The Other Road

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, ladies and hello, gentlemen.

This is the Victor Davis-Hansen Show.

I'm Jack Fowler.

Victor Davis-Hansen is the star and the namesake, and he is the Martin and Ely Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution.

and the Wayne and Marsha Busky Distinguished Fellow in History at Hillsdale College.

Victor is a best-selling author, syndicated columnist.

We're going to talk about one of his columns on this episode.

Military historian, classicist farmer.

Victor, you're like one of those big Swiss Army knives with lots of, lots of weapons and tools in it.

So many, so many areas of expertise.

And one of them is your, I've always said this, I think you're one of America's premier political analysts.

And

that's the person I want to talk to after these important messages so we can hear about your take on Herschel Walker's defeat Ralph Waranock's win in the Georgia runoff.

Again, right after these important messages.

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 arc 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 with the Victor Davis-Hansen show.

So Victor, it was the runoff in Georgia.

Herschel Walker lost by about 100,000 votes.

A little background, you know, other Republican candidates in the state, the governor, lieutenant governor, others, had prevailed handily on election day.

Walker obviously did not on election day, before the runoff still

fell far short.

Your thoughts on

this runoff, the candidate, the consequences, anything about this particular election?

There were three issues there, among some other ones.

I mean, everybody gets their hopes up when the polls show that Republicans in the general election were going to win, and that had some, I think, effect.

We talked about that earlier.

But in this particular runoff election, there were three or four things that were unique.

One was They were tired.

They'd already voted, and it was almost a deadlock.

And then we knew what was going to happen from the 2001 elections with Purdue, et cetera, et cetera, Lauffler.

That once you narrow that race down to Herschel Walker versus Warnock, it became, and that was the only election in the nation that day, that became the focus point of the entire left-wing machinery.

And that ACT Blue and everything, they all coalesced, and he was outspent

five to one.

And so that was one thing.

And then the other is that the Republicans talk a great game, but they don't understand that when you flip

in the most radical changes in our balloting history, when you flip 70% voting on Election Day in most states, and you flip it to 30% and 70%

early are male in voting, then as we said earlier, why argue about a voter ID?

You know, we work for voter IDs.

I am too.

But that's 30% of the electorate.

And these other 70% don't have a voter ID.

They just get harvested or they get cured or whatever third-party intervention we call it.

And so that really killed them.

And they did not address that.

You think they would have after 2018 and 2020.

And they still haven't addressed it.

And everybody knows the answer.

You go into state by state and you try to get Republican-led legislatures to go back to a normal system.

And to the extent you can't do that in a blue state, you do what the Democrats do.

You sue, you sue.

But in the meantime, you master their technique.

You don't say, I play by the Marcus Queensbury rules.

I'm just not going to do this.

I'm above harvesting or, you know, this is a techie thing.

I don't understand it.

So that was a big thing, the money and that.

And then it's not fair to Trump to say that his candidates were uniformly bad because I thought Adam Laxalt was good.

I thought Oz was fine.

Kerry Lake, I thought, was a good candidate.

J.D.

Vance, obviously, one was a good candidate.

But Herschel Walker

was designed for the Democrats to destroy.

And by that, I mean

they were running on a Christian, traditionalist, anti-abortion, mainstream American message against Warnock's neo-socialism.

But when you saturate the airwaves with, you know, he paid for an abortion and he was abusive to this past person and this illegitimate, then it makes it very, very hard for him to pose as the antithesis to Warnock.

So then you go to the issues and he was not able to articulate the issues as many Republicans weren't in the general election.

By that, I mean we have an open border.

This is how many miles of wall is left unconstructed.

Where there are walls and the old rickety fence was replaced, we don't have a problem.

Therefore, even though we don't have the Senate, we're going to bring this and make a showdown.

And this is why gas prices are high.

Within the first 100 days, I'm going to introduce legislation to finish Keystone.

I know you can't do it, but I'm going to introduce it.

And I'm going to try to get Anwar back open and I'll get these more federal leases going and things like that and crime.

And we're going to get the federal government to come in and look at whether there's racketeering or crime across the interstate lines that we can override these local prosecutors that are aiders and abettors of crime by their laxity.

But he didn't do any of that.

Instead, it was just,

you know, he wasn't a candidate that it was articulate.

So this is a particular case where the candidate quality

mattered.

And, you know, Kemp,

he's a good old boy.

He won by seven points.

And had somebody,

had his twin been running, he would have won.

Because Georgia, for all the left-wing brag that it's a blue state, it has a majority of conservative legislatures, and all the state offices are red conservative, except the two most important offices, the Senate.

And it's not just

liberals, it's socialist.

So, Sammy and I talked about that.

But

who would have figured that in the U.S.

Senate, when you want to go, hmm, who's to the left of Bernie Sanders?

Oh,

the two senators from Georgia.

I think that's an anomaly in our political history

to have

some people who are so ideologically out of whack with the with the with the electorate of the particular state it it's a a weird calculus that in the 2020 election trump got in you know following he got in arguments with kemp and that was a mess and then right before the january 6th and

and all of that questioning the election and then getting in fights with Georgia so the result was Donald Trump basically told his base, it doesn't matter anymore if you vote.

They'll rig the election.

And then the independent voters said, look at the guy, he's whining again.

I'm not going to vote for any Trump candidate because all he does is whine, whine, whine.

And so he turned off two constituencies.

And that's how those two Warnock.

What was his name?

Ossahoff.

They got, whatever his name, they got elected.

And you think that now on the third time, they wouldn't do it again.

They would master vote harvesting.

The Republican Party would get together.

Mitch McConnell would tell Trump, I don't like you, you don't like me, but you put in 10 million, I'll put in 10 million from our slush funds, so that Walkers only outspent three to one, something like that.

But that didn't happen.

So

it was suicidal.

It was a self-created error.

Yeah.

Well, Victor,

you mentioned Donald Trump and his complaining about past elections, and we're going to get into that

with a,

I can't call it a tweet, but a post he made on Truth Social

about,

well, a Twitter dump.

So these things will go in order.

Let's talk about,

let's not us talk, let's get your views on this.

Twitter dump that's been going on.

We're recording on the 11th.

