Are you anybody's stock?
Adam Curry, John C.
Dvorak.
It's Thursday, November 6th, 2025.
This is your award-winning Gitmo Nation Media
Assassination, episode 1814.
This is no agenda.
Slinging slop and broadcasting live from the heart
of the Texas Hill Country in FEMA region
number six.
In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
And from Northern Silicon Valley, where we notice
it in blue states, the Democrats win.
I'm John C.
Dvorak.
It's a crackpot in Boskill.
In the morning.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Notice anything?
In blue states, the Democrats win.
Nah, I guess you didn't notice it.
But I noticed.
Nah, that entire opening was AI.
Oh, it sounded, I was gonna ask you
if you'd prerecorded it.
Ha ha ha ha ha.
It sounded prerecorded, it didn't sound like AI.
No, I know, I know.
I sampled my voice.
It's a little flat, a little flat.
Yeah, it's a little flat.
And I tried for hours, like, regenerate, regenerate.
Then you get like little bits, like, oh,
that sounds like me.
And then, you know, because I trained it.
No, it sounds like you.
Yeah.
Except it sounds like you if you were.
Gay.
A robot.
Yeah, yeah, I was like, you know, the
troll room got it right away.
That was interesting.
Yeah, and you thought I was prerecorded.
Okay, yeah, that makes sense.
That makes sense.
So, our jobs are still safe then, I
think.
Well, you know, the opening of something, and
it's just, the repartee can never exist with
AI.
That's the problem, except with the, well, let's
take a deep dive.
Okay.
All right, here we go.
Oh, yeah, mm, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah.
Yeah, with the mumbling in the background.
Uh-huh, uh-huh.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, that's good.
I'm very happy.
That means we will remain employed for at
least another six months.
I hate to mention it to you, but
we're not really employed.
That is true.
And by the way, just as an aside,
you know, we now have, for the first
time, we have an AI song on the
charts.
Did you know that?
No, I don't know this.
How was I supposed to know?
Well, if you didn't know, this is Zaniah
Monet.
Hi, you guys.
It's AI-generated, has a record deal reportedly
worth up to $3 million, and has made
headlines for popping up on social media, streaming
services, and music charts.
Now, Monet is the first of its kind
to land on a Billboard radio chart for
this song, How Was I Supposed to Know?
How was I supposed to know?
Monet has real musicians fired up, too.
Joey Leneve DeFrancesco is with United Musicians and
Allied Workers, an advocacy group in the U
.S. Artists were already so mad that they're
already seeing next to nothing from their work
online and their work in digital music spaces.
And they're seeing this as another slap in
the face.
He says currently there's hardly anything when it
comes to AI protections for musicians.
By the way, this guy, he sounds like
he could just as easily be complaining about
being misgendered.
Oh, totally.
With his voice, he is.
He's not a great spokesperson for the performing
musicians, but let's complete this report.
Comes to AI protections for musicians.
My organization is in fact pushing a piece
of legislation in the U.S. called the
Living Wage for Musicians Act that would create
a new type of streaming royalty payments.
And it would specifically only go to human
creators.
But reportedly there's a human behind Monet.
According to Billboard, a poet named Talisha Nicky
Jones created the AI using software and her
own lyrics.
♪ I needed truth without games ♪ But
it's clear not everyone is willing to tune
in to what this AI is putting out.
So this is clearly, I'm sorry for our
humming representative there, this is clearly a trial
balloon from the music publishing industry.
Otherwise this would not happen.
You know, they've already told Spotify, get it
all off, except for this one, apparently.
This is your future.
We are so, getmojams.com is alive, everybody.
Three times an hour you get some AI
slop from us.
We will be breaking artists, in quotes, on
this screen.
We have to consider something, which is that
with ASCAP and with the royalty payments, it
goes to the writers.
Yeah, the writers and composers.
But there's a separate sound exchange, there's separate
streaming royalties that go to performers.
That's- Yeah, that's for streaming.
Yeah.
But in so far as the- Well,
what else is there?
I mean, there's not people are really buying.
The point is, is that this woman that
does this character is the writer.
Yeah.
She writes the lyrics.
But there's also ASCAP BMI for streaming.
It's all in one.
There's a lot of royalties that get split
up for streaming.
It just seems to me that I don't
think they should make such a fuss.
She's writing the songs.
This is not all AI.
It's just the stuff behind it, which she's
also programming using AI.
Oh, she's programming now, is she?
Well, that's what I would call it.
What would you call it?
Prompting.
Okay, well, prompting is programming.
How's that different?
Wow.
Yeah, okay.
You just broke the heart of a whole
bunch of dudes named Ben, but yeah, I
guess so.
They agree.
These named Ben know that what they're doing
largely, especially with the more advanced language models,
is prompting the machine to do certain things.
That's called vibe coding.
Go to, you know.
Go to, no.
It's prompting.
It's nothing more.
Oh, man.
Yeah.
No, I mean, it was inevitable.
I can't push back on this.
No, but I'm just saying that this is
where the industry is going.
We're going to see a whole new level
of hits prompted and written.
I mean, our end of show mixes.
Let's hope that the quality's better than that.
Okay, if you want to be critical, I
can be critical of the song.
I don't think the song's any good.
I don't like that song.
I know.
It's not a toe-tapper.
It's kind of, it's mournful.
Wait, wait, wait.
I'm feeling a new chart.
John C.
Dvorak's toe-tapping top 100.
I'm feeling a chart.
I'm feeling a chart coming here.
It doesn't sound, it's nothing you can hum.
I mean, there's a million things wrong with
it.
I'm with you.
Taylor Swift sounds no better, but it's beside
the point.
Exactly, exactly.
I'm just identifying what's happening.
No, you know, for two boomers, I know
how much you hate that, we're on top
of this.
There's a couple of- Hello, people.
We're not like two slouches.
Okay, there's, we'll come back to AI.
How do you use a barcode?
Barcode.
We'll come back to AI later because you
bring it up.
There's something that we weren't really aware of
and we received several emails about this.
And I want to read one of them
because it's the shortest.
People, you can make your point in a
shorter note.
And this is regarding the juice isn't worth
the squeeze from the Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes
interview, which I think we both interpreted somewhat
incorrectly.
Although I don't need people to say, I'm
so disappointed in what you did.
Yeah, that type of person.
They don't donate either of those people.
It's like, okay, just get to the point.
We don't know everything, obviously.
So here's one that I thought was reasonable.
I was listening to the Sunday show and
just wanted to clarify something you and John
were talking about when it comes to Nick
Fuentes.
The juice not being worth the squeeze is
a red pill concept, not an incel concept.
I don't think we tied it that way,
but that doesn't matter.
No, we didn't.
I forgot what I said, but it wasn't
about incels.
It doesn't matter.
Incel has fallen out of favor, but the
issue that most older men have is they
haven't been in the current, that's us.
They haven't been in the current dating market.
So they think things are the way they
have always been.
That's not true.
I don't think that's true either.
I have absolutely, I'm absolutely convinced things are
nothing like they were.
You used to meet women in the museum.
Those days are over.
Bring that back.
Hey, baby, what do you think of that
painting?
Nice, nice piece.
It's intriguing.
What are some of the, hold, stop.
What would some, what are some, because it
could come back.
It could have resurgence.
Give us a couple of pickup lines for
in the museum.
Oh, pickup lines in the museum.
But the thing is you have to, pickup
lines, I've never been good at them because
it's just like, I always thought it was
just casual conversation that either triggered something or
it didn't.
And so you'd say something like, what do
you think of this piece?
Well, how, hold up.
How did you meet Mimi?
What was the first interaction?
It was at a party.
Yeah, at a sock hop?
No, it was a party, a regular, like
an industry party, you know, tech.
She was at a tech party?
Interesting.
Yeah, she used to work for a tech
distributor.
And you went, hey.
It was something like that, yeah.
I forced myself on her, actually.
I can be pretty aggressive.
I love it.
All right, we continue.
You have been married three times.
John, once, I believe.
Incorrect, but that's up to John to explain.
The dating market.
Twice.
Yes, so between us, five marriages.
Yes.
The dating market isn't anywhere close to where
it was even five years ago.
Women have rosters of men they date.
Both men and women ghost each other at
the first sign of any trouble.
Yeah, that's true.
I believe it.
The juice not being worth the squeeze is
the simple fact that the vast majority of
men are treated like wallets, and the upside
to dating is so small that most men
who don't make a healthy salary are tall,
extremely attractive, and in peak physical shape, don't
have a chance for even an average woman.
That's a five.
I'm a Gen Xer that's been single for
the past five years.
I date extensively, but fall victim to the
same challenges that Gen Z and millennials face.
A date is a job interview for a
man.
What do you do?
How long have you been there?
What degrees do you have?
All in the hopes of sussing out how
much money I make, and the chance of
anything lasting longer than a few weeks is
not in the cards.
You and John were lucky with your mate
choices.
Well, not all of them, but for the
rest of the men out there, it's not
as easy as it used to be.
And you know what?
Thank you, and I appreciate that.
And of course, we've seen TikTok videos of
women talking like this, and how much money
does he have?
Six, six, he got six figures, six feet
tall, et cetera, et cetera.
And I'm really sad about that.
I think that's incredibly sad.
Well, this brings me to the Nick Fuentes
clips I have for today's show.
Oh, no, you went back to the well.
Well, about this exact topic.
Okay, oh, well, brilliant minds.
I only took two from the segment, but
they talked about dating, why Nick Fuentes has
his opinions.
By the way, and I'm going to preface
this by saying that I saw, I've never
seen Nick Fuentes' podcast, okay?
And I don't, he's saying okay, because I
listened to Candace Owens' podcast recently, and that's
all she says, okay?
But no, you're not doing it right.
You need to say, mmkay?
Mmkay?
She says, well, I don't know it's the
m so much, but she says it after
every phrase, okay?
Okay, well, she says it more like, okay,
like if you'd question her, the hellfire will
strike you down, okay?
Yeah, so I've never seen Fuentes' material.
So I saw, instead of watching Fuentes, I
listened to Ben Shapiro's rant.
About Fuentes, with old material.
About Fuentes and about Tucker.
It was great.
It's fantastic.
Because he's taking everything he can out of
context.
You have no feeling for anything, because it's
just these blips and blips and blips.
Well done.
He just took both Fuentes and Carlson to
the cleaners.
Yeah, well, we'll come back to that.
Okay, well, I hope you have something.
But I do.
Meanwhile, my take on Fuentes is what I
saw on the Tucker Carlson interview, and that's
it.
And I think he's entertaining.
He's, when you see the clips that Shapiro
plays, he's like a maniac, but it's different.
So let's play these two clips.
This is Fuentes on dating women and the
whole problem out there.
But I'm always, I think I'm just too
old or something.
I'm like, why isn't anyone married?
You tell me, why aren't people married?
Well, I mean, honestly, it's the women.
The women are extremely liberal.
No one talks about that.
Increasingly, they do.
Especially after the last election, there's a 45
point difference between men and women.
The men are extremely conservative.
Increasingly, the women are extremely liberal.
What are they liberal on?
What issues?
Like, what does that mean, liberal?
Oh, they're very feminist.
Like, actually?
Extremely feminist, yeah.
You just believe that, do they?
I think they do.
Really?
Absolutely, yes.
How do you believe that?
That gender roles are a construct that none
of this is inborn?
Like, you'd have to be an idiot to
think that.
They like the idea of it.
They like the...
Because, of course, I think all women naturally
want strong men.
Of course, obviously.
They naturally want a Chad.
You know, they want like a tall, buff
guy.
Gig a Chad.
But I think they like the idea of,
none of them want to work either.
None of them actually want to work.
That's what I'm saying.
That's what I'm saying, of course.
Obviously, the truth's always been true.
Work outside the home.
Right.
They don't have enough work at home.
There's a lot.
Right on, Tucker.
But no, I completely agree.
So that's why I question, like, they're feminists
in what sense?
Yes.
And, you know, they like these vague appeals
to equality.
We want a chance to work and we
want respect.
And, you know, ultimately, I think the whole
political system is just based around women never
being accountable for any of their choices.
Ultimately, that seems to be what...
That's what abortion is.
Yeah, of course.
Because 99% of abortions are elective.
So they say it's an unplanned pregnancy.
You had sex out of wedlock with someone
you didn't intend to have kids with.
So now we have to kill the kids
in the womb.
Woo!
Nick Fuentes.
Yeah, nailing it.
Nailing it.
I can't say it any other way.
Nailing it.
Well, he's making his points.
You know, it's very generalized.
It's almost stereotyped.
But it's great.
Of course, of course.
Well, yeah.
Anyone could have given that answer.
Even boomers who don't know what the dating
scene is like.
It's not like, like, like, like, like, K.
It's not incredibly hard to come up with
that.
But he said, okay, good.
But it's not also, you know, the number
of women that don't fall into these categories
is probably pretty high.
So let's, but let's listen to the better
part, which is the second half.
This is actually, this is more stuff that
yak, yak, yak back and forth.
I mean, very wordy, these two guys, but
let's go to the end.
And, you know, these no-fault divorce laws.
These women get married to guys maybe they
never intend to stay with.
And then when they're out, they're done.
And they want child support and they want
half the stuff.
And I think a lot of men are
looking at women and they're, they're very liberal.
They're overweight.
They have a very high estimation of themselves.
I think that people call it ho-flation.
Ho-flation?
Yes, their sense of their own looks and
sexual value is very inflated.
And so a lot of people are looking
at these like frumpy, obnoxious, loud mouth, liberal
women who are also very promiscuous and saying,
this is not actually appealing at all.
And I don't, I don't want to start
a family with a person like this.
Yeah, it is.
Okay.
So yeah, I thought that was worth listening
to.
Just tell me, because I have a little
series on Tucker.
Is, tell me what the Candace stuff is
because it might be appropriate.
Is it about Israel?
Tell me.
The what, which, what, what?
You have Candace stuff.
Candace debate theory here.
What is that?
Oh, this is about Mondami.
Oh no.
Hold on in that for a second.
Yeah.
No, I'm not pushing it.
I didn't even try.
Because you, you kind of let me write.
Okay.
I have to, I can't help it.
I've been watching it too.
Everybody.
Mkay.
It's habitual.
It's a problem.
It's a real problem.
That you have to like concentrate on.
Gotta shake it.
So I've been, I've been kind of obsessed
is not the word, but I'm trying to
figure out what is, what is going on
with all these podcasters going on each other's
podcasts, talking about each other, sniffing each other.
