 11, 11 independent studies and I was teaching four semester, excuse me, five semester classes a

you know and ten a year.

And I can remember coming home and my son saying to me, are you going to go to my basketball game?

And I said, look at that.

And there was a pile of blue books about five feet high from over 170 students with essays.

And

but I'd never had a student come up to me and say, you know, I'm 40, I'm a professor.

I really want to thank you for all the individual attention you gave me.

And I know that it took a lot of effort.

And you...

and you were criticized for making sure that I could write well and I could speak English perfectly and I knew languages and history.

At least maybe three or four, but here's at least six or seven.

Could you write me a recommendation for?

Could you help me for this?

And it's always some

diversity, equity, inclusion.

You know what I'm saying?

Yeah.

It's like, I'm going to be the diversity, equity, or I, I, when I left, I found out how right-wing you were.

Or I, oh, I, and they all used that wonderful education and then

and then tried to find an edge, not all, but an edge because of something that was incidental.

The

wonderful thing about education, you know, if you have a Greek classroom, you're reading Sophocles' Antigone in Greek, and you have a Mexican-American kid, and another Mexican-American kid, and a poor white kid, and

a Southeast Asian kid, and an 87-year-old Jewish woman in a wheelchair, which I did.

and another person who was a retired 80-year-old professor with epilepsy that would go into epileptic fits, and you have them all there, you know what happens?

Nobody cares after 15 minutes that you're disabled, that you're aged, that you're brown, that you're Asian, that you're white.

Nobody cares you're rich or poor.

Nobody cares because all we were trying to do is why is Antigone doing this?

And by the way, Politena,

this chorus,

what's the grammar?

Why does Sophocles use this particular word when when he could use another word?

What is the influence of Aeschylus?

How did he influence Euripides?

Those are the questions.

They're very difficult.

And all of that disappears.

And that's what that needs, this is a long circular explanation.

That type of education needs to be imprinted on minority, marginalized communities.

And if they would do that and stop all of this identity politics, then you would see a Shelby Steele everywhere.

And you would see a Tom Soule everywhere.

And you'd see a Jason Whitlock.

I'm not talking everywhere.

I'm not talking about the ideology.

I'm talking about the superiority in education and command of knowledge.

Yeah.

Well, you mentioned Jason Whitlock.

So I want to, because you didn't quite touch on what his solution to this Memphis murder was.

And he says

that it's baby mama culture explains Tyree's death and that the death was a byproduct of communities overrun by single black mothers, and that black urban areas are dominated by matriarchal rulership.

And he said, that's just not working, right?

And I was wondering your thoughts on Jason's, you know, analysis.

I mean, that you say the education, yes, that's true.

And then his analysis is, well, let's just admit that having matriarchal families with only one parent is just that that's a bust.

We all know it is, right?

And yeah, well, that was something that we were, you mentioned the Atlantic Art.

I think that was by that writer, Thomas Chatterton Williams.

The Blaze was who Jason was right here.

Yeah, but the earlier one, we mentioned, you know, not every atrocity is about white supremacy.

Yeah.

That was a very well-written article, brilliantly written.

And I've read stuff by Thomas Chatterton Williams.

He's a very elegant writer.

He's incisive.

He's broadly trained in literature.

And so that was a,

you know, that was very

logical.

And he was trying to warn everybody that

by trying to link every single element of

the news as it involves black people to white supremacy is a self-defeating project.

And it was rolled.

The Jason Whitlock was interesting because,

and he was on Tucker expanding on, as much as you can expand on what, three minutes, four minutes.

But he got a lot of criticism, and he mentions that in that article, I think.

And what he's trying to say is he's talking in specific terms about the black family and saying that when you have high illegitimacy rates and you have

no black father in the household in 75% of the cases, and the mother is dependent on the government for income,

at least partial or full entitlement income,

then the traditional nuclear family has been warped in some ways.

And the mother then becomes a matriarchal figure.

And the children, especially the male children, have no father figure, no male figure to enforce a type of discipline upon them in conjunction with the wife.

In other words, there's not the good cop, bad cop, if I could be so simplistic, where when you grow up and you don't come home from school, but you take a circurist route to go get bubblegum, and your mom says,

oh, I don't think you should do that.

It's dangerous.

And you said, oh, okay.

And

I don't think you should do that.

It's dangerous.

And then there's no father to say, did you hear what your mother said?

Now listen, you're not going to do that again.

I'm not saying that mothers can't do it, but more likely if that male figure is there in stereotypical fashion, the mother will say, okay, here's what I want.

I'll give you three pieces of gum if you don't do it.

So there's a different method of discipline between a male figure, and they're not antithetical, they're complementary.

Because sometimes

the mother can be the enforcer and the father can be the enabler, or both of them can.