So I think today is the fourth day of which a significant amount of material has been put out on Twitter by Mike Taibbi and Barry Weiss and others related to the internal records of Twitter and how it suppressed conservatives, including the president,

Hunter Biden's, the news about Hunter Biden's laptop from back in 2020.

And then

let's get your views on Donald Trump's reaction to that separately.

So first, Victor, what do you have to say about

the Twitter dump and the consequences of it?

Well, Twitter is,

most people don't know what it is in America, but for the elite in the media, in the corporate world, in the academic world, in Hollywood, in politics, et cetera, et cetera.

That's it.

That's how they communicate.

That's how they show off.

That's how they virtue signal.

That's how they perform as art.

And the people who run it represent San Francisco.

And so they view it as a valuable tool in their cultural war.

They don't believe in, they don't believe it as a public utility because it's a

communications device, just like, as I said earlier with Sammy, like the phone.

And that's what people do.

They tweet and they post.

No, no, they feel it's a, they're saying now it's a private company and we can do what we want with it, i.e., we can kick out anybody that we want.

We can destroy part of all that stuff.

But that's inconsistent, because if that were true,

then

they wouldn't be working as I think we were told.

Every week they had a meeting with the FBI, and as the later

trove shows.

So basically, they were a private contractor that was trying to interfere with an election by suppressing information about the laptop and then

trying to get rid of Donald Trump as a voice after the election, but during the election, trying to suppress his tweets, his communication skills, his retweets, his likes, and not just Donald Trump, a whole array of conservative people.

And who were they listening to?

They were listening to the FBI, but Michelle Obama this morning, we learned.

She weighed in.

So basically, it's anybody who's in the high reaches of government, and the Democratic Party on the left calls up Jack Dorsey or his minions and says, get that person, get that person, get that person.

So this Soviet-style Berea, show me

the person and I'll find the crime.

Because what these troves show,

there's no consistent rules or protocols.

They just say, hmm.

Okay, get him.

Let's get Trump off there because of, you know, he said this, but but we'll let the Ayatollah on or we'll let this terrorist on, but we'll go out.

They have no standards.

And the only standard it is, is that we're going to let a lot of little punk kids in Silicon Valley who are left wing do what they want.

And then after they do it, post facto, we're going to lie like Jack Dorsey did under oath.

Right.

Let me, yeah.

What, I mean, that's a standard, right?

There is

a standard whatever they do.

he has the ring in his nose and he does his yoga and he's worth billions.

And his way of looking at it is, I was a great engineer, and I developed all these companies, and I got this thing, and I hired all these guys, and I made it a you, my socialist utopia, where they

come in and they get their gourmet meals and they slouch around, and they're all over hired.

It's overpopulated.

The damn thing makes billions.

I'm just checking out because the stock keeps going up, because it's a plaything of the elite.

And all he wanted to do is what Elon Musk gave him.

He gave him billions of dollars.

So he didn't really care about standards or anything.

So when he went before Congress, he thought, you know what?

I will say or do anything to stop these people, if they ever get majorities, from declaring social media a public utility.

If it is a public utility, then there's a public utility board, just like we do with energy and things that people have to have.

So, do people have to communicate with email or use the internet to communicate?

Maybe they do.

If they do, they're a utility.

If they don't, then they still can't be a private contractor and be used by the FBI to circumvent the Constitution.

But he knows all that.

So, he just goes on there and he lies under oath.

No, we don't shadow back.

We don't do this.

And why did he do that?

He thought he's thinking,

Well, you know, Andrew McCabe was the FBI director.

He lied four times to a federal investigator.

John Brennan lied twice, once about drones, and then once about spying on Senate staff computers under oath to the Senate.

Hey, James Clapper lied.

He said that he gave the least untruthful answer why under oath.

Hey, James Comey, 245 times to Demon Nunes'

House Select Intelligence Committee.

I can't remember.

I don't know.

Maybe, maybe not.

Hey,

old Bob Mueller, Mr.

FBI FBI iconic figure.

Hey, I don't know what GPS is.

Hey, I don't know what Glenn Simpson is.

Hey, I don't know what Christopher Steele was, but they may have been the cornerstones and the catalyst for my entire investigation.

But I'm just going to say I don't know.

And then we go to Anthony Fauci.

I didn't have much of a role in the shutdown.

I had an open mind about the Wuhan liab.

I never tried.

And so what Dorsey knows is that all of these people lie under oath to federal investigators or in depositions or most importantly to Congress.

And there are no consequences.

The left knows that.

And so he was just going to go in there and lie his head off, and they're never going to hold him in contempt or do anything.

If you had a Justice Department that was not politicized, you might.

They need to start crossing out or they should just shut down the committees.

They should just say, you know what?

These committees don't exist.

It's a joke.

And if they want them to mean something, they should tell both sides.

The next SOB that comes in here and he says something that is demonstrably untrue and can be proved so, we're going to side him with perjury.

We're really going to do it.

We'll see what happens.

But now.

It's lie.

It's like Harry Reed did.

You remember he got up in the Senate.

He wasn't under oath, but he got up in the Senate floor and he said, Mitt Romney is under investigation because he never paid his income tax.

And then after we found out that was a total lie, he said to, I guess, George Stephanopoulos or one of these left-wing lackeys, he said, it worked, didn't it?

You know, remember that quote?

He got elected, didn't he?

I think that was the quote.

He got elected, didn't he?

And that really showed where they're coming from.

It's really sad, this erosion and

character and veracity.

And there won't be one thing that happens to Jack Dorsey.

But believe me, there's some people out there listening that have been audited.

And when you go into that IRS office and you say to that person, this was my total income.

And he has some kind of testimony that some guy, you know, paid you cash for some service and you said this was your total, they will charge you with lying to a federal investigator.

They will.

They'll go after you.

For $601, they'll screw you over.

Right.

And they will.

Threshold.

Yeah.

That's why it really makes a lot of sense.

It makes people cynical the way these people just lie and lie and lie.

Victor, the coordination or the cozy relationship with the FBI is, to me, particularly troubling.

I did run a media company once upon a time, National Review, not exactly the size, the scope of

Twitter, but I cannot imagine the FBI in any way, shape, or form, even an agent, trying to form some kind of relationship with NR

or the nation or any other public.