They're all going around and around.
It's like a circle jerk.
Yes, sniffing each other's farts and like, what
is happening here?
What is the point?
And is it still all about Israel?
But what, what is happening?
And earlier this week, I thought I saw
a clue and that was confirmed last night.
So I spent this morning clipping some stuff.
This is an op and it's, I think
it's pretty elaborate and sophisticated.
And- A good op is.
Which a good op is.
And in fact, a good op should not
be identifiable.
We just happen to be kind of tuned
into them.
Well, the best op is when the person
doing the op actually tells you what the
op is about.
And you just kind of accept that as
part of the op, even though you don't
know it's an op.
Does that make sense?
Well, we'll find out by your clips.
Okay.
So just to set the stage for a
second.
No, actually I'll go to, this is the
first clip kind of led me into it
because there's a lot of people involved in
this.
I don't think, I know that not everyone's
in on the op.
Fuentes is not in on the op.
Candice is not in on the op.
Glenn Greenwald might be, I don't think so.
And Dave Smith is completely not in on
the op.
He is the willing idiot in the game.
And so Tucker goes on Dave Smith.
I'm like, what is this?
I saw this.
And what, why is he doing this?
What is the point?
Yeah, that's what I thought.
I didn't watch the, you probably, I could
only watch a few.
I couldn't take it.
I couldn't watch it.
No, no, but I got lucky.
I got lucky because I needle dropped into
what I needed to hear.
But the first part, so people like, and
Shapiro is on the other side of this,
but he's completely fallen for the op.
He's the biggest moron in this.
Oh, Shapiro's terrible.
He's completely fallen for it.
By the way, just to stop you for
a second.
One of those phrases we should put aside
is needle drop.
Gen Z doesn't know what you meant.
What's a needle drop?
So back in the day, you'd go into
a store that had these discs and these
discs were black and they were made of
something called vinyl.
You might have pants made out of it.
And they were kind of flexible, but then
you would put them on a turntable.
That's a rotating disc.
And there would be a needle, an actual
needle in an arm that you'd put onto
this vinyl disc known as a record or
a long play album, sometimes a single, a
45.
And it would pick up the little grooves
in this vinyl and the vibrations would be
sent back through an amplification and you would
hear music.
So a needle drop, there's excuse in different
terms in broadcasting, but kind of the same
in a record store.
You'd sit behind a long desk and you'd
all have a pair of headphones and there
would be a record player in front of
you.
Sometimes the store would let you use it
yourself.
They wouldn't always because you might scratch the
record.
In the olden days, they did.
Yes, scratching the record later became a hip
hop art form.
Vooka, vooka, vooka.
Okay, but scratching meant that you ruined the
grooves.
So you do a needle drop just to
listen to a track further on.
In broadcasting, we would, a record promoter comes
in.
Hey man, I got, this is a great,
this is a hit, this is the next
number one, it's a toe-tapper.
And so you'd listen to the intro and
then you'd pick up the needle and drop
it in the middle.
Oh, okay, it was like, because you had
no time to listen to it all.
So that's a needle drop, i.e. these
days, fast-forwarding two minutes and checking it
out and fast-forwarding.
I'm sorry, I asked.
Yeah, well, you did ask.
So a needle drops and so Dave Smith,
who was, he's just Mr. Libertarian, anti-war,
Israel is the worst.
And by the way, I'm gonna, I'm sorry
if I'm interrupting you too much.
No, you're gonna have to do it for
an hour.
But Dave Smith, I can't watch him.
He is the worst example of the podcaster
who can't stop talking.
To get to his first question with Tucker
must have been five minutes.
He just keeps going over this.
Well, you know, and I wanna ask you
about this because it's something that I think's
important.
I think you might have thought it was
important too because I thought it was important.
So you would probably think it was important,
but I'm not sure that you thought it
was important, but I wanna know if you
think it's important because everybody else, in fact,
I talked to some guys the other day,
they thought it was important.
And so I want you to tell me
if you think it's important.
This is, you do a very good impression
of the Dave Smith.
And he's a comedian, by the way.
I tried to, I found one of his
sets on Netflix and I'm like, oh, you're
not that funny.
You're funnier when I'm watching you stumble around
like this.
So Dave Smith is not in the op.
Dave Smith is just delighted that he's got
numbers.
He's trending.
Everybody is trending.
It's proof that he's right.
And what's his face?
Ben Shapiro, you know, he's a loser.
He's an idiot and he's yelling at us.
And so we're yelling back at him.
But meanwhile, we're winning.
We've got numbers, we're the best.
But he sent me the episode of Ben
Shapiro today.
So I'm pretty pissed at him for that.
That's not a cool thing to do to
a friend.
But I did watch a little bit of
it and he's going, you know, he's like,
he's sitting there and he's going like, you
know, Tucker Carlson.
And then just completely like, you know, in
a demented way, representing your view.
Tucker Carlson, the platforming of Holocaust deniers and
this and loving Nazis, the American people hate
that.
The American people reject that.
And meanwhile, there's just this amazing feature about,
you know, the new decentralized media landscape where
like we can all look at the numbers
and we can see who's gaining in relevance
and who's losing it.
And the fact is that like Nick Fuentes
is ascendant.
Candace Owens is humongous, she's been breaking records.
You were the biggest show at cable news,
got fired and got bigger after that.
Again, you can just look at the numbers.
They're all right there.
And Ben Shapiro went from being like the
king of the online conservative guys to being
very much a laughing stock.
And falling down in all these numbers.
So they wanna sit here and try to
convince you that what you're seeing in front
of you isn't really happening, but we all
know that it is.
So he's so self-righteous, Mr. Dave Smith.
By the way, he's got a guest in
front of him.
Oh yeah, no, that doesn't matter.
And he's yakking away.
When I, you know, it's like, I always
thought interviewers should let the guest, the guest
is there to tell you something.
No, no.
You always listen to the host.
No, no, he feels that he's on the
same, he's on a team.
He's on the team.
Tucker's on the team.
We're on the team.
We're on the right side of America, saving
America, America first.
This is all about, this is the thing.
America first, baby.
We don't want foreign wars.
We don't want foreign intervention.
We want America first.
I never hear them talking about SNAP because
I learned that three weeks of SNAP benefits
is equal to the annual amount we send
to Israel in military aid.
But okay, America first.
So that's what he's about.
And you know, and then this- You
got that number?
Yeah, oh yeah.
Three weeks of SNAP.
Three weeks of SNAP is equal to-
Everything we send to Israel for a year.
Yes, yes.
And then we get that money back from
Israel in arms purchases.
In arms purchases, right, okay.
Yeah, we don't get that with SNAP, but
we do get, we do sell food though.
So we need to take that into account
for a moment.
Now, just to reframe my thinking so people
understand where I'm coming from, particularly Israel.
And by the way, I think that October
7th, this very suspicious that we have, you
know, this thing, you're in Tel Aviv, you're
45 minutes from where this all took place,
but it took seven hours for the military
to do anything.
I think that this was in itself an
op, not by the Americans, but by the
Israelis.
And maybe it was a part of the
whole Abraham Accord, let's settle this in the
Middle East.
And, you know, they had the- We
don't know.
We don't, well, no, we don't know, but
- It's just suspicious.
But hold on.
There was the master plan, which was already
started by the master plan's own admission of
Witkoff and Kushner.
So this was in the planning.
I don't think it went the way they
actually thought it would.
They thought that, you know, no, they'll kill
some people, but it'll be good.
And they had hostages and it got drawn
out.
And the whole thing was obviously a mess,
or as Dave Smith calls it, genocide in
4K.
Okay, all right, I got it.
War is horrible.
So this kind of reignited the, why are
we sending money to Israel meme?
This is a very real meme.
We can't fight it.
The millennials, the Gen Z, even the Gen
Alphas are very suspicious of all of this.
Then we got the Kirk murder.
Enter Candace Owens could not have been more
helpful for pointing the finger at Israel.
And then you have AIPAC, oh AIPAC, AIPAC,
AIPAC.
Israel controls all of Congress, AIPAC, AIPAC.
Now, I'm just gonna reiterate our stance that
Israel does not control America.
America has historically since the 70s, go back
at bingit.io and look at all the
Michael Hudson videos.
He was there.
The clips we have of Michael Hudson.
How Israel is the aircraft carrier in the
sand and meant to be our launching point
there for all kinds of horrible things America
has done mainly for resources, et cetera.
So AIPAC is funded by the American-Israeli
Education Fund, which is mainly funded by the
military-industrial complex.
So if you wanna say AIPAC is a
danger to America for control, I'm in complete
agreement.
Ever since Eisenhower said, and way before any,
like 15, 18 years ago, we were talking
about Eisenhower's message upon his leaving the presidency,
be careful, it's the military-industrial complex.
And yes, a lot of Congress is definitely
controlled by AIPAC and the military-industrial complex,
and they are inherently bad because they always
want war.
So this op that I think I can
show to you is using the Israel conviction
that people think that Israel is controlling us
and we need to stop that to complete
a very specific goal.
And I believe Tucker is completely, he may
even be leading this.
I think he's really good at it, if
he is.
And this was the clue during the Dave
Smith podcast, part of the problem, I think
is the name of the podcast, that made
me start to think about this.
And then last night I was totally convinced.
So listen to this.
Ben is like this, Ben fears that he's
gonna get hurt.
And it's like, I look at this and
I'm like, I don't think, I think Ben's
fine.
No, it's like, who's more likely to get
hurt, me or Ben?
You know, it's like not even really close.
But that doesn't matter, he feels that way.
And a lot of these people who are
throwing this Nazi stuff around, they're doing it
for a reason.
Of course, this is part of a strategy.
You know, we've gotta clear the skeptics out
of the Republican Party by the time Trump
leaves or else the neocons will lose their
stranglehold on the party, that is the goal.
But I just wanna say again, as they
say these radical, really kind of crazy things,
they convince themselves and they become dangerous.
Because it's not about me, it's about the
future of the Trump movement after Trump.
That's what all this is about.
I'm just happened to be in this place.
I'm not trying to shirk responsibility for anything
I did at all, but it's not really
about me.
They're mad at me because I'm like basically,
sincerely a moderate guy.
So when I hear this, I'm like, huh,
could it be that Tucker has the assignment?
And remember, Tucker was at the Republican National
Committee he was walking into UFC fights with
Trump.
And then this stuff starts to happen and
we had one truth social post from Trump
saying, Tucker's gone nuts around the same time,
Elon is no good.
Notice how you haven't heard anything from the
president about either of those guys in a
long, long time.
In fact, quite the opposite.
The guy who Elon wanted to be NASA
administrator suddenly is back and available and is
up for nomination or approval by Senate when
they come back to be the NASA administrator.
So Elon very likely is playing a part
of this as well.
And if so, wow, long game, very, very
impressed.
So last night, Tucker drops another episode.
He has an almost a 40 minute monologue
and these are always good.
This is what he used to do on
Fox News.
It's written, he's just nailing it.
And I need to play some of this.
Most of these are pretty short, but they're
all very relevant.
Here's how it starts off.
Good evening and welcome and happy anniversary.
Tonight is the one year anniversary of Trump's
second election to the presidency.
It was a year ago tonight that Donald
Trump not only won, but won a majority
of the popular vote.
And not only won a majority of the
popular vote, but won with a coalition that
was broader than any Republican coalition, probably since
1984 with the Reagan landslide.
So a 40 year coalition.
And at the time looking at not just
how many people voted, but who voted, it
seemed really obvious if you were interested in
keeping the left at bay and the Republicans
in power for say the next generation or
two, you would copy exactly what Donald Trump
did because no one else has done it
in 40 years.
He created this amazing, not just landslide, not
really a landslide, but it was an amazing
victory in an environment in which most people
assumed you couldn't have an authoritative victory because
the country is just too closely divided.
So it was an amazing thing that Donald
Trump did a year ago.
So the election was a year ago.
That means the midterm election is a year
from now and the next presidential election two
years after that.
So it's probably not too early to start
thinking through what comes after Donald Trump.
No disrespect to the sitting president, but of
course there's gonna be something after him because
he can't run again.
Okay.
When I heard this, I'm thinking, all right,
exactly one year, this is the anniversary.
We've got to get ready for the midterms.
Something has to happen.
And we know that, and that's the second
time he's saying what happens after Trump?
What happens at the midterms?
What are we going to do?
We have a party that is filled with
good people and bad people and they need
to be rooted out.
And needs to say people are thinking about
that and know they're thinking about they're already
arguing and fighting about it.
There is what Politico is calling a civil
war in the Republican party.
And it's over, of course, identity, because the
only wars we have in this country, the
only sanctioned wars we have domestically are about
identity, BLM, anti-Semitism.
Of course, it's not really what they're ever
about.
These are proxy wars.
These are wars waged on behalf of people
who aren't directly participating for reasons that are
never openly stated.
And this war is actually about what comes
after Donald Trump.
He keeps saying it.
This is all about what happens after Donald
Trump.
Now, at this point, I agree with the
initial sentiment in the troll room.
I'm like, wow, is Tucker going to run
for president?
No, no, that can't be right.
No, he's going to clearly point out what
this is about.
Does the Republican party, the party that now
has power and a lot of money, revert
to what it was before Trump or does
it continue to evolve in the direction that
Trump has steered it?
That's the question.
And on that question hangs a lot.
Well, control of the most powerful country in
the world.
Notice what he's saying here.
He's saying this is about the Republican party.
This is not about Trump.
This is not about Israel.
This is about the Republican party, which Tucker
seems to care a lot about.
The question.
And on that question hangs a lot.
Well, control of the most powerful country in
the world, control of the free world, such
as it is, the shrinking free world.
And an awful lot of jobs for people
and an awful lot of military power.
So there is a lot at stake in
this contest.
So consider the two choices here.
You can go with the Republican party as
it was, which is basically neoconservative foreign policy,
libertarian economic policy, the Republican party of the
think tanks in Washington of the Wall Street
Journal editorial page of all the deep thinkers
in the Republican party.
Deep thinkers.
The ones who are always invoking the same
three Reagan quotes and quoting Tocqueville incorrectly and
doing their little where erudite impression.
Or does it continue to become what it
is currently becoming, which is the party of
Donald Trump?
Well, what is that?
What is MAGA exactly?
How do you make America great again?
Well, Donald Trump in his sort of signature
way, which is to say never quite spelling
everything all the way out is not very
ideological, but instead sort of leading by implication
and by action, the position of Donald Trump
in the last election was America first.
There it is.