But I'm saying that you have

a wider diversity of parental guidance and controls coming from different angles and experiences, male, female.

So

that's what he's saying.

And a larger,

a large, I don't know if he wanted to bring that up, but in a larger context,

there's been a lot of pre-woke research, and you can see it in ancient Greece too, in modern-day Greece, but when you have a society that puts a lot of emphasis on the male, the cheese mot culture, or the tribal culture, or the idea that the male is violent and he's super masculine and he doesn't have to stay with his wife and

he glorifies his martial prowess.

You can see that in the Iliad, for example.

Okay.

And you can see why Achilles is so attached to his mother, Thetis.

And what I'm getting at is, whether in mythology or classical, any society that puts such a price on hypermasculinity, inevitably, that male will not be in the house to the same degree as other societies, but more importantly, to the degree that he's in the house, he will have a more likely confrontational relationship

with the spouse.

And what happens is the spouse, to find protection or insularity from that male figure, will then

champion the male child.

And in so many cases, I can tell you in the Scotch-Irish Oklahoma tradition, what I grew up watching, in so many cases, an abusive father would hit a kid or hit a wife, and then the son, when he reached a particular age of 16, would take on the father.

You know what I mean?

And then the mother would then latch to the son as her protection, not of herself just, but of also the family.

And then the mother and the son would develop this intense, understandable loyalty.

And then the father moves out of the picture.

And when he comes back in the picture, he's opposed to his sons because they protect what the father should, they do what the father should have been doing.

And in its most extreme form, you get sort of a

doting baby enabling from the mother for self-protection.

And so you can see in very strange societies in rural Greece, for example, when I was there in the 70s or in the Arab world or in parts of Mexico, traditional Mexico, you will see this strange thing where

the male is,

you know, is absent and the mother then dotes and excuses the

macho of the male who is into this matrix is going to repeat this cycle.

That is, when they come of age, they're going to have a a lot of girlfriends.

They're going to not be married if they are married.

If they do marry, and that's not always, they will be absent or they will have fairs or whatever,

and they will be violent, and then they will start the cycle over again.

I know I was reminded of this also, besides the Whitlock article, which got him a lot of abuse.

I probably people will criticize what I just said, but you remember that

Lonesome Dove sequel called Streets of Laredo.

I think Larry McMurdy McMurthy wrote the screenplay for it.

And in that, there's this psychopathic killer, Joey,

and he has this weird relationship with his mother who dotes on him and dotes on him and excuses his murdering, murdering.

And she's been married four times, and there's no father in the picture.

They just leave.

And so she had looked at him to be the senior male, but he abuses his blind sister, his retarded brother.

and finally he kills his mother.

But

she never criticizes him.

She always sees that he's my little Joey.

And that's sort of the relationship that happens in these situations and these particular cultures where the matriarchal figure will

tolerate no criticism at all of the male.

The mother will never say,

you get out of this house and support yourself right now, and you don't say a word, and you get married and have children, you stay there.

They don't do that, they can't because that and that male then gets that message that he will be enabled and that he's special.

And it has nothing to do with economic status.

You can spoil a child or dote on a child if you're only the one parent.

But what that's why it's so essential to have two parents for to be self-correcting of one another, and then you don't, and then to break any cycle.

And so I know that many people, most people that grow up in a two-parent household, the mother doesn't dote on the male child necessarily any more than the father does.

In other words,

there's a balance there because the mother is not looking for the male child to be a protector.

of her from abusive men.

She's not

because she's married and happy in a stable relationship and she counts on the discipline from the father so she doesn't have to enter into kind of a bribery situation to make the male strong son obey.

And then the strong son doesn't end up worshiping the mother, you know?

And so that's, and I don't know how you break that.

Even this discussion we just had.

just drives people crazy because in our society right now,

everything that was traditional and stable and led to the success that we all enjoy and take for granted, inherited from our vettors,

that normative experience is called toxic.

And the abnormal is considered the desirable.

So

heterosexuality is the norm.

No.

That's considered exploitive.

A nuclear family is a norm?

No.

Who are you to judge?

One parent's just as good as two.

And that's so it's very difficult.

But if you have none of these norms, it gave you such bounty,

will be very interesting to see what's going to happen in the next two generations when more and more people are being born out of wedlock, more and more families are

run by one parent.

And

the

white male, Christian, heterosexual male that is said said that they're toxic, toxic, toxic, toxic, toxic, toxic, toxic, toxic.

Then if that is true and

their legacy is an entirely baleful, then right now,

take away the world of Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, the Wright brothers, Abraham Lincoln, Albert Einstein, just take them all away.

as a toxic legacy.

And what do you end up with?

You end up with, I don't know, but

nobody ever talks about that.