It would just, it would be outrageous for them to do that.

I love the guy's name.

What was his name?

Noel Roth.

He was the head of safety.

What does that mean?

He was a guy that was boasting that he was meeting with, he was writing these internal emails, meeting with the FBI, man, isn't this cool?

He thought he was something.

And when you look at this cast of characters, they're all 20, early 30-something people.

They've never been in the real world.

They live in this artificial la-la land called Silicon Valley cyberspace.

They have no moral bearings.

To the degree they go to these colleges, whether it's

Miss Ellison, who went to MIT,

who

helped run Mr.

Bankman Fried, who was also a, she, excuse me, she went to Stanford.

He grew up on the Stanford campus.

He went to MIT.

He went to MIT, right.

Yeah.

So, I mean,

they're not getting any moral training.

The fact they get these BAs or PhDs means nothing.

And

it's really disturbing, these people that gravitate to Silicon Valley.

And they're not very, I don't, they don't impress you.

You see, Jack Dorsey, he's not a very impressive person, I don't think.

And maybe I know he's a genius to dream up all these ideas, and he's an engineer, but he has no social skills at all.

He doesn't have any reasoning, and they just feel they're exempt, that they're better than everybody, and they do a lot of damage because it was all laid out by Molly Ball.

And I keep referring to that February of 2021, gushing

Agadachio essay in Time, how the conspiracy, her words, not ours, how it worked.

Silicon Valley, Zuckerberg Money,

print media, corporate boardrooms got together, raised a lot of money, sued,

changed the voting laws in key states they know would be

pivotal in the election, went to Antifa and BLM, modulated the protests so they would wane before the election.

And

then if Biden, you know, not show that the left was out of control before the election.

And then if Trump won, they were ready to spring back.

And, you know, so when Molly Hemingway wrote a book called Rig, everybody was saying, well, it wasn't RIG.

Well, that's what her point was.

A lot of insidious ways of changing voting laws and putting money and pre using fronts that are non-profit or whatever you call it.

Zuckerberg sending in $419 million

to these nefarious groups and then motor outreach nonprofits.

And then using

Hunter Biden's story.

I mean, if you think about it,

we kind of live already in a Norwegian world.

Just think for a minute.

We have a laptop of the president of the United States son.

Forget the felonies that he's committing on videos, whether it's prostitution or drug use or buying drugs

or anything.

But you have these communications where he's talking about funneling 10%

of these huge sums to his father.

And then he's getting sums from his father.

I guess he's no one, nobody's paying gift tax.

He's already in tax trouble.

But you'd think that somebody would say this is prima facie evidence that the current president of the United States was selling his vice presidency and the potentiality that he would be a president to the highest Chinese, Russian, or Ukrainian bidder.

And nobody says, and then you jump.

Tony Bobolinski's out there in public.

He's out there confirming everything that we're ignored by the FBI.

And this is just opposed to going after Donald Trump at Mar-lago, going after the Trump.

More power to them.

If Donald Trump didn't pay full taxes, more power to the Irish, go after him, but show some symmetry.

Come on.

And this is what gets people really cynical.

You can't run a constitutional state when the people and the permanent bureaucracy are not symmetrical and they become retrieval service.

FBI is now a retrieval service for

the Biden family.

If Hunter loses his gun,

FBI goes to the Secret Service, says, well, where was it?

What's going on here?

If Ashley Biden loses her, I guess, diary talking about showers with her dad at a too late age, let's go get James O'Keefe, FBI.

Let's go get him, get that diary back.

If the laptop pops up, hey, we're ordered to go get that laptop and get it out of the public.

Let's put it on ice for a year and deny and leak, say it's Russian disinformation.

That's what they do.

And so the question is,

we already know, Jack, that they erased data on cell phones that were subpoenaed during the Mueller investigation.

We know they altered a FISA document.

We know that they used the steel dossier for further FISA subpoenas that they had already been told by FBI officials was not confirmed, was not reliable, and yet they continue to do that.

We know that James Comey, we know that James Comey memorialized on an FBI device a private conversation to the President of the United States and then leaked it for the purposes of getting a special counsel.

And

we know that he misled the President of the United States when he said he was not under investigation.

And so when you add McKay blind and

Comey saying he can't remember, Mueller saying he can't remember, and now Ray says he can't, doesn't know.

The question then is posed, what are they not incapable of?

What is the FBI not incapable of?

Entrapment?

We know that with the kidnapping plot in Michigan.

Informants everywhere.

And then, yeah, well,

according to Mr.

Rosenberg at the New York Times, they were all over the January 6th demonstration, and they won't talk about it.

So I think they're capable of anything at any time.

And that's really scary.

Well, except they're incapable of infiltrating Antifa, it seems.

Oh, yeah.

If you have the Sarnoff brothers and the Soviets, the ex-Soviets, the Russians of all people say, hey, these are

be very careful with these people.

They're in your country and they are terrorist.

They're not just anti-Russian terrorists.

They're dangerous people.

No problem.

Just forget those guys.

We're not going to act on it.

Same thing with San Bernardino.

What they're supposed to do, they don't do.

And

what they're not supposed to do, they do very well.

And that's what's scary.

And you know what?

I'll make a prediction.

And this dovetails with John Brennan's CIA,

and this dovetails with Lloyd Austin and Mark Milley's military.

And Tom Cotton gave a little inkling of it the other day when he said to corporations, don't come before this committee and complain about regulation and harassment when you people are the avatars of wokeness and you deserve what you get.

And I'm not going to stand there and defend you against your left-wing friends when they turn on you.

I thought that was very good.

It was terrific.

But it was

a sign.

It was a sign of what's happening in this country.

And that is that the leadership of the FBI,

CIA, and the Pentagon slowly,

steadily, incrementally, insidiously is destroying conservative traditional support for those agencies.

And they think because they're Washington-centric in that beltway, it doesn't matter.

But they don't know that the left hates the CIA, the left hates the FBI, the left hates the Pentagon.

And they only like them because they feel that there's no give and take.

They're chain of command operations.

So you get the top and flip them for transgendered surgery benefits or wokeness or this or that.

And you can get instant social change, cultural change.