This is what everyone has been saying.
No, we want America first.
What Trump is doing is not America first.
Notice that Tucker is on the president's side
here.
He is saying that the president wanted America
first.
At this point, we have no talk about
AIPAC or Israel or Epstein or any of
this stuff.
It's all about rooting out the neocons.
And I completely agree that there are a
bunch of A-holes, we just lost one
yesterday, and Dick Cheney who really were not
good actors in the Republican Party who had
a lot to do with controlling our country,
specifically through the military-industrial complex.
So now Tucker will say here's the other
side that we have that we can look
at.
On the other side is a return to
the Republican Party that we had before, which
is a party that has all kinds of
other agendas, most of which are never publicly
revealed, and that spends a lot of its
time policing its own members.
Now, what does it attempt to achieve by
policing them?
Well, it attempts to achieve silence.
It wants them to shut up about what
is actually happening.
And what is actually happening is that on
the foreign policy side, which is the side
that Washington cares about because it's got the
most money and the most power, you can
literally kill people and there's no power greater
than that, our foreign policy is not wholly
dependent on the whims of Israel.
Of course, we have acting in lots of
parts of the world that have nothing to
do with Israel, but it is unduly influenced
by the concerns of Israel.
And in some cases, the U.S. government
has acted, and these are all well-known.
The Iraq War, for example, has acted in
ways that hurt the United States in order
to help Israel.
It has put the aims of the foreign
power above its own interests.
By the way, I disagree with him that
the Iraq War was about helping Israel.
That was Halliburton's war, and that was a
Bush family op.
We were mad at Saddam Hussein, so I
reject that part of it.
But there you go, he's bringing it in.
And now he's going to tell us that
Elon is, in my storyline here, that Elon
was definitely a part of this op.
And that's immoral, it's illegitimate, it's extremely unpopular
domestically, and it just doesn't work over time.
That's not sustainable.
You can't, there's no way to justify that.
So rather than trying to justify it, they
scream at people and tell them to be
quiet and read them out of the movement
and call them names and threaten them.
But ultimately, because it's not a winning message,
it cannot win over time, particularly if people
are allowed or somehow managed to describe it
accurately.
And unfortunately for the guardians of the old
system, the old Republican Party, people have been
allowed to describe it accurately, mostly because Elon
Musk opened up X.
And when he did that, you get all
kinds of filth and nonsense and lies, but
you also get some truth, actually quite a
bit of truth.
And one of the main things that people
are telling the truth about that they didn't
tell the truth about before is that our
foreign policy really doesn't have much to do
with what's good for the United States.
And once those words have been uttered, they
can't be taken back and they change people's
minds and the polls reflect the fact that
they have.
People's views are different.
So now he gets into the attack mode
and this is where it just blew my,
and I didn't look at the description of
the podcast, I just listened to this while
I'm walking the dog.
I listened to it while I'm getting ready
for bed, brushing my teeth.
And if you think about the true bad
actors being those associated with the military industrial
complex slash AIPAC cloaked under the guise of,
hey, everybody hate Israel because they fund AIPAC
and they control the Congress.
If you wanna get those people out, you
gotta go for the head of the snake.
And Tucker himself is doing this now.
So in the face of this kind of
inevitable change of heart, collective change of heart
in America, where both parties are like, wait,
why are we doing this?
The people who are benefiting from the old
arrangement, which only continued because it was maintained
by threats and silence, those people are going
absolutely bonkers.
And they have been a week and they're
claiming it's about one thing, the Holocaust or
something like that.
But no, really it's about who controls the
Republican Party after Donald Trump.
That's what it's really about.
So ignore the moral posturing.
This is a power struggle as all political
parties have from time to time.
And this one just happens to have a
lot of emotionally unbalanced, hysterical people with no
limits who have access to social media.
So they're scaring the crap out of everybody,
but it's really kind of a conventional power
struggle.
So who are the players in this?
Well, some of them are in the pundit
class.
The more ludicrous ones are in the pundit
class, but some of them are actual sitting
politicians.
And if you were to choose one who
symbolizes what we're actually debating and the stakes
of this conversation, it would have to be
Lindsey Graham.
Lindsey Graham is a senior senator from the
state of South Carolina, one of the most
conservative, reliably Republican states out of 50.
And he has been in Congress since 1994.
So that would be 31 years.
And he is running for yet another term
as a US senator.
He's 70 years old.
He'd like to serve till he's 77.
And he has the support, not simply of
the White House, he has an endorsement from
the president, but he has more donor support,
probably than anyone who's ever run in the
history of the United States.
I mean, Lindsey Graham has so much donor
support and donors just as a numerical question
probably represent, you know, a hundredth of 1
% of the American population, but have a
great deal higher proportion of the money.
He's the most popular candidate they've ever backed.
He's like a higher IQ, less grading Nikki
Haley.
Huh, so Lindsey Graham is the target.
Because he's the most well-funded senator, who
funds Lindsey Graham?
That's actually quite easy to find out if
you look at opensecrets.org.
Top four donors, Lockheed Martin, GE Aerospace, Boeing,
in fact, Boeing has their wonderful plant there
in South Carolina, and the Fluor Corporation.
So this is a strike against the military
industrial complex that controls idiots like Lindsey Graham.
Now, if you want, I can play the
two takedown clips.
It's almost like a no agenda greatest hits
where Lindsey Graham is saying, yeah, that's the
best money ever spent.
We're killing Russians.
Yeah, you know, we're lowering your taxes and
we're killing the right people.
The guy is clearly a ghoul, clearly.
I'm reminded of Matt Gaetz when he was
in Congress.
Commenting once on one of the big shows,
he says, well, Lindsey Graham never met a
war he didn't like.
We had that clip on the show.
Do you wanna hear Tucker's takedown of him
or do you wanna?
Well, I just wanna finish.
Within one cycle, Matt Gaetz was out.
Oh yeah, oh, because it's incredibly powerful.
Incredibly powerful.
The military industrial complex, AIPAC, they control a
heck of a lot.
And what I'm seeing here is Tucker is,
he's the missile and he's working on-
And he's a point man.
He's point man at the behest of the
president who he's good friends with.
He texts with them all the time.
They didn't just fall out of love, but
it's been very quiet between the two of
them.
So I'll leave those, they're longish and we've
heard it all.
But Lindsey Graham, without a doubt, is a
ghoul who likes killing people.
He loves the military and he cloaks it
all under Israel, Israel, he always talked about
Israel, Israel.
It's almost like saying Kiev instead of Kiev.
Israel, Israel.
And again, I had not looked at the
description of this podcast.
And I probably should probably the last little
bit of this Lindsey takedown here, because he
was talking about Lindsey.
Well, here, this is the second clip, it's
worth it.
But if you wonder like who Lindsey Graham
actually is, what his gut instincts are, take
a look at his first reaction to the
death of George Floyd.
And in case you don't remember that story,
it was Memorial Day, 2020, this convicted armed
robber, home invader, drug addict, former porn star
tries to pass a counterfeit bill in a
convenience store, like this poor convenience store owners
in Minneapolis and gets arrested for it and
then promptly dies of a drug OD.
That was all pretty obvious from day one
actually, but that wasn't Lindsey Graham's view at
all.
Here's what Lindsey Graham said about George Floyd.
The topic for the country is what to
do after the death of Mr. Floyd and
what does the death of Mr. Floyd mean?
Well, it's a long overdue wake up call
to the country that there are too many
of these cases where African-American men die
in police custody under fairly brutal circumstances.
Mr. Floyd's case is outrageous on its face,
but I think it speaks to a broader
issue.
I think this committee has the potential to
reinforce things in society that will lead to
better policing.
And hopefully one day, if you're a young
black man and the cops pull up behind
you, you'll be wondering if you were going
too fast rather than you're gonna get beat
up.
It is liberal white women like Lindsey Graham
who are the real problem.
So, okay, that's the setup.
We get it.
Lindsey Graham has to go.
He's incredibly powerful.
He has the biggest military industrialists behind him.
And here's Tucker's payoff.
With that in mind, Paul Danz is running
against Lindsey Graham in the Republican primary, which
is in June of next year.
We don't know a ton about him.
We're about to find out.
But that's all we need to know.
This is unacceptable.
Ladies and gentlemen, Paul Danz.
So how did you decide?
Let's just start at the end.
How did you decide to run against Lindsey
Graham?
Well, I'm original MAGA.
I kind of go back to even H.
Ross Perot days.
And we'll get in a little bit about
how I- So you supported Perot?
Oh, I was a Perot.
Perot was my first vote for president.
I came from a kind of a traditional
ethnic Catholic family, working class.
My parents were the first to go to
college to actually speak English.
My siblings were the first.
My parents spoke Spanish and French at their
households.
But why am I running ultimately against Lindsey
is for God, family, country.
I don't think we have a choice at
this stage.
This is about the future of the movement,
whether MAGA, America first lives or dies.
We have to start thinking post-Trump.
And this is gonna be the fight for
the future of this country.
I was working in the trenches, if you
will, for the last five, seven years, really,
with the Trump admin.
I was the architect of Project 2025.
And right now, this is, I believe God
has a plan for us all.
And this is a calling, but it's also
that I have the life experience.
I cannot sit back and watch somebody like
Lindsey Graham represent our state.
I live God, family, country.
This is it.
Tucker is now kicking off the war to
kick out all of the neocons and the
military-controlled, I think not just Republicans, Democrats
as well.
This is about the midterms.
It's completely about the midterms.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, after Trump, sure.
And I think President Trump doesn't give a
crap.
He's like, hey, I got stuff to do
in the next three years.
I'm probably gonna choose someone to, in fact,
I have another clip from 60 Minutes where
he's talking about the incredible bench they have,
which is true.
J.D. Vance, Marco Rubio, they've got a
lot of interesting people who could totally be
the next president.
Tucker is leading the charge here to get,
this is your draining the swamp, actually.
This is what it is.
And it's cloaked under this clear movement of
people hating Israel's so-called influence over the
American government, which is really done through AIPAC.
Everything is, they need to register as Farah,
blah, blah, blah, okay, fine.
I think that you're gonna see, this is
how the frame, this is the frame I'm
gonna be using for the next couple of
months to see what Tucker does, see how
these podcast wars, so-called wars are used
to push new people, the America first people,
who already work for President Trump.
This guy has been in the Trump administration.
He was there for almost the entire first
term.
Project 2025, come on, this is exactly what
Trump is doing.
And Tucker is the op.
Well, Tucker might be the point man for
the op.
I've noticed that this is very similar to
what Candace Owens is saying about the anti
-Trumpers and MAGA joining hands and something she's
not gonna do.
There was some discussion about that in her
last show, which was a huge hit, by
the way.
And then there was Trump himself, who for
some, I've never seen a president do this
in my entire life, which is Trump himself
and his team is celebrating the first anniversary
of the election, which is a bogus thing
to celebrate if ever there was.
It's like, oh yeah, this is the third
year we've been married, let's have a big
party.
So.
It's our month-aversary.
This is not gonna make it, this is
weak.
Oh really?
It's not gonna cut it, Lindsey Graham is
a pro.
He will shred these guys.
This guy has, I would put money on
the fact that this guy who sounds like
he has the charisma of a rock will
be eaten alive by Lindsey Graham in South
Carolina.
Well, that's very possible.
But he is the chosen one now to
run against Lindsey Graham.
Not gonna happen.
He's amazing.
Lindsey Graham is, he's really, he's a puffy
-faced dude.
Like the power that he has is incredible.
He's a smart guy.
I mean, you know, he's a dummy in
some sense, but he's also politically savvy.
He has a style all his own.
The people of South Carolina keep putting him
in and he's got the money.
He's got the money.
I mean, the combination of ingredients, and he's
the incumbent.
And he can say to the South Carolinians,
look, I'm in here, I've got seniority, and
you, as you know, in Senate and House,
seniority makes a big deal because that puts
me at the head of a lot of
committees and it puts me in a position
where I can help the state.
And this guy, this 2025 guy, he's not
gonna be able to do jack.
He's gonna take him 10 years.
He had to be reelected two or three
times to get as far as I am.
Why would you vote for him?
Yeah, well, Tucker has work cut out for
him.
No doubt.
He's got more than the work cut out
for him.
This is futile.
Okay, well, I hope he succeeds.
I mean, this show has not been a
fan of Lindsey Graham.
That's for sure.
No, no, we have not been a fan
of Lindsey Graham, but there is a moment
where you have to accept the fact that
Lindsey Graham is a force of nature.
What could get Lindsey Graham out?
Anything?
Well, he lives at home with his mother,
supposedly.
I mean, that's what I've heard.
He's obviously gay, but he's not out of
the closet.
Get him on the gay card.
He should come out.
He could hang out with Besson and the
A-gays.
I mean, he's doing it all wrong.
He's doing it perfectly.
I don't know that he has anything in
his closet, any skeletons in the closet.
I don't think so.
He's untouchable.
Well, anyway, I think that's what this is
all about.
Obviously, something's going on, and I think you're
right.
Tucker is always suspect.
Yeah.
And Ben Shapiro on the other side for
the neocons.
That makes total sense.
Well, we have to always remember, or we
don't, but the public generally forgets, especially the
Shapiro fans and the podcast fans, the podcastiverse
or whatever you want to call it, podverse.
Podosphere.
You have to remember that Ben Shapiro hated
Trump.
Oh, yeah.
He was an anti-Trumper from the get
-go.
Yep, yep.
And when he was writing for Breitbart, he's
the one who set up the phony baloney
scandal that made him quit in a huff
over the girl who was supposedly molested by
one of Trump's guys, I forgot his name.
The guy's name starts with an L.
And he grabbed her to move her aside,
and, oh, you hurt me!
And then, oh, this is terrible.
What was her name?
Oh, she was a journalist, wasn't it?
Yeah, she was a journalist.
What was her name?
And the two of them quit and formed
the what they have now, Daily Block, whatever
it is, the Daily Something.
Oh, what was that?
What was her name?
And that whole thing was a scam, and
it was set up, and there's still, I
think even during that period, Lewinsky, not Lewinsky,
that's not the name of the guy, but
something like that.
I think it was.
Oh, no, no, Corey.
Corey.
Corey Lewandowski?
Lewandowski, that's it, right.
And so that guy was railroaded, and so.
You remember that well.
Well, I didn't remember Lewandowski, I didn't remember
that well.
But Shapiro, that's when he made a big
stink, he started his own operation, he started
his podcast, he got a little radio syndication
for a while, that disappeared.