So you can't inherit a system and then pick and choose and say this person's wholly evil because one part of their life did not meet the expectations of modern morality, but the other part we essentially desire that it that that inheritance benefits us

That's what I if you don't if you think that guy is totally evil then don't use his inheritance.

That's very simple.

Just get rid of it get

look for an alternative paradigm If you think it was, just look at the Aztec paradigm or the Zulu paradigm, any other indigenous paradigm.

It may be superior.

And there's ways to pursue

that paradigm.

You can detach from the Western toxic legacy and go out, I don't know, and make a commune or an alternate community based on more,

I don't know, egalitarian principles, more

harmony with the earth.

But people,

when they want, you know, all of the, when you see a Whoopi goldberg or a lebron james or a megan markle knee-deep in western culture and all of its benefits what they should be doing is what martin luther king did they should be saying

we are part of this and we contributed to this and we hold white people to the extent we criticize them only because they didn't live up to their own standards of the declaration and the constitution and when they do we're happy

and

we don't play games and say this race did this and this race did that.

And we all enjoy it.

But when you do that, and you do play games and you cancel out a whole culture for one sin or two sins, and you don't look at the

totality of the experience and the inheritance, then, boy,

hypocrisy looms large.

Yeah, it sure does.

Well, Victor, we're at the end of our time here.

I would like to remind people in your area that there is going to be a talk that's sponsored by the Young Americans for Freedom chapter at Clovis Community College.

It will be at Clovis Community College.

It's Daniel DiMartino.

He is a Venezuelan economist.

He's currently getting a PhD at Columbia University, and he will be talking on socialism.

You mentioned some of the disastrous socialist leaders we've had, and so that is the topic of his talk.

Please text your attendance to 559-492-7282.

That's 559-492-7282.

And they'll send you a map and things to get to the college.

And it should be a great talk.

Again, it's on socialism, and we welcome everybody.

Thank you for everything today.

You did a great job.

Since you are hijacking Victor's podcast to give a commercial, I know you're not getting paid for it.

And it's a public interest.

I am looking at it.

You gave me permission to do it.

Okay.

Well, I'm going to do it myself.

I've never, I don't ever get money myself.

I don't do commercials, but

I'm looking at.

I took a break because I went to get a water and I've been drinking this elevate water.

It's called Premium Hydrogen Infused Water.

I don't know what the science is.

It's problematic.

I've looked at it, but a friend of mine, when I got long COVID, Michael Wiener and his wife Adrian, sent me this elevate water.

And, you know, I've been drinking it, drinking it, drinking it.

And I don't know of the addition of the hydrogen molecules, what the reaction is, but man, I'm getting energized from it.

I don't think it cured me of long COVID.

I still feel dazed that I'm not quite there, but I think it really helped.

And the reason I'm saying this, I have a friend.

I won't mention his name, but he suffered from head and neck cancer.

And during the radiation process, they destroyed his saliva glands.

And he happened to come down here and he wanted, I didn't have any other water because I've been drinking exclusively this elevate.

And I gave it to him.

And

he's very skeptical of everything.

And he called me back up and said, man,

it's moisturizing my mouth in a way that I never have.

And now he's addicted to it.

So that was, I was just thinking as we were finishing, I was looking at it, and I've been, that sound you hear sometimes is me drinking elevate water.

So if you're going to give a plug, I'm going to give a plug.

It's not a non-profit, apparently, it's a you know, it's a company.

Yeah, you can reach them at drinklevate.com.

You can, yeah, absolutely.

Thank you.

I know it's uh, it's also another thing that I've noticed is that

if you have kidney stones, and I've been operated three times, and I think the last time I had one, I counted 24 of them,

and you've got an oxalate, calcium oxalate problem,

it's very hard to get the oxalate down because it's a metabolic problem, probably from the parathyroid gland.

But nevertheless, it's not a calcium problem so much, but you have to curb your oxalates, such as spinach or chocolate or tea, and you want to drink a lot of water, of course.

But one of the ways you can really help

you can take potassium, citrate, magnesium, and V6, the Theralix.

Theroleth is a product over the counter.

That's not a commercial, just something you can buy very cheaply.

But what I'm getting at is alkali water raises the pH of your urine up to seven or eight.

You can buy it up to nine.

And that pH, when it's highly alkali, it's very hard for the calcium and the oxalate to fuse together.

And so, even though you're dysfunctionally producing too much oxalate, despite your efforts at

liquid drinking, hydrating, and cutting down on

histamine and oxalate foods,

you really want to take a high alkali water.

And one of the things I like about Elevate is that not only is it infused with hydrogen, but it has a high pH.

Yeah.

Well, that's drink elevate.com.

And Victor, thanks a lot.

I think we better sign off here.

We're right at the end.

Yes.

Thanks to our audience.

We appreciate everything.

And this is Victor.

Again, thanking everybody for tuning in.

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