But otherwise, they don't like them.

And you know what?

Conservatives are not going to support them anymore.

And when I meet, I confess now, if I see somebody who's a senior FBI agent or a senior military officer, and I do once in a while, or FBI, I just assume they're left wing

and that they're not going to speak up.

And I know that everybody said, well, the rank and file, it's not the rank and file officers or directors, it's these people in Washington.

Well, where do these people in Washington come from?

Do they come from Mars?

They came from somewhere, Jack.

They came from our military academies that are

taught at the awokeness.

I can say with, you know, in retrospect, as a visiting professor at the U.S.

Naval Academy, and I have been the Nimitz visiting lecturer at UC Berkeley.

I have been a visiting professor at Stanford University.

I'm on the Stanford campus.

I've been a visiting professor at Pepperdine.

I have never been at a more liberal, progressive, left-wing campus than the U.S.

Naval Academy.

And the history department, which I spoke, I've never met more left-wing professors.

And that

was like...

That was over a decade ago, too.

2002, 2003.

I walked into a room almost the first time I was there, and their military officer was giving a lecture on Okinawa,

the Battle of Okinawa and Iwo Jima, i.e.

the island hopping campaign.

And he said with a straight face that there was no strategic value of Iwo Jima and that killing 25,000

Japanese soldiers was murder.

We just wanted to go in there and kill a bunch of yellow people because we're racist, ditto, Okinawa.

And I politely said

there were over 2,000 B-29 landings on Iwo Jima with their 11-person crews.

Said, well, that was all exaggerated.

They just went, you know, that didn't really matter.

And I said, it did matter.

We don't know how many people were actually saved because they could land at Iwo Jima, but it mattered.

And Okinawa was the idea with Okinawa was that we were going to have a huge new base.

So the B-29s on order would go straight there.

They'd keep the Marianas, but it was only 400 miles from the target, not 1,600.

And then we would have all this idle B-17, B-24, and Lancaster fleet.

The war was over in May in Europe, and they were going to come over.

So they were essential targets.

I had kind of a personal stake because my namesake was killed on Okinawa, and I didn't want to hear that Okinawa was just a racist exercise.

And my father had two emergency landings on Iwo Jima with a crippled B-29 and told me both times they would have been dead had they not landed there.

And here was this Marine officer lecturing us, and he had no support.

I mean,

there was no, he had a lot of support in the audience, but when you ask him under

in the Q ⁇ A set, where is the document?

Where is the source?

Where is your Japanese archives, how they looked at it?

There was nothing.

It was just tailor-made to appeal to a woke faculty.

So I could not believe it.

And I started to meet people and

it was a new experience.

And

people said to me, yeah, yeah, this is a left-wing place.

Didn't you know that?

What the hell did you think you were doing when you came here?

And so I think the military at the highest echelons is woke.

And I think they're woke because people,

when they get to a particular rank and they want to get to the final, you know, the final leg of their cursus honorum, they understand that you have to say and do and be somebody that appeals to the wider culture in Washington.

And they do.

And then they are rewarded accordingly.

And so, and it's not how many, when you were a colonel or a major, how many artillery shells your unit put on the target or how many missions your air wing flew that without you know missing the cable on the on the aircraft carrier no no it's not that it's was your how many promotions reflected the diversity and did you have a non-hate pro-diversity trans policy something like that and so it was not anything to do with battlefield efficacy or how well did you present the case to the media, your superiors, that lowering the physical standards for women in combat had no effect on battlefield efficacy.

Stuff like that.

This is kind of a rant, but this is really troublesome because all of us that listen to conservative or traditional podcasts or we watch Fox News or we're in that conservative orbit, we are the people who support these institutions against attacks on fair from the left.

But now we're starting to discover, as Tom Cotton pointed out,

that they don't like the conservative movement.

They don't like conservatives.

They don't care about conservatives.

And I mean that literally.

When you had Mark Milley get up there and say he was going to investigate white rage and Lloyd Alston was going to look through the,

you know, the recruitment, the roster, and to weed out white supremacy and white privilege.

And they gave no evidence.

that that was an existential problem in the military.

So they just, you know, they turned off their constituency that was dying in wars at twice their numbers in the demographic

victor you mentioned the um

if you don't mind me spitballing here a little bit on

on the tenor of

of silicon valley many i'm going to make an assumption many of the occupants of twitter and other offices come from stanford yes where you have been affiliated one way or another through hoo and taught there and graduate

with Stanford for maybe pushing 40 years.

You've also, you've taught for many years.

You've taught for at least approximately 20 years consistently and now at Hillsdale.

I'm wondering if I want to

see if you make a comparison of the change in students

at Hillsdale.

I'm sure that students are changing everywhere across the country, the tenor of them and

their attitudes, et cetera.

But you're still seeing that in real time.

Is there any way to compare what you see

going on at, say, Hillsdale versus the change going on at Stanford?

Yes, I started teaching for one month in 2004 at Hillsdale College.

So essentially, I taught for 20 years there.

Intensive classes in history, Greek history, military history, et cetera.

And I can tell you that under Larry Arndt, the president and his team,

there was no relaxation of standards.

If anything, the faculty, he went out and recruited and raised money and got extraordinary faculty.

So when I went there in 2004, they had an endowment of about 250 million.

They were wonderful people, but they were not bringing, it was more of a local campus.

And that was good because it reflected conservative mission statements in Michigan and stuff.

But

over that 20 years, it was kind of amazing to watch Jack because when I ended up and last year was in September, it was my last year teaching there.

I think I'll continue giving a lecture every year and stuff, but that was my last, you know, three or four hours a day every day teaching there for the billet.

The students were remarkable.

I mean, they were, I would say they were sort of like UC Irvine or Cal Poly, which were great schools when I first got there.

And 20 years later, they were comparable to Berkeley, Stanford,

UCLA, USC.

No doubt about it.

And

in contrast, when

I was a visiting professor at Stanford in 1991, I taught classics.

Then I went to the Stanford Center for Behavioral Studies.

And I'd say maybe in

my

20 years at the Hoover Institution at Stanford, I probably guest taught maybe seven or eight big classes where professors have had me speak.

I've probably given eight or nine on-campus talks where students came to question, often in a hostile climate.