Gosh.
Because he couldn't cut it.
Forgot all about that.
So Shapiro's a suspect.
Hold on, let me see if we can
find it.
It's Corey Lewandowski.
No, I don't see any clips.
It's Corey, C-O-R-E-Y.
But who?
They won't be named, right?
Michelle Fields?
Yes, Michelle Fields, yes, Michelle Fields.
She was the reporter for Breitbart.
That's who it was.
Here we go.
Is this, do we have audio here?
Okay.
Oh, that's not, here, let me get a
report.
I think this is the report.
Lately, the past few weeks, past week and
a half or so, there has been a
lot more tension.
It's from 2016.
These rallies, a lot more violence.
Violence.
And Omarosa says that it's just one protester
who's done this, or Mr. Trump says that
it's just one.
I mean, excuse me, supporter who's punched a
protester.
I have to take issue with that because
we've seen a number of occasions where protesters
have been roughed up by Trump supporters.
So the idea that it's just one guy
acting out of bounds is just frankly not
true.
And I'm trying to press him on his
tone and his rhetoric at these rallies, and
Jake Tapper did during the debate as well.
We have felt at times, me and the
other reporters in the room, that we are
on the precipice of something potentially very bad
happening.
So it's not just one person.
It happens very frequently, and it's happening even
more so.
I also asked Mr. Trump, as you saw,
about this Michelle Fields incident and his campaign
manager.
His campaign manager has been extraordinarily antagonistic towards
the press this entire time.
Clearly, he did not like that line of
questioning.
So far, there has not been video yet
to prove any of her allegations.
Yeah, remember she was showing her bruised arm
and everything?
Oh, man, good recall there, JCD, good recall.
Yeah, well, you know.
Don't get carried away.
It's just one, it's just one so far.
This is, and this goes back, and this
is when Breitbart was a dominant news outlet.
Yes.
They ended up getting kind of shadow banned
by everybody.
They killed him.
They killed him with the red wine poison.
And then Breitbart himself was killed.
The whole thing is shady, and this phony
baloney era early on in the Trump campaign
where there, violence, there were beaten up protesters,
and what were the people protesting about?
The whole thing is crap, and Shapiro's right
in the middle of it.
Yeah.
Wow, yeah.
So, spy versus spy, op versus op.
Your no agenda show is on it.
And I might as well play this little
bit from the, I loved watching the president
in his 60 minutes overtime, which is the
only 60 minutes you want to watch.
You want to watch the full interview.
Yeah, absolutely, it's funnier.
It's much funnier.
They take all the funny stuff out of
the real interview.
Yeah, and they put in clips and stuff.
Who needs that?
Give me the raw stuff, like a podcast.
Nora was very nice to him.
And here is the- Nora, let's stop
there for a second.
So, in the early, in 2016 era, Nora,
when she was on the morning show, she
was on CBS, but she was the early
girl.
They moved her up to the news anchor
later.
The early girl!
And she would, when Trump's name would ever
come up, she would just grimace, and she,
you know, because she's pretty if she smiles,
and, you know, looks bright eyed.
But she has an angry look, and she
had it all throughout this interview.
She tried as hard as she could to
be nice.
She did pretty good.
She did okay.
I don't think so.
So here's Trump explaining how he will be
able to run in 2028.
It didn't get a lot of, not the
play I expected it to get.
There's been a lot of talk about 2028,
and who will be at the top of
the Republican ticket.
Can you set the record straight, you're not
going to try and run for a third
term?
Well, I don't even think about it.
I will tell you, a lot of people
want me to run, but the difference between
us and the Democrats is we really do
have a strong bench.
I don't want to use names because it's,
you know, inappropriate, but it's too early.
Three and a quarter years.
But people do like when you start talking
about whether you like J.D. Vance or
Secretary Rubio.
I do like J.D. Vance.
I like Marco Rubio.
I like so many people.
We have an unbelievable bench.
We could run two people together.
We have a great bench.
So I don't want to start talking about
elections.
It's too early.
One thing I can tell you, the 2020
election was rigged, and a lot of people
say, when it's rigged, you're allowed to do
it again.
It was rigged, and it's been caught, and
you see the same information that everybody else
does, and it's coming out now in Spanish.
A lot of people say.
I love it.
I don't know why I missed that, but
that's hilarious.
It's so good.
And she's there.
She's so flat-footed.
She doesn't, she can't do any repartee with
him because she hates him.
What people?
And she can barely keep a smile on
her face, and that is, that right there,
she should, any good interviewer would have cracked
up laughing.
Of course, of course.
What people say, what people say?
The Supreme Court?
The Supreme Court says that?
Does the Constitution say that?
And by the way, I think they nailed
11 or 14.
I can't remember.
Probably 11 million viewers for that episode, and
I think they averaged normally three or four.
Whatever the case is, it was a ratings
bonanza for 60 minutes, which Trump always is.
Of course he is.
And they just, it just bugs them to
no end.
They still hate him.
And I mean.
The hate is, I think the hate is
visceral.
It's apparent to me, and it was there
with Nora.
It's so good, and I got a lot
of people emailing me, like, oh, was this
the deal he made with Barry Weiss?
I said, no, Barry Weiss turns out to
be pretty smart.
It's like, get the president to do an
interview with someone who at least won't be
yelling at him.
Let him talk, let him say his thing,
and then you'll see that people like it
and people want to watch it.
It's like, I'm impressed.
I'm already impressed with Barry Weiss.
Way to go.
Well, I think they, you know, the last
thing she pushed was the other interview that
was on his show.
I think it was Witkoff and Kushner.
Yeah, Witkoff, right.
And it was boring.
It was very boring.
Because those two guys are boring, and they
set her up, they made the interview boring
to prove that Barry Weiss doesn't know what
she's doing.
It was also Leslie Stahl who did that
interview, and she's annoying.
Right, she's terrible.
She's too old.
Yeah.
She's not too old for a podcast.
No, she's too old for a podcast.
She'd be a terrible podcaster.
Yes.
You're fired.
You're fired from podcasting, said the podcaster.
When you can't do a podcast, that's saying
something.
Yeah.
So they set that up so it was
a flop, and it was, and so then
she came up with this idea, I'm sure,
and they tried to make it a flop
by putting Nora in, who hates Trump, I
mean, I like the way you think about
it, it's different, but that's the way I
see it.
And it turned out, because Trump is Trump,
it got a big ratings hit.
Now, 60 Minutes, the team there is screwed
because now they have to listen to Barry
Weiss if she has more suggestions.
She got clout now, all of a sudden.
The Twinkle Toes Skydance is like, hey, we
love you, Barry, good job.
Everybody listen to Barry.
We know how that goes in corporate life.
David.
One minute you're up, next minute, oh, we
never liked her.
David Allison does a memo to all, all
at Skydance, all at Skydance.com.
Hey, everybody, look, we're so proud of Barry,
good job.
And then President Trump got to do his
peace president bit.
It was fantastic.
But I brought, I mean, just a little
list of, look at this.
I got a little list, I got a
little list.
I have a peace list.
But I brought, I mean, just a little
list of, look at this.
Wars, how many did I solve?
Cambodia, this is.
I solved them.
Cambodia, Thailand, Kosovo, Serbia, Congo, the Congo, and
Rwanda.
Pakistan and India, that was gonna be a
beauty.
They shot down seven planes.
Israel and Iran, you've heard about that one?
Egypt and Ethiopia, that's another beauty.
Ethiopia built a big dam where there's no
water going to the Nile.
Armenia and Azerbaijan.
And if you take a look, Israel and
Hamas, which is a, you know, rough little
situation, but it's gonna be.
I do wanna talk about, I mean, you
have branded yourself the peace president.
Well, I think I did pretty good.
I solved those eight of the nine wars.
She walked right into that.
Solved, you know how I solved them?
I said, in many cases, in 60%, I
said, if you don't stop fighting, I'm putting
tariffs on both of your countries, and you're
not gonna be able to do business with
the United States.
Why isn't that working with Putin?
It is working with Putin, I think.
What are you talking about?
It's working.
Can't you see?
I did different with him.
By the way, that was a good question
on her part.
And he had a great answer.
Yeah, he came.
Well, because, what the problem is, these scripter,
these people that just read from a script
and they can't, they're not fast on their
feet because they don't do podcasting.
Can't think, can't think.
They can't think, so they get, Trump just,
you know, circles them around, and around, and
around, and they don't know what they're doing.
It's terrible.
For people, and we have a lot of
listeners who don't like President Trump, you are
watching incredible history in the making.
Enjoy these three remaining years.
Really, enjoy it, because you will never, in
your life, well, we won't, but you, even
the Gen Z-ers.
I don't think anybody will.
This guy's a singular character.
You'll never see anything like this in your
life.
This is your JFK.
Not comparing him to JFK, but what he
is doing is, you know, all of the,
so, and this will probably, this should probably
lead us into Mamadani.
So, you've got all of these Republicans who
were running for governor and, you know, other,
and, of course, mayor in New York, and
they, and they, they are so stupid.
They didn't follow, he even said it, I
think, they didn't follow Trump's lead of saying,
okay, look, we've got the border, the woke
stuff.
That's not what people are interested in right
now.
Now they want economy better.
They want to hear the economy's doing better.
What are we doing?
I can't believe that the New Jersey governor's
race was lost to a Democrat when he
literally has a deal like three miles from
the New Jersey state line in Pennsylvania to
build ships, South Korean ships.
He's brought in billions of dollars of deals
and we're financing it with credit lines to
these countries for South Korea, for Japan, for
Argentina.
These are credit lines.
We are in control of the financing, not
Wall Street.
He's, him and Besson, gotta give Besson props.
I'm not quite sure where this guy came
from, but they are doing incredible things, which
will work.
If they don't kill Trump, that seriously keeps
crossing my mind, he is going to turn
the United States back into a country where
you can get a good $80,000, $100
,000 a year job working on building big,
beautiful ships and other stuff.
He's pushing trade schools for everybody, pushing it.
This is really, it's an amazing moment to
me and people who are all mad and
sitting around, Epstein files, you're missing out on
a great show.
You really are.
I think it's a great show.
What do you think, John?
What do you think of the show?
He's this entertainer.
He's a total entertainer.
Well, the reason that that woman kicked his
ass in New Jersey is because he was,
he attached himself to Trump in such a
way that he became associated with the stoppage
of the building of that tunnel.
Yeah, he screwed that one up.
He screwed it up.
He should have just divorced himself and said,
we need to get that tunnel built because
that's a job killer.
And he screwed up and it was just
a massive screw up because he was a
little too much of a Trump, a sycophant.
Yeah, sycophant, yeah.
I like to say sycophant.
So then we have, and did we talk
about this?
I told you about, yeah, we did talk
about the Flynn nonprofit, America's Future.
They had their little get together in Washington.
Yeah, we talked a little bit about it.
Yeah, because this is the next thing you'll
be hearing about.
So the next thing we all have to,
and this is specifically for conservatives and Republicans.
Everybody, hair on fire.
We're gonna be like, Europe, Islam has taken
over.
I already saw fake videos of like, Times
Square.
Maybe it was real, I don't know, but
you don't know anymore.
They'll be like, oh, we're doing prayer on
Times Square five times a day.
New York is turning completely Muslim.
Not the same story in Europe as it
is here in the United States.
Is there some danger?
Yeah, of course there always is.
But even my friends in the men's text
groups, like, oh, oh no, New York forgot
all about 9-11.
Now they've elected a Muslim.
Like, oh man, there's a big difference between
what happened on 9-11 and this jamoke,
this theater kid.
And New York just let that happen.
Who was your friend who said, oh, your
New York friend who said, oh no, he's
not gonna get elected.
Who was that?
Didn't you have a friend who said that
to you?
Yeah, one of an actress friend of mine.
Right, right.
I guess she forgot to vote.
No, we got a Zed in New York.
She's like, yeah, we love it.
We love it.
It's fantastic.
We can't wait for it.
Cuomo's a sex predator, so we didn't want
him.
You know, Sliwab, who cares about him?
Don't even know the guy's name, really.
Well, there's a couple of things.
There's demographic changes in New York, which are
extreme.
And they also, all the Republicans have left.
They don't live in New York.
They're either living out of- Florida or
Texas.
Florida, or they're in Jersey, or they're someplace
else.
But they're not in New York.
And they can't vote there.
And some of them work there, but a
lot of them live in Connecticut.
Yeah, for sure.
And so they're not voting there.
And you end up with, if you look
at the numbers, it was 93% of
all the votes cast in those New York
City elections was Democrats, 93%.
That is one party rule.
So you just need one guy who's charismatic.
And that he is.
Well, he's very charismatic.
And I'm happy, by the way, because the
next time the Gen Z-er runs into
some financial troubles, I'll just say, ask your
boy, Mom Donnie.
He'll take care of you.
So there were two analyses.
The best one was by, and I reposted
it on Twitter, at the real Dvorak, again,
I've mentioned this before.
Have you gone down again?
What happened to my numbers?
Are you going down again?
No, it's just frozen at 100,009.
What am I at?
It's just, you're at 99.
I can never, I cannot crack 100K.
That's because they're put, they're limiters.
They're called, you know how audio works?
Yes, I do.
99.2. Hey, everybody, it's Adam Curry, 99
.2 FM.
I'm never going to 100, ever.
You might, but it's beside, somebody's got to
change your number limit.
Change my number, my limiter.
It's a limiter is what it is.
Yeah, I'm with you.
So, it was Glenn Greenwald who took, actually,
Candace Owens, the day before, ran this clip,
which I'm going to play, which he claims
is how the election was won.
It was won in the first debate, because
all these guys were a bunch of stooges,
and Mamdami stood out like a sore thumb
as a good guy, and it was a
setup question.
Glenn Greenwald, which is retweeted, you can go
look at this presentation, takes it a little
step further, and analyzes it with some of
his Mamdani's videos, and some of the stuff
he did on social media.
He went out like a man on the
street.
He was like the Johnny.
Glenn Greenwald?
Went out with a microphone and went floating.
Sorry?
Glenn Greenwald did that?
No, Mamdani.
Oh, Mamdani did that.
Oh, well, yeah, and then edited everything the
way he wanted to.
Perfect, very smart.
He, well, it was more complex than that,
and it was, the stuff was edited in
favor of Trump, of all things.
Oh, interesting.
So you'd have to watch the Greenwald presentation,
but he had to watch the whole thing,
but he stole the basis from Candace the
way I see it.
I could be wrong.
I don't think they thought of it the
same way.