And I probably maybe had

400 students come in of various political persuasions.

And that would be, you know, I'm writing a PhD thesis or master's thesis on a a subject you know, World War II, ancient Greece, could you help me?

Or I write for this, or, you know, that kind of stuff.

And I can, so I got it.

And I would tell you that I saw a gradual increase,

but market gradually, but never interrupted at Hillsdale.

And I saw the opposite at Stanford.

And

that's

unusual because it was harder and harder to get into Stanford for some groups.

So what I think explains that, Jack, is that the criterion,

the criteria for getting into Stanford changed

and Harvard changed, and Yale changed, and Williams changed, and Vassar changed.

And that eliminated a lot of students who were clearly superior.

And they started to go to other schools, and that Hillsdale was a beneficiary of of that expanded pool.

And they got more, a lot more applicants.

And it put a dilemma on Hillsdale because

you're a traditional school, and all of a sudden you're getting these people

who a year earlier would have gone to Harvard, but maybe they don't reflect the mission statement of your school.

What do you do?

And by the same token.

And

it wasn't just affirmative action diversity candidates.

Oh, that was a problem with Stanford.

It was more and more athletics.

And we saw the scandals that Stanford, just to take one example, had with their coaches selling admittances.

And we know the Hollywood connection.

So there were people who wanted to get in in greater numbers as athletes in minor sports.

There were legacies that the wealthier the university got.

There were all these rumors that X amount of million dollars would get your son or daughter if they had fairly good qualifications, but otherwise not good enough to get in.

And then I would say in the last two or three years,

the last five years,

the diversity,

equity, inclusion ideology that had changed the admissions undergraduate from proportionally representative of the demographic of the United States to repertory,

that is,

that maybe the Hispanic group or the African-American would be admitted at larger than 11 or 12% of their population.

And the white male group would be no longer 33%, but might go down markedly to accommodate that change.

But that started to apply to graduate programs.

And you could start to see it when you looked at the course.

What I always do at Stanford, I walk in, I look at what the books are being ordered for classes, and I start looking at some of the courses I know something about.

And when I started looking at the,

you know, what the courses are and the descriptions in the catalog, the number of courses that were not academic, but therapeutic was much larger.

So I never thought that in certain areas of Stanford excellence, i.e.

the medical school, engineering, physics, math, I never thought anybody would say, well, we're not going to let this person in because he's the wrong color and she's the right color.

But they did.

And therefore, as I was saying to Sammy, I've been talking to people I know in Silicon Valley and I always ask them this question:

Do you still have confidence in hiring a bachelor's degree from Stanford, since you're right next door?

And they say, no.

We don't.

And I say, well, where do you hire?

Well,

if a guy comes from Georgia Tech,

our person comes from Michigan,

we'll hire them because

there's no premium now on Stanford because

we know that they were admitted without an SAT or an ACT from, and we know that in many of these graduate programs, either the GRE

is either not required or not paid any attention to.

So a lot of these firms are giving their own version, as I said to Sammy, of tests.

And if you're a coder and you come out of Stanford with a master's in electrical and computer engineering, they're not going to trust that degree.

They're going to ask you to code because they don't feel that that

brand that was so prestigious conveys what it used to convey.

Now, it still conveys something.

And I think this is good in a way because it's going to redirect a lot of these students that are breakneck, they've been coding since they're three years old to go to other schools.

But it's a big problem.

And

it's kind of funny that these universities are in this bubble where they talk to each other and they hire dozens of diversity, equity, inclusion.

And all that does is add to these administrators, which the left-wing faculty used to hate and say, we've got all this dead wood, you know, two faculty members, one administrator, but suddenly they can't say that because they're the right kind of administrators.

So all these pernicious things are happening and nobody's talking about it.

Nobody's saying, okay,

I guess we're more diverse, but we had to

get rid of standardized testing on the front end and then on the back end,

that is what you're actually doing before you graduate.

We can't ask the student to do the level of work that we did 10 years ago, because if we do,

then we might have to grade them in a way that might suggest that we have a pattern of

fill in the blanks, racism, discrimination.

So, and this is all a complicated, convoluted, convoluted way of saying, why didn't we just do what we were supposed to do?

When people were underprivileged, or there had been historical biases that we felt may have not given them a level playing field, you start at K through 12.

We could have gone in and say, you know what?

We're going to make sure that K through 12 is math, science, language, logic.

Instead, we let all these people come in and say, no, it's not.

It's diversity.

It's transgenderism.

It's therapeutics.

And so

it's sad.

But one thing to remember about all of this, Jack, is that

you take away Mark Zuckerberg's tie-dye shirt.

You take away Sam Bankman Freed's sloppy grunge look.

You take away Jack Dorsey's nose ring and his Charles Manson look.

And beneath all of that get up, it's kind of like Ward Churchill get up, you've got

a serious capitalist.

And they want, of course they do, to make as much money as possible.

And ultimately, those companies are run on those principles.

And that means when they hire somebody, they're either going to give them a test or a coding exam or something that's antithetical to what they did at Stanford because Stanford is a plaything.

It's what they can afford to do that because they've got a $40 billion nonprofit endowment.

But these people have to make money.

So they're not going to experiment to the same degree, maybe in HR or whatever.

But when you get somebody, if I would imagine, and I'm just speculating, so don't hold me, but if you go to Oracle or Google or Apple and you look at the research and development

of codeine and, you know, the really

the next generation that will keep them competitive, I don't think somebody's saying

we don't have this percentage of these people and that percentage of these people and that percentage.

They're saying, I want 100%.

I don't care what they look like.

but they've got to be the best because I'm in a cutthroat competition with that group and that company and those people.

And they say, you know what?

And I'll handle the PR.

I will handle the PR.

And the PR is meant, we'll sound left-wing.

We'll talk about virtue signaling, performance art, all that.

But privately, you work for us.

You're going to meet the highest standards.

And if they don't do that,

they're not going to be competitive.

And I have a feeling that Stanford University, unless they change, will no longer be the feeder school to the Silicon Valley.

It just won't.

Yeah.

The lusters off the degree.

Hey, Victor,

we've got to take a break here.

We have to get your thoughts on Donald Trump's new thoughts on the Constitution of the United States and your thoughts on Trump 2024.

And we'll get to that right after these important messages.

We're back with the Victor Davis Hansen Show.

So, Victor, two things before we get to Victor's thoughts on the Trump matters.

Victor has a website.

It's called VictorHanson.com.

And I heartily recommend to our listeners, especially new listeners, that you visit.

And you will find as you go around and you, oh, there's an interesting article.

You click on it.

You'll see it's got a little word ultra.

What does that mean?

You'll click, but you won't be able to read it because that is an exclusive article for the website.

It requires a subscription to read it.

The price for a subscription is to test it out, it's just $5.

For the year, discounted at $50.

Victor writes a lot, a lot, a lot of exclusive material.

for his website.

So that's victorhanson.com.

Sign up for the subscription.

You will regret not having done so sooner.

As for me, Jack Fowler, I am a senior fellow at the Center for Civil Society at American Philanthropic, and I write a free, that's important, free, weekly email newsletter called Civil Thoughts.

And if you go to civilthoughts.com, sign up.

Every Friday it comes out, gives 12, 13, 14 recommended readings of interesting things I've seen in the

prior week.

links, some excerpts.

I think you'll enjoy it.

There's nothing transactional.

We're not trying to build a mailing list to sell your name to somebody.

So that's civilthoughts.com.

Thank you for that.

So Victor,

two things here.

This is, of course, a reaction to the Twitter dump, the first, I hate to say Twitter dump, but whatever.

That's the terminology being used.

So the first

release of news that, of course, showed what everybody knows.

Twitter has been shadow banning people and playing footsie with the FBI, affecting the outcome of elections.

And Donald Trump's reaction on his social media, the platform Truth Social, was this.

So, with the revelation of massive and widespread fraud and deception in working closely with big tech companies, the DNC and the Democratic Party, do you throw the presidential election results of 2020 out and declare the rightful winner?

Or do you have a new election?

A massive fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.

Our great founders did not want and would not condone false and fraudulent elections.

Victor, of course, that set off a lot of commentary: Donald Trump is now

picking the Constitution in the shins.

You separately wrote your your syndicated column.

You talk about this and other things, political actions Donald Trump has taken recently and how that may all play out for him in 2024.

So talk about any of this, Victor, but I would ask you, I thought you made a very interesting

point in your column where you compared Donald Trump 2022 post-presidency with Theodore Roosevelt post-presidency post-presidency and the consequences of his political actions, which were pretty long-term and

quite serious.

So, anyway, Victor, any of that, please share your thoughts with us.

Well, Donald Trump had a radical change of fortune, partly self-induced, partly not.

So,

let's just go back to two weeks before the November election.

And if you let's say you were reading the Insider Advantage poll or the Trial Faglar poll,

and it was showing Kerry Lake by eight, Blake Masters by one, Oz.

And you listened to Newt Genrich, let's say, on, I don't know, Fox News, and he was saying 50 seats, House, five seats, Senate.

Or you listen, I said on Tucker, I think they'll probably at least get 20 seats.

I think it was him.

That's going to be.

So you listen, everybody thought that.

And Tom was then saying that my candidates won the primary.

And he looked really good.

And he, you know, he'd been off the social media.

He had this big rally.

And then, of course, it wasn't really good on election day.

But right before election day, he started to

start to see the momentum building of DeSantis.

He was still in head-to-head

polls ahead of DeSantis.

But then he, right before the election, he winked a nod that he would run, mistake, shouldn't do that and take away attention.

And then his candidates on election day, many of them, not all, but many of them like Oz and Masters lost.

And then he had, before the election, he had attacked DeSantis, who had a wonderful night on election night, swept all of the statewide offices in Florida, along with Rubio, has basically,

along with the help of demographics, has turned Florida from a blue, purple, to a red state.

And he attacked him.

He's sanctimonious.

Okay.

And then he comes in and he makes fun of Mitch McConnell's wife in a racialist sense.

And then he says that Glenn Younkin's young kin, I guess his name, he thinks it sounds like it's Chinese.

And then

he

has Nick Fuentes.

I don't even know who the guy is.

And again, Sammy and I talked about whatever Q Anon is and all this white stuff.

But he has him.

I know who Kenya West is, Yi or whatever he is now, and he's an anti-Semite.

So this guy's an anti-Semite, and there's no filters.

They go, and I don't know to the degree how long they

talked to Trump or they had dinner, but Trump allowed himself to be there.

And Trump knows that he's not Barack Obama that has insurance from the media.

So Barack Obama gets a picture and smiling with his buddy Farrakhan, and they take a picture, and the left says to that photograph, you put that on ice.

It's 2005.

We don't don't want to see that thing until Obama's done with his second term.

And that bargain held.

But that's not true of Trump.

So he knows, yet he still does it, then anything he does will be amplified in the media immediately.

Okay.

You correlate all of that together with the results of the disappointing results, and Trump is getting frustrated.

You can see by these acts, and then he reacts to the Twitter drops.

And what was he reacting to?

Was reacting to, A, he had been telling everybody that the FBI was after him, that they rigged the election by

basically

empowering Christopher Steele, whom they paid, who was a contractor.

And he was a operative of the DNC through the firewalls of Perkins-Coey.

and the DNC

and Fusing GPS and Hillary Clinton.

And that was illegal.

He was a foreign national.

And he was doing illegal things.

And so were a lot of the people around him.

And this may have made that

dossier made things very tough for Trump.

And in the transition, that kind of sandbagged it, i.e.

Michael Flynn.

They just took him out.

And then we had the Mueller investigation.

So all of these things he's thinking of.

And then he learns that that wasn't all, that in 2020 election they deliberately without any policy without any rationale suppressed knowledge of hunter laptops incriminating you know election and we know that 17 percent of the electorate said that they would have voted for trump had they known that that incriminating laptop was authentic so Trump gets in there and he says after all these things he's done he caps it off by saying I don't care about the Constitution you know and even if you you got to do this over as if it's golf and you have a mulligan, you get to do it over.

That's like, you know, Richard Nixon saying,

Daley dumped a lot of, so did LBJ in Texas, and I want to have the 68 election over, the 1876 election.

And no, you don't do that in America.