So Candace says that the whole thing was
run, won in the debate, and the debate
was begun with a setup question to try
to trap Mamdani to make him look like.
Is this the Israel question?
Yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Because the question, I have it here, it's
the first clip.
This is from the debate, and the question
is bullcrap.
It comes out, the first question is, or
this question that was asked during the debate
was, you know, it's important that the mayor
go visit foreign countries, and it's always symbolic,
the first one they go to, this is
bullcrap.
That's complete bullcrap.
The question was just bullcrap, and it was
designed to get Mamdani to say he won't
go to Israel, which he did say.
But then he backs.
He had a better answer.
And then he backs it up with, yeah,
he had a great answer.
Everyone else is, Kis, he's going, these guys
are stupid, and Cuomo, it seems as if,
because he argues at the end of this
clip, trying to embarrass Mamdani, it seems that
the whole thing was set up to push
for Cuomo, which, you know, it was a
setup.
It was a setup question, the whole thing
was rigged.
Backfired.
Mamdani was totally, he may have gotten the
question, his team may have gotten the questions
beforehand.
We know this happens with Democrats.
I think he was, I heard this when
it happened.
I think we even talked about it briefly
on the show.
I'm like, this is an amazing answer for
a New York mayoral candidate.
The first foreign visit by a mayor of
New York is always considered significant.
Where would you go first?
Left, right, or south?
First visit, I would visit the Holy Land.
Mr. Cuomo?
Given the hostility and the anti-Semitism that
has been shown in New York, I would
go to Israel.
Mr. Tilson, where would you go?
Yeah, I'd make my fourth trip to Israel,
followed by my fifth trip to Ukraine, two
of our greatest allies, fighting on the front
lines of the global war on terror.
Mr. Mamdani?
I would stay in New York City.
My plans are to address New Yorkers across
the five boroughs and focus on that.
Mr. Mamdani, can I just jump in?
Would you visit Israel as mayor?
I will be doing, as the mayor, I'll
be standing up for Jewish New Yorkers and
I'll be meeting them wherever they are across
the five boroughs, whether that's in their synagogues
and temples or at their homes or at
the subway platform, because ultimately, we need to
focus on delivering on their concerns.
And just yes or no, do you believe
in a Jewish state of Israel?
I believe Israel has the right to exist.
Not as a Jewish state?
As a state with equal rights.
He won't say it has a right to
exist as a Jewish state, be very clear
on that.
And his answer was, no, he won't visit
Israel.
I said that.
What he was trying to say.
No, no, no, unlike you, I answer questions
very directly.
My goal would be to take my first
trip to Israel.
My wife's life work in this area means
a lot to our family and it could
coincide with my young son, Myles Bar Mitzvah.
Yeah, I think this theory is correct.
It is probably one of the few debate
clips that made it into my timeline, my
sphere, my email, whatever.
So it must have been the one that
had the most virality that people saw.
And of course, it's almost like Trump America
first, New York first.
It's a simple answer.
There was a setup and it blew right
up, blew up in their face.
Yeah, they all lost their asses to this
guy because of that.
Now, Candace, of course, goes off a little
bit on it to ridicule the Israelis and
the Jews and the rest of them.
So I have that little piece of it.
Now, I don't have the whole thing because
she is like Dave Smith.
She's talking it.
M'kay.
And so she goes off, but this little
part is good.
But the green-walled version of this is
better and I'd recommend people go look at
it on Twitter.
This is Candace.
This is our country, you guys.
That's it.
You know what?
I'm gonna take my 19th trip to Israel.
Oh, well, I'm gonna take my first trip
after my son's Bar Mitzvah.
Oh, I was planning on stopping over on
the way for our honeymoon.
We were gonna stop and just go to
Israel and do whatever we could.
It's ridiculous and it's obvious.
And the way that the establishment comes down,
if you don't peddle those talking points, he
says something totally normal.
And we have to remember that Candace was
a Democrat before the whole Kanye thing.
And I don't even know where she stands
politically anymore, but she's right about this.
Of course.
Of course she is.
But, and again, the debate over Israel and
America is over.
And I just wanna accentuate this.
We got another note from one of our
producers.
He has a millennial and a Gen Z.
I just need to share this because it's
good information for you and for I.
My two kids could not be more unlike
each other.
They are eight years apart.
My millennial stepson, 26, who introduced us all
to hypno-sissy porn is mentally not doing
well.
I know this producer because we've read other
notes from him about the hypno-sissy porn.
He has held the job for about a
year, which is great.
However, he requires that we acknowledge his greatness
for holding his job.
He literally thinks that we should go to
his place of work to witness his greatness
in action.
His claim is that we no longer show
him love and do not support him or
take part in his life.
From our perspective, he is verbally abusive, brags
about every little thing he does.
He's tolerable, one to two visits a month.
He thinks we should be hanging out with
him and his friends.
Everyone I know with a kid that is
22 to 29 is effed up, confused about
their sexuality, addicted to perverted pornography, unable to
create careers, unable to create healthy relationships.
These kids all went to therapy and they
are worse for it.
Our son's therapists have turned him against us
and honestly played a big role in his
drift into transgender lifestyle.
They created shame instead of helping him work
through it.
These kids needed a pastor, not a therapist.
They'll be remembered as the loneliest generation.
Now, my 18-year-old Gen Z could
not be more different.
About three years ago, he was led to
Christ through friends.
His entire friend group is from church.
Church is their social place.
When we were kids, we used to go
to parties and get wasted.
They go to church.
He met a wonderful church girl that he
has been dating.
He's attending Liberty University.
God has done really amazing things in his
life.
I'm incredibly grateful as the church filled in
some parenting pieces that as parents we didn't
think of.
He is not alone.
A large percentage of kids around his age
are church kids.
He got me to attend a couple of
times and the number of kids from 15
to 20-year-olds was very surprising.
Liberty streams the twice-weekly convocations.
I watched the convocations.
He says, these kids all watch Nick Fuentes.
They are all anti-DEI.
They are all skeptical of Israel.
They are skeptical of Erika Kirk.
They are anti-abortion.
Pornography and phone use are their big issues
and they are aware of the issues.
However, when we were kids, we had don't
drink and drive and this is your brain
on drugs campaigns.
They need the same to make these issues
equally as scary.
Wow.
There's someone boots on the ground who says
the loneliest generation is the millennials and they're
screwed.
And these Gen Z kids, when it comes
to Israel, they're skeptical.
You're not gonna convince them any other way.
So might as well use it for political
gain and that's exactly what Mamdani did here
in the right way.
Well, I don't think the Israel issue was
that front facing with him so much because
I looked at a lot of his stuff.
He is mostly about, he pushed the affordability
issues and he also got 35% of
the Jewish vote in New York City.
Yeah, that's amazing, isn't it?
And so there's that.
I don't think, and of course I wrote
a column on this predicting all this, of
course, nailing it.
Not to pat myself on the back.
Would you like an award?
We can do a special- Yes, a
peace prize.
A peace prize?
So the point is, is that we don't
know how he's going to govern because he
has no experience.
Oh no, of course, it's gonna be a
group of people just like they ran Biden.
It's gonna be, yes, it's gonna be, if
he can put a team together that can
govern and advise him- He's not putting
anything together.
He's already got a team.
He has a team, yeah.
He's already got a team and this is
a bad sign.
He made a big point in mentioning that
his transition team, all female.
Oh no, it's gonna be horrible.
He made an announcement that the transition team
is all female and to do that is
a bad sign.
Of course it is.
A bad sign for New York, but this
is what they want.
This is the DSA, which by the way,
I did some research in the DSA.
It's not actually a party.
I mean, it's just a group.
They do have a website.
They have a website, but it's not a
political party.
They're a group and they've got funding and
there's unions in there.
A lot of socialists and Marxists.
Mostly socialists.
And Islamists.
Yeah, yeah.
Like radical type people, not people who practice
Islam or Muslim, but Islamists, serious like, what
are you doing?
And it's gonna suck.
Of course, it's gonna be horrible.
And it will be great, because we can
all look at New York and say, we
don't want that.
Yes, you're kind of hoping it sucks.
Yes.
I think, I hate to say that I'm
hoping it sucks.
Yeah.
Because I like New York and I've worked
there and it's like, I don't.
I live there, of course.
I love New York.
Yeah, you live there.
So it's, we don't dislike the city and
it, but it does go through these phases.
I mean, I went the first time I
went to New York, that's when Dinkins was
the mayor.
Oh, worst mayor ever.
Dinkins was bad.
He was really bad.
I was living and working there when Dinkins
was mayor.
It was horrible.
Yeah, well, sorry to hear that.
So I went there and I will say
that the change, then Giuliani came along and
the changes were so radical.
And fast.
Yeah.
It was really fast.
So the town can turn on a dime.
But I do recall during the Dinkins era,
and I don't want to get into any
details, but the town was a lot of
fun.
Well, yeah, Times Square, it was still dangerous.
It was great.
It was, it was, it was a fun
place.
It was a fun town.
Times Square is like.
You had to be careful, but it was
fun.
Yes, yeah, you had to be very careful.
I had a rabbit fur leather coat, full
length leather coat.
I walked around Times Square like a pimp.
It was great.
And there was, you know, dirty movies and
hookers and.
Oh, that 42nd Street, the theater.
The theater district.
The line of theaters was all filth.
Yeah, and then.
Which reminds me, by the way, I'm going
to bring this up.
That you went to that mystery party, you
had the hottie give the lucivious note to
you that you read on the show.
Yes.
And we talked about this, Lurid, I guess
was the name of it, I'd call it
a note.
At the dinner table.
You had a chat about this at the
dinner table?
No, no, I was thinking about it.
No, I had a chat with you after
the show about it.
And there was a piece of information you
left out.
What was that?
That she conveyed that I thought should have
been talked about on the show.
What part was that?
That all the women she knows.
Oh, yes, well, that wasn't in the note.
Let me, I'm happy to tell everybody that.
Hey, I got a lot on my mind,
okay?
There's a lot going on in this show.
So it's not like I withheld it, but
yes.
No, I didn't say you withheld it, I
just said I wanted you, because it came
in after the show, and I knew it
wasn't gonna come up out of the blue
unless I brought it up.
She said that all the women that listen
to the show, she says, of the women
she knows that listen to the show, all
feel that I am very mean to you.
Yeah, I think she's dead on.
And I said- The women are very
observant.
Yes, and she said, and we like it.
I mean, she said, we'd like it.
Didn't say that.
You somehow have an incredible sex appeal amongst
the 30 to 40 year olds, female.
That's, it's uncanny, really.
There's something, which of course, is partially due
to our lack of video on the podcast.
Yeah, because if you saw me, oh, I
don't know, I don't think so.
All right.
All right, that's a good one.
There's an example of you being mean to
me.
She's nailed it.
That's a perfect example right there.
Subtle, but yet there it is.
You're, you know, you're one chance of being
funny and it has to be at my
expense.
Of course, yes.
Well, as we say in the old country,
what you love, you make fun of.
Oh, that's a good one.
That's true.
All right, onward.
Yes, onward.
You're on Mom Donny.
Do I have any more Mom Donny?
Well, you've got Mom Donny NTD clips or
you've got the acceptance opener.
You've got all kinds of Mom Donny stuff.
Oh yeah, so I wanted to, that's right.
The acceptance opener.
I watched the whole 23 minutes.
This guy's like Trump.
I'm sorry.
He goes on and on and on and
he cycles, he cycles.
He's very Trumpy in this guy.
Except for the fact that he's a socialist
and he's going to screw up because he's
going to have an all women team or
whatever he's going to do wrong.
Wait, how many of the women are black
and how many of the women are black
and gay?
They're all over the map.
You can count on being trans, black, you
know, Hispanics.
There's probably not a white girl in there.
All right, perfect.
And so, so this is the, so he
starts off, his public speaking is so much,
it's the best Democrat speaker.
He speaks like an old...
In a long time.
Sorry, what?
The best Democrat speaker we've seen in a
long time.
Better than Obama.
Oh yeah.
He is outstanding and he's got writers.
This speech, this 23 minute ad lib acceptance
speech was written months ago and massaged and
massaged.
I only have a couple of minutes of
it.
I'm not gonna, and this is just the
opening.
He got, later on when he attracts, attracts,
attacks Trump and does other things.
It's all well structured and he's, it's a
little long.
He's boring.
This is a problem he's gonna have because
he's using the Trump model.
Trump is boring.
I hate to tell you this, but I've
seen him on these things.
He goes on, he talks at least 10
minutes too long.
Sometimes he just goes on too much.
I mean, it's funny for a while and
then you get sick of it.
This guy's gonna be the same way.
He's gonna talk you to death, but listen
to the poetic way he presents the opening
of this speech.
The sun may have set over our city
this evening, but as Eugene Debs once said.
Oh yeah, that's good.
I can see the dawn of a better
day for humanity.
For as long as we can remember, the
working people of New York have been told
by the wealthy and the well-connected that
power does not belong in their hands.
Fingers bruised from lifting boxes on the warehouse
floor, palms calloused from delivery bike handlebars, knuckles
scarred with kitchen burns.
These are not hands that have been allowed
to hold power.
And yet over the last 12 months, you
have dared to reach for something greater.
Tonight, against all odds, we have grasped it.
The future is in our hands.
My friends, we have toppled a political dynasty.
I wish Andrew Cuomo only the best in
private life, but let tonight be the final
time I utter his name as we turn
the page on a politics that abandons the
many and answers only to the few.
Oh man, I never expected Debs to be
the hero of today's socialists.
That's amazing.
Well, Eugene Debs is code.
You drop his name to indicate you're a
socialist because he's a famous, probably the most
famous socialist he's ever- He went to
jail, I think.
Yes, he was in jail, wrote a lot
of stuff in jail, very famous for being
in jail.
He ran for president from jail.
The socialists of this country, the communists, there's
a lot of Democrats, the super lefties, if
you say you even know who he is,
they go nuts.
I gotta tell you that- Eugene Debs
is code, it's a code word.
I don't think I saw a single M5M
talking head even mention that he talked about
Debs.
I did.
Oh, you did?
Okay.
Yeah, I can't remember.
I can't tell you who, probably it was
Fox.
Right, of course, but not on MSNBC or
CNN.
No, no, no, nobody else would know.
None of that.
Which brings me to a point.
I don't know if I have any clips
on this, but- Make a point.
I have a letter from a guy.
We were talking about Comey's been indicted and
now they're gonna go after Brennan, it looks
like, and all these other things.