You don't do that.

In fact, Trump,

he could have in March and April and May spent a lot of money to make sure that those lawyers were opposed on the DNC side, but he didn't.

And so, yes, he was done a great disservice.

Yes, they warped the election, but you don't change the Constitution to have a clause that says, if you object, then you get to try it again, because we don't know to the degree that Twitter, Facebook, New York Times, I don't know who can adjudicate which lie has this percentage.

You know, that's a poll with Twitter, maybe Facebook, maybe this or that.

And so he hurt himself is what I'm trying to say.

And the polls today, when you aggregate desanctimonious and Kane West and Fuentes and dabbling with the Constitution

and attacking Glenn Yunken and the racial stuff about, they put it all together, they being independent, conservatives, and they poll.

And now Trump has not held a rally and

he is not polling nearly as well in DeSantis, I think, 47, 42.

Okay.

And this didn't have to be because it was a self-induced error because what?

Donald Trump, just think if he'd done this, Jack.

Just think two weeks before the election, he said, come on, everybody.

We've got to give to Herschel and Blake.

And I've raised $120 million.

It's not for me.

I can raise it next year for presidency.

I'm going to put in $10 million for Herschel.

and 10 million for Blake.

And come on, Mitch, you can do the same thing instead of fighting with him.

And what if he had barnstormed and not mentioned the 2020 election and not done any of that and had rallies?

Then he could have said legitimately so, I told you that these people were suppressing the truth about the laptop.

I told you about the Russian collusion hoax.

I told you about the warping and the lies to get me off of Twitter and then left it at that.

And then he could have said, and this is is my agenda that I'm going to put forward.

And he would have been all right, but he didn't.

And so each time he got into the public sphere, whether it was his candidates losing or whether it was the Constitution or the anti-Semites at Mar-Lago or the Asian references or the attacks on DeSantis and Yunkin, it created a picture.

And he didn't rectify that picture.

And the picture was something like this.

He had a great four years.

He saved the country from the Clintons.

He saved the Supreme Court from 20 years of progressivism.

He put his finger in the dike and stopped this left-wing woke flood for four years.

They treated him horrible.

He exposed who they are.

Thanks to Trump, we know now what the military and the FBI and the IRS and the DOJ is doing.

But he's self-destructive.

I'm not saying I believe this is the consensus, but he's too self-destructive.

He's our gunslinger that got rid of the cattle barons.

He's Tom Donovan and the man who shot Liberty Valence.

He got rid of Lee Marvin.

But

you don't turn to Tom Donovan when you want to turn a province into a new state.

You go to Jimmy Stewart with the law degree, et cetera, et cetera.

That's the impression that's happening now.

And

he has a long time to address it.

And I don't think the economy, unfortunately, is going to get any better.

And there's going to be a lot of really bad things happen because the people in Washington, I think, are very bad.

We saw the Greiner exchange for

international terrorist-arms dealer.

We're going to see a lot of that stuff.

And all he had to do was just be quiet, do not get down into the muck,

stay issues-orientated, and he would look pretty good.

But that's not what those types of tragic heroes do.

And so that's where we are.

And it's not to say that DeSantis is going to now be anointed as the candidate.

No, we're going to let the people decide, and they're going to have to look at this for the next two years.

And Trump can have a renaissance, and he can have a bad thing.

We don't know what he's going to do.

We don't know what DeSantis, but right now, he's not doing things that are right.

And I don't know if he has people around him that are not toadies that say,

Mr.

Trump, that was a bad mistake.

And I'm here to make sure you're never going to make that mistake again.

So anybody sets foot on Morlago, I'm going to have a detailed background check.

And anybody who gets a picture with you, I'm going to be running interference because these people hate you.

And just because you write all the time, you're right about collusion, you're right about the laptop, you're right about Twitter, does not mean that

you get to get a second chance and replay that.

You can't talk like that.

Talk about the issues and what you've done and what you will do.

And we'll see if there's that type of staff that would do it.

But I have a feeling that the staff is saying, you know,

you were done a great injustice.

It was so horrible.

Yes, Mr.

Brett, you're right.

It's terrible.

They should do it again, Mr.

President.

And

you're wonderful.

And

I'm going to get this endorsement.

Would you endorse this guy, my friend, or this guy that hired me?

And that kind of stuff.

And that's not good.

Well, Victor, we have time for one

more little item.

It's wet, it's geographical, and we'll get to it right after this important message.

We're back with the Victor Davis-Hanson show.

And Victor, it's actually the weather is news.

I know I didn't talk to you about this in advance, but you actually live there in California.

Where you are right now, talking from your home, there's news on the Daily Mail about this massive storm that's coming east, but hitting California.

Ton of rain, ton of snow in the mountains, which is important.

Not only

for the farming community out there, but for the eating community here and the world where much of produce of america is is to be grown you can't grow without water victor is it a good week for agriculture in

america we've got about four to six feet of snow anytime we have that level of snow in december we can manage even though last year it looked just like this and then it fizzled out we had a drought for the rest of the year, but we still were better than the year before.

So

it hasn't rained as much as they said in the Central Valley on the California coast where we need rain.

We've got very heavy rains.

It's very important to get very heavy rains in Northern California because that's where the aqueduct sources are at Orville and Folsom,

dams, et cetera, et cetera.

And that's where the aqueduct comes all the way down to LA and coastal communities and agriculture.

So it's wonderful and it belies

the, you know, the

gloom and doom climate change.

People said, oh, oh, you're in a permanent drought.

It's never going to be any different.

No, it's not.

It's seasonal.

Basically, in California, you have one very wet year where I live, you get about 15 inches of rain and the snow, you get an accumulation of 50 or 60 feet for the year.

And then you have a sort of

dry year, and then you have one or two very dry years, and then you get a sort of good, and then you get a really wet one.

And then five year cycles.

And if we would adjust to that, build more reservoirs, do not let the water go out of the San Joaquin and Sacramento rivers out to sea at the volumes that they're doing,

then I think we would be able to handle it.

But not when you say,

we're going to have salmon at $50, $50,000 a shot go back upstream all the way to the Sierras.

We're going to make sure that there's going to be water from the Big Creek Project, Huntington Lake, Mammoth Pool, the Kings River, Pine Flat, up in the American River.