And it's based on a, I'm working on
a column, and so there's a thought process
here.
Arctic Frost.
Yes.
Now, this came out of finding a bunch
of burn bags in an obscure room-
Yes.
Outside of a scaffold.
And by the way, what's the point of
putting it in a burn bag and not
burning the bag?
Who dropped it?
Well, we have a note from one of
our military insiders.
There we go, boots on the ground.
ITM Legends.
Please keep me anonymous for the sake of
law information.
Legends, there you go.
Legends.
We are the legends.
He's got the right idea.
Burn bags come back to the forefront with
the Comey investigation allegedly revealing troves of burn
bags with classified material from them from years
ago.
I'd imagine many people are wondering how could
this even be possible?
The answer is absolutely.
I am a retired military officer who's done
entire tours working in SCIFs, S-C-I
-F, which stands for, I forgot.
Secure communications, something tent.
Basically it's a tent.
It's a room.
It's a tent in the room, yeah.
You have a cubby outside the door that
you put your personal electronic devices in.
You scan access card or enter a code
and you go in for work.
You can only enter these spaces if your
clearance will allow it.
Advantages of SCIFs are you can have open
classified material and work on anything you need
to without fear of prying eyes or any
sort of security concerns.
These areas typically have burn bags in most
offices or cubicles.
There are also burn bags located by the
approved paper shredders in common spaces within the
SCIF.
So the bags are in there.
There's paper shredders into the whole thing.
The truth of the matter is that these
burn bags rarely get emptied into the shredder
and most of the time just get moved
into some secure location like a broom closet
or supply room and forgotten about.
Most people just place their unwanted classified material
in a burn bag and assume someone else
will dispose of it at an appropriate manner
according to the classification.
Very rarely does this happen.
Honestly, I am surprised that more incriminating material
hasn't been found about more classified, what is
this word, funny, more classified operations in old
forgotten burn bags.
I guess they're all over the place.
What's interesting, this is the final paragraph.
What's interesting is there's about six hours of
required training annually, annually on how to handle,
transport, maintain, and dispose of classified material appropriately.
Clearly, most people don't pay attention during the
disposal section of that training.
Hope this helps.
Wow.
So it's, how typical is that?
It just sounds, I've worked for the government
long enough.
I'm reading this, yep.
Government nonsense.
Yep.
Wow.
I put it in the burn bag.
Both, I put it in the burn bag,
both, I did my jobs.
So there's probably a trove of material that
they're gonna go after Comey and Clapper and
Brennan, all this stuff with the Arctic frost.
So I'm thinking, because I'm gonna write a
column about this because none of the mainstream
media is writing at all about Arctic frost,
none of them.
Right.
So if you recall, some years ago, we
had one of our contacts talk about how,
if you have a security clearance or you
work for an Intel agency, even if something's
released that's classified and it's a public domain,
it's on the New York Times.
You're not allowed to read it.
Wait, don't we have the Cuomo kid talking
about that?
Famous.
Somebody was talking about it, but it's also
been, it was brought up on the show.
We discussed it in detail.
So I'm thinking, hold on a second.
Why aren't the big newspapers and outlets discussing
Arctic frost?
Because they're all spooks.
Are they so compromised that all the reporters
are read in and they're not allowed to
read it or talk about it?
Yeah, because they're all spooks.
They're all spooks.
Yeah, exactly.
Wow.
Yeah.
Because there's no reason, this is a great
story.
It is a good story.
It's a great story.
So here's the- Now with the burn
bag information, oh my God.
Here's the, it's about a minute and a
half from the 60 Minutes interview edited.
This is Trump on Comey and Bolton, et
cetera.
I want to ask you about another matter.
James Comey, John Bolton, Letitia James were all
recently indicted.
There's a pattern to these names.
They're all public figures who have publicly denounced
you.
Is it political retribution?
You know what, you know who got indicted?
The man you're looking at.
I got indicted and I was innocent.
And here I am because I was able
to beat all of the nonsense that was
thrown at me.
But you can't then accuse me of weaponizing
government.
They were horrible human beings.
They went after the president of the United
States.
They went after my children.
They went into my wife's drawers.
They went into my wife's closets.
They held the dresses up.
She came back, she said, oh, what happened?
What happened?
Because she's a very meticulous person.
Everything's nice and neat.
These are crooked people.
These are just, so don't ask me about,
did you go after?
Letitia James, in my opinion, and I only
say in my opinion because I guess the
lawyers would prefer that I say that because
I have a much stronger opinion.
She's a total crook.
She's a lowlife.
Comey's a dirty cop.
Bolton actually helped me a lot because he
was crazy.
He's the one, him and Cheney, a couple
of people, got Bush to go out and
blow the hell out of the Middle East
and then take, you know, then leave.
And actually, Bolton helped me because every time
somebody saw Bolton standing behind me, foreign countries,
they conceded.
You know why they conceded?
Because they said, Bolton's a nutjob.
Trump is going to take us to war.
But I don't listen to people that are
stupid.
Oh, oh, this is fabulous.
Bolton's a nutjob.
He's a nutjob.
Now, I want to mention to people out
there that don't know this because they keep
bringing this Bolton thing up.
The Bolton investigation began during the Biden administration.
This is nothing new that Trump started.
Right, okay.
Okay, if you don't mind, I asked Rob,
the constitutional lawyer, about the Supreme Court.
The tariff decision, I have some clips.
Yeah, you want to play your clips for
us?
Yeah, maybe then you can.
Yeah, I can add some color, maybe.
You can do the clarification.
I can try, yes.
What do we have here?
You have- Supreme, oh, yes.
I have it, unfortunately, spelled Foo-preem.
Yeah, it's okay.
I speak Dvorak, so it's not a problem.
So the Foo-preem Coot tariffs.
How'd you even get to F?
This D is in the middle between F
and S.
The F and the S, they're two keys
apart.
I have no idea.
Okay, but it happened.
It happens, it's okay.
The Foo-preem Court.
The Trump administration saying it's optimistic after attending
the SCOTUS arguments on President Trump's global tariffs
And the president speaking to business leaders in
Miami today, reacting to last night's election results.
We now go live to NTD's Washington correspondent,
Mari Otu, at the White House.
Good evening, Mari.
What is the administration saying about the president's
tariff case?
Tiff, good evening.
Treasury Secretary Scott Besant, just a little while
ago, is saying that he's, quote, very optimistic
about the Supreme Court case that's considering the
legality of President Trump's global tariffs.
And Besant, who attended the arguments today, says
that the Solicitor General presented what he calls,
quote, strong persuasive arguments.
And he says that the plaintiffs fundamentally misunderstood
and misrepresented President Trump's trade goals.
Take a look.
It gives him the ultimate negotiating authority.
Sometimes the best tariffs are the ones that
never get enforced.
Every camera, every iPhone here would have been
subject to a Chinese patrol.
Because he had the ability to threaten 100
% tariff, he was able to successfully execute
on foreign policy.
Okay.
I'm glad you have these, because this is
all positive.
Yeah, I think they say, well, NTD, you
know, they- Yeah, of course.
They hate China, so fupreme good.
They have to like Trump.
China bad, fupreme good.
President Trump has repeatedly emphasized that without his
tariffs, there would be no national security.
And meanwhile, President Trump today is reminiscing about
his election victory exactly a year ago while
lamenting the results of last night's election.
Take a look.
I'm a very modest person.
I would never say this.
The single most consequential election victory in American
history.
President Trump celebrates the anniversary of his 2024
election win and proclaims the golden age of
America.
November 5th, 2024, the American people reclaimed our
government.
We restored our sovereignty.
We lost a little bit of sovereignty last
night in New York, but we'll take care
of it.
Don't worry about it.
While reacting to Republican losses on election night.
By the way, it's even better.
So I'm always misspelling tariffs because I always
do double R, one F.
Just it's like, it's hard to get it
out of my system.
So you have tariffs spelled correctly, but you
have fupreme coot.
It's even better.
You don't even have the R in coot.
If I get closer to the screen, it
might help.
I do have the tariffs analysis clip, which
is this one that's standalone.
It says- Yes, I got it.
I got it.
The Trump administration solicitor general defended the president's
power to impose global tariffs on Wednesday before
a skeptical panel of Supreme Court justices.
Skeptical.
On April 2nd, President Trump determined that our
exploding trade deficits had brought us to the
brink of an economic and national security catastrophe.
He further pronounced that the traffic of fentanyl
and other opioids into our country has created
a public health crisis taking hundreds of thousands
of American lives.
President Trump has declared that these emergencies are
country killing and not sustainable, that they threaten
the bedrock of our national and economic security,
and that fixing them will make America a
strong, financially viable, and respected country again.
A handful of small businesses in 12 Democratic
states have accused the president of overstepping his
authority by imposing global tariffs where the law
doesn't allow it.
They maintain that only Congress has the power
to regulate tariffs.
Tariffs are taxes.
They take dollars from Americans' pockets and deposit
them in the U.S. Treasury.
Our founders gave that taxing power to Congress
alone.
Yet here, the president bypassed Congress and imposed
one of the largest tax increases in our
lifetimes.
Many doctrines explain why this is illegal, like
the presumption that Congress speaks clearly when it
imposes taxes and duties, and the major questions
doctrine.
But it comes down to common sense.
It's simply implausible that in enacting IEPA, Congress
handed the president the power to overhaul the
entire tariff system and the American economy in
the process.
The court is not expected to make a
ruling today, but it appears that the justices
are concerned about the Trump administration's regulation of
tariffs globally, with several justices questioning whether he
properly interpreted the statute in question.
Oh, that was kind of middle of the
road.
That was NTD, and they kind of got
the main talking point, which came out, interestingly
enough, within 30 minutes of the three hours
that this took.
It was supposed to be, I think it
was supposed to be 90 minutes, they went
for 180 minutes.
But right away, within 30 minutes, which was
the opening questions, and they were grilling the
administration's lawyer, the Solicitor General, I forget his
name, who has a very, very unfortunate voice.
And so Bloomberg- And he doesn't clear
his throat.
And so Bloomberg comes out with this.
What's got your attention in these arguments today?
Well, I think I would agree, I think
with most commentators so far, that it does
feel like the justices as a whole are
leaning toward the plaintiffs away from the government
and really challenging the government on their interpretation
of the statute, on the delegation issues.
Did Congress give this power, which is a
congressional power, to impose tariffs to the president?
We had Justice Barrett asking a lot of
really pointed questions about the words in the
statute, their meaning, and whether they encompass this
authority.
And here is MSNBC on the Stephanie Rule
Show.
They, of course, took it to the expected
conclusion after the first 30 minutes of reports
were in.
You wrote about today's arguments for Slate, and
you called them a bloodbath for Trump.
Bloodbath!
Well, I mean, I think it's pretty clear
that the Supreme Court is gonna strike down
these tariffs, and at least- Explain why.
A lot of people were not tuned in
today.
So at least three conservative justices, John Roberts,
Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, they came in
gunning for Barrett.
They were not remotely convinced by the Justice
Department's arguments.
They said, you know, look, this is a
statute that, as you just said, Steph, doesn't
talk about tariffs, taxes, duties, imposts, anything like
that.
It's been around since 1977.
No previous president has ever even attempted to
use it for tariffs.
And now Trump thinks that it gives him
the power to impose any tariffs he wants
against any country he wants for as long
as he wants.
This Supreme Court spent four years of the
Biden administration saying, look, if the president wants
to do something big and bold, he needs
to have clear congressional authorization for it.
That authorization does not exist here in this
statute.
And so at least those three justices, plus
the three liberals, I mean, they were being
consistent.
They were saying, we just don't see in
the law that you're showing us anything that
looks like authorization for it.
I love this guy.
Look, I'm telling you, this is a bloodbath.
Okay, fine.
So a couple of terms that are good
to understand.
IEPA, I-E-E-P-A, the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act.
In peacetime emergencies declared by the president, IEPA
gives the president the power to regulate any
transaction in foreign exchange by means of instructions,
licenses, or otherwise.
This is where it gets all kind of
a little crazy.
It was basically, forgive me, Lord, ant-fucking
over language.
This language is often described as capacious.
So the question is- Are you reading
from the lawyer's brief?
Yes, I am.
So- It was not clear.
Yes, I'm sorry.
So how capacious can it be under the
constitution?
Then we have the TWEA, TWEA, the Trading
with the Enemy Act.
By the way, the ant-fucking term is
mine.
During times of declared war, TWEA gives the
president the same power.
Because we're not in a declared war situation,
TWEA doesn't apply here.
But the statutory language received attention during the
oral argument.
Then you have, these are interesting, the Non
-Delegation Doctrine that says one branch of government,
usually Congress, can't delegate its powers to another
branch.
But there are many exceptions.
See our entire administrative state.
Yeah.
And then the C Chevron Deference as an
example.
The Major Questions Doctrine is related to non
-delegation.
It says that courts won't read a statute
to empower the president to determine a major
political or economic questions unless the statute makes
it clear and explicit.
To quote the late Justice Scalia, Congress doesn't
hide elephants in mouse holes.
So this whole thing really comes down to
language.
Now, the first hour, this is where we
have the Secretary General with the very unfortunate
voice, and he is being hounded by the
justices.
And Rob says, and I thought this was
interesting, he says, we lawyers sometimes hear the
adage that if judges are leaning toward one
party on a controversial issue, they'll direct the
toughest questions to that party just to make
sure they're not missing anything.
Now, I thought that was interesting because that
is clearly what was going on here.
Justice Gorsuch.
General, just a few questions following up on
the major questions discussions you've had.
You say that we shouldn't be so concerned
in the area of foreign affairs because of
the president's inherent powers.
That's the gist of it, as I understand
it, why we should disregard both major questions
and non-delegation.
So could Congress delegate to the president the
power to regulate commerce with foreign nations as
he sees fit?
To lay and collect duties as he sees
fit?
We don't assert that here.
That would be a much harder case now.
In 1790.
Isn't that the logic of your view though?
I don't think so because we're dealing with
a statute that wasn't carefully crafted compromise.
It does have all the limitations that I
just talked about.
You're saying we shouldn't look, we shouldn't be
concerned with, I want to explain to me
how you draw the line because you say
we shouldn't be concerned because this is foreign
affairs and the president has inherent authority.
And so delegation off the books, more or
less.
And if that's true, what would prohibit Congress
from just abdicating all responsibility to regulate foreign
commerce, for that matter, declare war to the
president?
We don't contend that he could do that.
Why not?
Well, because- So that's the kind of
grilling he got.
Very, very thorough.
So then we have, now it comes down
to the language of otherwise and licenses and
tariffs.
Because it's called tariffs, it seems to be
the big issue.
So Justice Gorsuch, our position is not that
regulate can never mean tax or tariff.
Our brief at page 15 gives you an
example.
A president may regulate cars coming in to
the city.
And then if it adds by charging tolls
or something like that, absolutely.
In context, it does.
Here, the context you're referring to, story and
so on, says nothing about this case.
That is the constitutional context about Congress's use
of power.
But it's part of how we understand languages
used.
And it's relevant for that purpose.
And then when you've got licenses, which are
economically the same thing as, would you agree
they're basically economically the same thing as tariffs?
Sometimes they can be regulated.
Okay, so you've got something that's economically identical
to a tariff authorized by this statute.
Where does that leave you, as a matter
of plain language?
So let me take the question in two
parts.
One is about the word regulate.
And the other is about licensing.
With respect to the word regulate, when it's
used in the constitutional sense, it's very different
than the sense in IEPA that my friend
is asserting.
When we're asserting IEPA, we're talking about a
statute that is granting the president massive powers.
And so the relevant context that I think
you look at in asking the question, what
did Congress mean in 1977?
The best context, the most natural context is,
what does Congress say every time they grant
the president such power?
And then there's just one other point on
this.
Constitutions are read totally differently.
Story and Madison are talking about the constitutional
phrase.
And as Chief Justice Marshall said in McCulloch,
a constitution we're expounding, the prolixity of a
legal code is the opposite of the way
you read the Constitution.
I do follow that argument.
Okay, so it turns out you read words
differently when they're in the Constitution versus in
US law.
Then Kavanaugh comes in, and he's now talking
to the prosecution, which is a wine importer
and some Democrat states who don't like this.
And this is interesting because it turns out
the president does have this power, but he
doesn't have it in a certain way.
They call it the donut hole.
And I want to pick up on Justice
Barrett's question because your interpretation of the statute,
as she pointed out, would allow the president
to shut down all trade with every other
country in the world or to impose some
significant quota on imports from every other country
in the world, but would not allow a
1% tariff.
And that leaves, in the government's words in
its brief, an odd donut hole in the
statute.
Why would a rational Congress say, yeah, we're
going to give the president the power to
shut down trade.
I mean, think about the effects.
But you're admitting that power's in there, but
can't do a 1% tariff.
That doesn't seem, but I want to get
your answer, to have a lot of common
sense behind it.
I think it absolutely does because it's a
fundamentally different power.
It's not a donut hole.
It's a different kind of pastry.
And on that power.
Oh, please.
Even Kavanaugh thought that was funny.
That's a good one.
On that power, though, and you've said this
many times, and Mr. Katyal too, and look,
I get this, obviously, but the court has
repeatedly said a tariff on foreign imports is
an exercise of the commerce power, not of
the taxation power.
So, you know, this whole idea that the
Supreme Court was skeptical, I disagree with.
I think that they really saw the issue
here.
And it comes down to, are you calling
it a tax?
Because that's what we hear Rand Paul call
it.
And, you know, and of course, the entire
Democrat caucus of, oh, it's taxing the American
people.
But no, it's called raising revenue and it's
foreign facing.
We're really getting into the weeds here.
Yes, sure, the tariffs are a tax and
that's a core power of Congress, but they're
a foreign facing tax, right?
And that foreign affairs is a core power
of the executive.
And I don't think you can dismiss the
consequences.
I mean, we didn't stay in this case.
And one thing is quite clear is that
the foreign facing tariffs have in several situations.
Right, and we aren't.
I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Shut up.
We're quite effective in achieving particular objectives.
So I don't think you can just separate
it when you say, well, this is a
tax, Congress's power.
It implicates very directly the president's foreign affairs
power.
And then the final clip, which I think
is really what this will hinge on is
if this is a war situation, of course,
the president will be allowed to do this.
You say that this is not.
This is Alito.
Sorry, it was Roberts before that.
This is Alito.
This case does not, these executive orders do
not address an unusual and extraordinary threat.
I understand that argument.
Suppose that the facts were that it was
indisputable.
Suppose that there was an imminent threat of
war, not a declared war, but an imminent
threat of war with a very powerful enemy
whose economy was heavily dependent on US trade.
Could a president under this provision impose a
tariff as a way of trying to stave
off that war?
Or would you say, no, the president lacks
that power?
Couldn't do tariff, but could do quota, embargo,
all of those things.
Could do all those things, but the president
could not impose a tariff.
It's the one thing he couldn't do.
There's a category shift between a tariff and
the other eight powers in IEPA because it
is revenue raising.
So it's not a difference in degree or
something like that.
That's why, you know, I don't doubt tomorrow.
Even if the purpose of this has had
nothing whatsoever to do with raising one penny,
the president didn't want to raise one penny.
The president wanted to deter aggression that would
bring the United States into a war.
He wouldn't say, no, can't do that.
Yeah, Justice Alito, I think you've said many
times the purpose isn't what you look at.
You look to actually what the government is
doing.
And if you disagree, if you ruled for
us and the president says, I need this
power, he can go across the street to
Congress tomorrow and get it by a simple
majority through reconciliation.
But if you vote for them, this power,
as Justice Gorsuch said, as Justice Barrett said,
is gonna be stuck with us forever.
The power to- Can I ask you?
So I think that's why Trump is pulling
out the hedge on this.
I think that's why he's saying, hey, use
the nuclear option.
We need to have, you know, just get
rid of the filibuster for the end this
shutdown because he might need that in case
- No, he just said it takes a
simple majority from Congress.
He doesn't need 60 votes.
Oh, really?
Okay, okay.
I don't think, the filibuster thing's going nowhere.
There's a couple of things that caught my
eye.
It's like they gave him an out on
one, licensing's okay.
Yes.
So, you know, because here's what, in the
back of my mind when I'm listening to
these clips is Besant, who came out a
couple of days ago and said, don't worry
about it.
Whatever happened doesn't make any difference.
We have alternative ways of doing this.
We have our ways.
We have our ways of doing this and
we can make it hurt for you.
We can make it hurt very much.
So the alternative ways would be one, embargo.
No, no trade.
Yeah, he can do that for sure.
That's what he said.
That's what the justices said right there.
And also licensing, just change the terror to
a license.
Yes, yeah.
So I don't see this being a big
deal.
No, Rob, the constitutional lawyer says he views
the odds as not bad, which is lawyer
speak.
Yeah, but not bad is better than listening
to MSNBC.
A bloodbath.
It's like the last- How can people
listen to that network?
So he says that the tariff, so the
main argument is that the tariff opponents say
the president can issue licenses as long as
they don't involve fees that generate revenue.
SCOTUS will spend a lot of time scrubbing
this out.
And ultimately, you're right.
And if that's all that the president is
left with, he'll say, okay, embargo, no trade,
or license, and the license will depend upon
you giving us rare earths or whatever.
By the way, President Trump did get a
one-year extension on that deal on rare
earths in time for some other alternative avenues
to be ramped up.
So he's definitely done something good there.
So I think not bad.
Yeah, sounds about right to me.
Yeah, he also encouraged Australia and other places,
including here, to restart processing these things.
He says it's gonna take a year or
two.
Yeah, yeah, he said that in a CBS
interview.
It was a mistake.
You saw this years ago.
The rare earth situation, it was not gonna
be good.
Well, it was 10 years ago that we
still had a processing plant in California.
The MaliCorp.
Yeah, there you go.
And I have clips.
We should probably take a break.
I have clips of that.
Well, before we take a break, I have
the perfect intro to the break.
Okay.
Let me guess, does it involve something from
TikTok?
Yes, it does.
And it's a clip, it's a bonus clip.
Ah, yes, okay, yes, the bonus clip.
Yes, I got your bonus clip.
Do you wanna set it up?
Yeah, this is a woman who hates men
and thinks the vote should be taken away
from them.
I think that we should just repeal a
man's right to vote.
It's kind of what I'm thinking about.
It's kind of what I've been mulling over
recently.
Because I know there's been a lot of
chit-chat amongst evangelical Christians, particularly stemming from
the voices of men, which is classic.
Classic, honestly, that they want to repeal the
19th Amendment.
And I think that really what should happen,
because, I mean, look at every empire that
has existed under a man's rule.
What has happened to it?
Right, right.
So what I'm kind of thinking of, you
know what, I think even more so, we
should just take all men and put them
in cages, particularly a straight white man, particularly
a straight white man with a podcast.
Those have got to be the first to
fucking know.
Ha ha ha ha.
Ah, that's good.
We're out, we're done, we're in cages, we're
done.
We should be grandfathered in somehow.
I don't know, that doesn't sound fair.
And with that, I want to thank you
for your courage.
In the morning to you, the man who
put the C in the full preem court.
Say hello to my friend on the other
end, the one, the only, Mr. John C.
DeMora.
Yeah, in the morning to you, Mr. DeMocrat,
and Mr. Seabird, Mr. Graffin, Theos, I'm still
one of the dames and knights out there.
In the morning to you, the trolls in
the troll room.
Let me give you a count here.
Don't stop moving around.
There we go.
Morning, guys.
There it is, there it is.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Yeah, we're inching our way back.
1743, that's not too bad.
1743.
Yeah, it's only down 50.
Yeah, we're good.
Welcome, trolls.
They're listening at trollroom.io, or they could
be listening on one of those modern podcast
apps.
And I have news about the modern podcast
apps.
Five years ago, Dave Jones and I started
the Podcast Index.
We created the namespace when people said, ah,
no one cares what you're doing.
Who knows what you're doing?
There'll be no more features, no more ads.
Well, you know, I like you doing that
voice, but I have no idea what you
said.
What were they bitching about?
They said, because we said, hey, you know
what?
Apple doesn't own podcasting.
We can create as many new features as
we want, and these modern podcast apps, they
will do it.
And people will use, you know, people use
Podverse more than any other podcast app to
listen to the show.
I think Fountain is number two.
We've got Podcast Guru.
And then you, and we're not even on
Spotify by design.
So there's all these cool features.
And Transcripts was one.
Oh, I guess Apple adopted Transcripts earlier this
year.
And today's- So what you tell, you're
actually trying to tell me that people complained
about having more features?
Yes.
No.
No, you have to understand the podcast industrial
complex, they don't like anybody rocking any boat
for anything.
And they, and quite honestly, they find me
annoying because I'm like, hey- What?
Yeah, I'm sure they just find me annoying.
And you know, the podcast, you know, we
said- Oh, yeah.
Yeah, we said, hey, this, you're not going
to get deplatformed from this.
And then people went, yeah, but you know,
Alex Jones, you shouldn't be on the podcast.
You understood that.
Alex Jones.
And there were several pod, not the biggest
ones, but a big one, a podcast hosting
company who said, nobody cares about what you're
doing.
We're not adopting any of your features.
Podbean?
Nope.
No, Podbean is actually progressive.
They're forward looking and forward leaning.
And two days ago, Apple Podcasts adopted another
one of our features, which is the cloud
chapters.
And so now, and I think they're smart
because- You should get an award.
International Peace Prize.
We're going to send you a Peace Prize.
I want a Peace Prize.
So, you know, that's a big win.
And that shows that Apple is looking at
what we're doing.
They're considering what we're doing.
We have moved the needle on a very
big company and it's good for podcasting.
And I think it's great.
And it's because a lot of people are
using these modern podcast apps.
Apple's like, we're losing market share.
We lost the whole percent to those guys.
Percent's a lot for them.
For them, a percent is a lot.
But it's also the way we're moving it.
And it's not me and Dave, it's an
entire orchestra of misfits who are doing this.
And I want to congratulate them for moving
this a little bit forward.
And of course, in 10 years from now,
it'll all be Adam Carolla's idea.
Yeah, it already is, by the way.
So as long as I get my International
Peace Prize, that'll be fine with me.
So go to podcastapps.com.
You even see Apple now listed in that
list because they have three features that are
new.
So congratulations to them.
They are good people over there.
It's a behemoth of a company.
So I'm glad that they're able to move
the needle.
And by the way, I think that the
next tag will be the funding tag, which
the modern podcast apps have.
If you look in any of the other
podcasts, the aforementioned podcast apps, you'll see a
button that you can press that button and
it will take you right to the donation
page of the No Agenda Show.
It's amazing.
It really is quite helpful.
So you're listening.
You hear like, hey, you can support us
with a donation, value for value.
You just go to your podcast app.
You don't have to remember anything, even though
noagendadonations.com is not that hard to remember.
You just press the button.
You press the button, boom, you're there.
You make a donation.
You've helped your favorite podcast.
I believe that Apple will do this next.
And then you're gonna see things happen.
And I need to mention something about value
for value.
Tina has been inundated with people asking her
for, she has a form email now about
the crowd health, crowdfunded insurance, and it's not
insurance, but crowdfunded healthcare.
What is the right word for that?
There's gotta be a word for it.
Meta share.
Yeah, meta share.
And I just wanted to explain how it
works.
You pay a very low amount monthly.
I think it's $99 for the first three
months, but she pays under $200.
The first $500 is for you.
And then if you have an emergency or
something happens, it's gonna be more money than
that.
You tell them, they immediately go to work.
They negotiate directly with that provider.
They negotiate it down.
You know, it's like 30, 25 cents on
the dollar.
They tell you exactly what to do, what
to say, what to sign, what not to
sign.
And then they go out to the community,
which is quite big at this point, and
they say, okay- Who is this operation?
CrowdHealth.
Where are they located?
I think they're in Texas, but they're nationwide.
You can use them anywhere.
Because it's actually value for value.
That's the thing I wanted to explain.
So from time to time, like every couple
of months, Tina told me, she'll get a
request to support someone or someones they sometimes
bundle and say, okay, we've got a pregnancy.
We've got three people with cancer.
We got this going on.
We got a broken back.
And then it says, will you help support?
So you're paying this low amount and then,
okay, I'm going to provide some value to
the system.
And it's like a hundred bucks or maybe
150 bucks.
It's not a lot of money.
It's every two months.
So you're still way under your $2,000
of nonsense that you're paying for nothing.
And then when it's your turn, and you
get a value for value credit check.
It's like, hey, this person supported it.
So when it's your turn, when your turn
comes around, they say, hey, look, this person
has always supported everybody else.
We're now going to support you.
And Tina can explain all that, Code Bongino.
But it's, unfortunately, once you hit 65, you're
out of the system because then apparently you've
got Medicare and you're on your own.