We're just going to let all of that water plunge and make a riparian landscape.

And it's going to be like 1870 and the delta will maybe flood a little bit.

It's going to wash out all of the nitrogen that our 30 waste plants in the Bay Area contribute to.

And we're going to get the delta smelt back.

And

not with 41 million people, you're not.

You know, Victor, there's, I'm sure, we should talk about it another time.

There's efforts to do something similar on the Columbia River up in Washington State to blow up the dams for for for fish.

And it's

the impact that this will have on the Northwest and, of course, the power that's generated from these places.

It's

staggering.

When you create in the West constitutional government like we've done with a lot of freedom, that's great.

And free market capitalism that creates a lot of capital and wealth, you got to be very careful that your elite do not take that as their

entitlement or their birthright.

And they do, unfortunately.

So they feel like they have solved all the existential problems.

Food is automatic.

You push a button and a steak out.

Or they feel that, you know,

All of a sudden they go to their Palo Alto service station and that gasoline just comes out like, you know, a fountain out of the earth.

And that's how they look at things.

And therefore,

they can say, you know, I'm against carbon fuels.

But they don't think it through because they're completely divorced from the real world.

They don't know how tenuous it is to put 41 million people in a state like California, but more importantly, a state that had a inheritance design for about 15 million.

So, Jack, if they were sane, if Jerry Brown and

Gavin Newsom had been sane, if Diane Feinstein and Pelosi and Barbara Boxer and Camilla Harris, our senators, our mayors, our governors had been sane, they would have said, oh my God,

the 99 freeway is only four lanes and it hasn't changed in 50 years and the population is tripled.

Let's make six all the way down the ladder.

Oh my God, I-5 is only four.

It's a death drop.

Let's make six.

Oh my God, we haven't built a reservoir since the new Milonas Dam, you know, a non-Los Angeles reservoir.

And it was 21 million people.

We've got 41.

Let's build six more.

You know, Los Banos, Grandes.

Let's build the Sites Reservoir.

Let's build Temperance Flat above Millerton Lake.

Let's do all this.

And they're not doing it because let's not shut down Diablo Canyon.

We shut down two nuclear plants with 10%, 10%, and now we're going to shut down the last one.

And that'll be another 10% we'll lose.

And we shut down Moss Landing and we shut down the Morrow Bay plant.

So we're doing all this, but the only infrastructure that I can see that we're doing is we're building a bunch of solar farms all over the west side of California and out in the desert that generate a lot of power that we don't need from 12 in the afternoon to 5 because we have a surfeit of

solar-generated power, and we don't have enough in the morning or during the winter or at night.

And we have to import power.

It's very solvable.

We built two or three nuclear plants.

We're not going to do that.

Same thing with forest fires, Jack.

We get 60 million trees are dead.

We let them burn.

They put in more soot and carbon than all the internal combustion engines for a whole year.

And we say, you know what?

This is a natural process.

And

these dead trees are making mulch for worms and birds.

And to the degree that, you know, we're going to try to fight them and stop them a little bit, but it's a natural project.

We don't want timber companies coming in and thinning them out.

Now, we'd like our nice homes and our hardwood floors and our twos by sixes and my beautiful new home, but we never compare or collate that with all of these trees we could harvest.

And so

to the degree we get upset by these annual horrendous fires, we say, you know, they have no business living up there.

Why is the guy living at 3,000 feet?

That's Sierra Club territory.

You don't live up there.

That's nature.

Even though they're living in the coast ranges, you know, over cliffs on the ocean and everything.

It's a very strange phenomenon, these people.

that they have all of these utopian bromides for everybody else.

And then they think they've reached the end of history because they push buttons and everything works.

And meanwhile, there's a bunch of faceless hellots that are mining their granite counters and smelting their

stainless steel refrigerators and making the wiring for their Teslas.

And they're doing all these very important things that they make it very hard to do.

Well, Victor, I'm glad my rain dance worked from 3,000 miles away.

So you can.

Okay.

Now,

at at the end of the show, and we're at that point, I'd like to thank our listeners for listening, no matter what platform they're on.

Those who listen on Apple can leave rankings and ratings from zero to five stars.

Most leave five stars, and we thank you.

Some have left less than five stars.

They don't like Fowler's Uz.

I think it was Victor and his

dancing internet.

I had one show where

I was watching my computer screen, and and I don't know if it was a weather or what, but

the internet would go on, off, on, off, on, off, on, off.

And I didn't catch it time.

It's all right, Victor.

Yeah, I'm consistent with the babbling every issue, though.

But anyway, that's that said, I do want to, I do want to make a correction of something from the other day where we ended the show.

Actually, we began the show talking about the Immaculate Conception, and someone left a comment on

your website

that I had said the feast of the Immaculate Conception, which you had, of course,

led you to talk about feast days.

What are feast days?

But it's actually the solemnity, the solemnity of the Immaculate Conception.

And we're not going to talk anymore about the Immaculate Conception after that.

Now, all that said, we have a nice little comment from somebody on the Apple Podcast platform.

This is

Andre Karin, A-N-D-E-R-K-A-R-I-N, Andrew Karin,

who titles this Wise and Brilliant.

So very grateful for VDH's brilliance and wisdom.

His clarifying analyses of political and cultural events, infused with a deep understanding of history, provide a clarifying lens through.

which to process these chaotic and confusing times.

Thanks very much.

That's typical of the comments that you received, Victor.

So thanks for listening, folks.

Remember, VictorHanson.com.

Subscribe, civilthoughts.com.

Subscribe.

And we will be back soon with another episode of the Victor Davis Hansen Show.

Thank you all for turning in again.

That's the word turning in.

I sound like Joe Biden with archaic vocabulary, but we'll see you next time.

Just don't wander off aimlessly, Victor.

Shake somebody's hand that doesn't exist.

Right.

Wherever you go,

whatever they get into, from chill time to everyday adventures, protect your dog from parasites with Credelio Quattro.

For full safety information, side effects, and warnings, visit CredelioQuatrolabel.com.

Consult your vet or call 1-888-545-5973.

Ask your vet for Credelio Quattro and visit QuattroDog.com.