So- Medicare is not bad.
No, I know.
I know.
That's why I keep telling you, don't worry
about it.
What do you think it costs a month?
Nothing.
No, it costs money.
You're under a misassumption.
What does it cost a month?
About 180 bucks.
Right.
Don't you have some donut hole you have
to fill up because it doesn't take care
of some things?
Drugs.
Okay.
Well, President Trump is getting those prices into
check for us.
Duh.
It's a scam.
It's all a scam.
Drugs are a scam.
Anyway.
So, but I find it a very interesting
value for value type of proposition.
It's a lifestyle.
It's a new international lifestyle.
Live it if you want to.
If not, then pay those bankers $2,000
a month for nothing with your $8,000
deductible.
Good luck with that.
So we have lived by value for value.
We know it works and we don't have
any credit checks on you to see if
you donate it.
Although we do notice that a lot of
people- Please check.
I don't.
I don't have- Well, I do.
I have nothing to check.
With some nasty note comes in and a
guy comes on and he says, I'm not
going to donate anymore.
I'm sick of you guys.
I usually check.
And?
They're never donating.
They never have donated, never will.
This reminds me of when I was a
magazine writer.
You know, I'm going to cancel my subscription.
They have no subscription.
If you have access to the database, they
don't have a subscription to begin with.
It's bull crap.
Well, that's interesting, isn't it?
There's some things just always stay the same.
And it's also uniform.
Well, that's what they think is leverage.
Yes.
Well, I was talking to Pastor Jimmy yesterday.
And he says- Pastor Jimmy.
Pastor Jimmy.
By the way, this is the joke at
the church now, Pastor Jimmy and the five
Bryans.
This is a- Yeah.
Pastor Jimmy and the five.
There's only four, but it makes it funnier
to make it five.
People like this a lot.
No, he said the biggest people who support,
the biggest donors of the church.
He says, half of them, I don't even
know their names.
It's anonymous.
The other half never ever talked to me
about anything.
He says the people who sometimes tithe or
not at all, they're the ones that complain
the most about how the church should be
run.
Yeah.
Hello.
I know, but it's just, it's interesting that
this is uniform across the board.
The biggest donors, the biggest value for value
supporters have no agenda.
One line note.
Thank you.
We love you.
Good night.
Yeah.
The lower you get- You bitch and
moan constantly.
It doesn't matter.
We love all of you.
And we thank you very much for your
courage and for your support, whether it's time,
talent, or treasure.
And we will start it off with some
of the time and talent that is brought
to us in the form of artwork for
our album art.
By the way, all of the end of
show mixes, we now actually post the end
of show mixes in the actual credits.
So you can download them, do whatever you
want.
Since there seems to be no- Which
is new for us.
It's very new for us.
There's no restrictions and we love it.
And of course, you can go to gitmojams
.com and listen to this slop 24 hours
a day.
We have three songs an hour now.
The rest is end of show mix stuff,
which is quite funny to listen to.
Thank you, MVP.
He set up a website for it.
We're still working out the bugs.
Let me see if it's up actually.
Gitmojams.com.
What?
So I don't know.
I may have a DNS thing here.
Anyway, it should be working.
If it's not working today, it will be
working tomorrow.
And it's all filled with quotes by you.
And it's end of show mixes jingles, but
really we're moving towards full-time slop, all
slop, all the time.
So the slop that we thank here is
the AI prompted slop.
And actually, we both immediately kind of took
to the artwork from Capitalist Agenda, which is
not a typical AI piece, nor is Capitalist
Agenda necessarily an AI artist.
This was Choking the M5M Chicken for episode
1813, which we titled Lunchbox from Lunchbox AI.
We both like this piece.
It stood out.
It really stood out as something different, which
is how I imagined once the Hot 100,
the Toe Tappin' 100 is all AI slop
music.
They'll be one of those things that just
pops out.
It's like, whoa, okay, this is different.
This is good.
You know, everything, Capitalist Agenda, who is a
good artist.
He is.
The fact that he, the thing that makes
this work besides the choking of this chicken
with M5M underneath him is the, which is
a lewd reference, you know, bringing us back
to the hottie that gave you the note.
Yeah.
It's the eyeballs with the swirl in them,
which really makes this work.
Only an artist understands that.
And only an artist, yeah.
Or someone who has some notion of how
a cartoon should look would have that.
I mean, the only other possibility was the
eyeballs popping forward.
Boi-oing-oing, yeah.
Boi-oing-oing type.
That would work too, but this is just
dynamite.
Good piece.
Beautiful piece.
Had beautiful luminance in it.
Nice white background.
Jeffrey Rhea, you need to either do something
with your art or you need to get
another language model.
You are the orange man.
All your stuff is orange.
No, what he needs to do is get
a copy of Photoshop or some other system,
drop the art in there, and then brighten
it up.
Take the, filter out the orange.
I mean, we literally, we look at the
page, it's like his signature.
It's like everything he does is orange.
It's all orange.
It's got a film of orange over everything.
And I immediately hate it.
Yeah, you're never gonna get picked.
Nope, nope.
I mean, you'll get picked for the newsletter
once in a while, which I think you
got last time.
But you're not gonna, but Adam will veto
all your pieces because they're so orangey.
Yes, and it's not that hard to fix.
Like the methane cow.
Yeah.
It's a beautiful piece.
It's a good piece, too orange.
Orangey.
Too orange.
Yeah, he's got another one.
Missing chocolate, orange.
And then Nestworks, now Nestworks came in.
Nestworks is also a good artist.
And he makes another fundamental detrimental mistake on
his sock hop art.
Sock hop.
Oh yeah, this was noticeable to me immediately.
The people aren't wearing socks.
The reason, let me go back to it
just one more time.
This is the last time I'm gonna bring
it up.
A sock hop was called a sock hop
not because it was a cool name.
It's because it was required that you wear
socks because they were having a dance on
the gym floor of the school, of a
basketball court usually.
And in those days, people didn't wear, they
didn't wear Nikes.
In the olden days of the sock hop,
they wore leather-soled shoes.
Bowling shoes.
They didn't wear bowling shoes either.
They wore leather-soled shoes.
Bowling shoes are actually kind of slippery.
They would be okay.
They wore leather-soled shoes.
And when you dance on a basketball court,
you ruin the court.
It's scratched up.
It's all, it's a mess.
So you had to wear socks.
So when you see somebody in a sock
hop wearing shoes, it doesn't make sense because
it never happened.
Yeah.
So they throw you out.
Disqualified.
They throw you disqualified.
Disqualified.
I did kind of like Nessworks' boots, dancing
on the M5M.
By the way, I haven't heard from our
boot guy.
We gave him such a, like such an
alley oop.
Like, come on, man.
Let's make these no agenda boots.
Just like PBB, PBD.
Blue Acorn had some boots too that I
thought were nice.
Yeah.
But ultimately- And he had a chicken.
And the Blue Acorn had two chickens in
the background, which I thought added a lot.
Yeah.
But we'll have, once our boot guy gets
back to us and we get some no
agenda boots, made in America, made in America
boots, that's our exit strategy, man.
Where you at, Opie?
Opie Shoes?
Opie Boots?
Come on.
It's not called Opie Boots.
I forget what it's called.
Opie Boots.
So it's Opie Shoes.
Hold on a second.
Opie Shoes, Opie Way, opieway.com.
They do the sneakers, but then he has,
he started a boot company.
The sneakers are nice too.
By the way, we could go for sneakers.
opieway.com.
They got some nice sneakers.
High end.
We could outdo infotainment.
Value tainment.
Well, he's value tainment, infotainment.
That's a- It's a Bron Bloom.
It's a Bron Bloom title.
His are Italian.
Yeah, so?
Ours are American.
Yeah, but the thing, the problem, well, the
problem he has as opposed to the sneakers
is that people don't wear shoes anymore.
They wear sneakers.
Yes.
You would look at, if you watch TV,
they're coming out with a suit on wearing
sneakers.
People, the number of people that wear Ferragamo's,
which is an incredibly comfortable shoe, or Gucci's.
But have you looked at value tainment's shoes?
They're basically sneaker, leather patented sneakers.
Oh, that's, ugh.
Yes.
Hello, 70s.
Yeah, no, I think the Opie Way's, maybe
that's better for us.
We'll find out.
We'll play it by ear.
As long as there's no terrorists involved.
No, he makes them in America.
There's no terrorists.
He makes them in North Carolina.
It's a beautiful thing.
All right, of course, we always want to
thank our producers who supply us with treasure.
Here's how that works.
You go to noagentitdonations.com or hit that
little dollar sign or whatever it is in
your podcast app.
You go right to it and you support
us with your fiat fund coupons.
Or I see, actually, that we have some
Bitcoin coming in.
That's just the color coding on the spreadsheet.
And here's how that works.
In this segment, we thank people who we
call executive and associate executive producers.
These are real credits that they get because
they are able to support us, just like
in Hollywood, with more money.
$200 or above gets you an associate executive
producer credit and will read your note.
$300 and above, you become an executive producer
and will read your note.
And if you question the validity of these
credits, go to imdb.com, type in Noah
Jindal.
You'll see that there's over 1,000 people
who have done this, and you can use
that to your advantage.
In fact, if you're dating and you're Gen
Zed or even millennial and you're having trouble
and these women want to know, they're trying
to figure out how much money you have,
you just say, well, I'm an executive producer.
What?
Yeah, look me up.
Hit me up on imdb.com, baby.
I'm right next to Dana Brunetti, huh?
Okay.
So we kick it off with our top
executive producer who comes in with a, wow,
this must be some kind of Freedom Merca
donation.
$17.76 and 33 cents.
It's Aug, A-U-G, Aug from Texas.
And Aug says, dearest Podfather and Grouch.
Yeah, that would be you.
In the words of warrior, monk, and philosopher
Alexander Jones, they're turning the frogs gay.
No, he says, the solution to 1984 is
17.76. A while ago, I made a
similar donation in honor of Sir and Mrs.
Heck of Eagleford.
Come to find out he doesn't listen during
basketball and she doesn't listen to donations.
This is one for me.
Wow, they missed out.
But if they hear it this time from
the kid they taught to never stop asking
questions, thank you.
I pray I get to see you again.
Just to support No Agenda more regularly.
Happy All Saints Day.
Feliz Dia de los Muertos, the Day of
the Dead.
Y vaya con Dios, mofos, or something like
that, says Aug.
Thank you very much, Aug.
We appreciate that.
That is welcome, very welcome today.
And- And there we go to Sir
Schwartz.
May the Schwartz be with you.
333.33, keep it up guys.
Sir Schwartz of the woke bashing culprits.
Overtax Gitmo Little Mermaid.
It's code for something.
And there's Dame Catherine coming in with a
Bitcoin donation.
It's $300.
She says, I know times are hard and
I'm a most fortunate woman to have Bitcoin.
I love you guys and appreciate all that
you do.
Remember, being rich is having enough to share
with others.
From Dame Catherine Crypto, Granny of Bangkok.
Thank you, Dame Catherine, very nice.
Yeah, she's been begging for us to have
a crypto thing.
No, not crypto, Bitcoin specifically.
Yes.
And- And there it is.
There it is, but you know, it was
always, it was on the donation thing, and
so I've had Jay change it.
Because you had to click on a thing
to go to where you should, it was
a long story, but- You made it
easier.
Yeah.
Good for you.
Yeah, Catherine's always, she's very much in touch
with the show.
Astrid Klein.
And by the way, you can also boost
us from Fountain and your message will come
through.
Astrid Klein, you know, if people have a
message- Email it.
You send it to adamatcurry.com or John,
or no, notes, no agenda.
What?
Yeah, go ahead, not to me or you,
to notes.
No, you're right, that's why I stopped.
Yeah, keep going.
Not to me or Adam, but notes at
noagendashow.net, notes at noagendashow.net, and the
key is to put donation in the subject
line.
Oh, wow, that's so smart.
People don't seem to remember this.
No, they remember adamatcurry.com, that's all they
seem to remember.
Surefire way to get missed.
Astrid Klein, she's in Tokyo, 2-22-19.
Oh, the archduchess.
Dear John and Adam, many congratulations on 18
years of public service, which I believe it
to be.
Thank you for always being your authentic selves,
honest, charming, at least in my case, sprinkled
with a little bit of bickering, the right
mix to keep it interesting.
We wouldn't like it any other way, and
we sincerely dread the end of four more
years.
Dame Astrid and Sir Mark Archduchess and Archduke
of Japan, and all the disputed islands in
the Japan Sea.
Yes, and people should know that we are
not susceptible because of this very system to
audience capture, and that's what everyone else is
falling for.
Oh, man, everybody wants us to say this.
Most recently, Ukraine.
Remember that?
I mean, we had Ukraine flags in Texas.
Which is idiotic.
It's totally idiotic.
It went away.
We knew it.
We move on to Associate Executive Producer Anonymous
from Hartford, Connecticut, 210 and 60 cents.
I am writing this with great shame.
It's probably why you're anonymous.
I have been aware of no agenda since
2018, although I only started listening in September
2024, episode 1698.
You can thank Carl from Who Are These
Podcasts for hitting me in the mouth, even
if it took six years.
It's okay, you're here.
Your show makes my long Monday and Friday
commutes to and from work tolerable.
Lastly, I'd like to thank all ATC workers.
You are all the glue holding the aviation
industry together.
We appreciate you showing up and doing your
hard work during these rough times.
Sincerely, Anonymous Citation Pilot.
It's a jet boy.
Jet jockey.
Jet jockey, yes.
And John and I also appreciate all air
traffic controllers and everyone who has feet in
the air.
Jingles, Trump, they're eating the dogs, followed by
Nancy Pelosi, shut up.
They're eating the dogs, shut up.
That's a good one, hadn't heard that one.
I like that combo.
That's a good combo.
Ah, Linda Lou Patkin in Lakewood, Colorado, $200
jobs karma.
For a competitive edge with a reputation resume
that gets results, go to ImageMakersInc.com.
For all of your executive resume and job
search needs, that's ImageMakersInc with a K, and
work with Linda Lou, Duchess of Jobs and
writer of winning resumes.
Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
Let's vote for jobs.
You've got karma.
And we have a final associate executive producer
from Christopher Ryan in Hamilton, Ohio.
And he says, calling all male singers in
the Cincinnati area.
I initially thought it read male swingers, but
it is male singers.
The Southern Gateway Chorus is inviting male singers
who enjoy acapella music to join our Christmas
grand chorus show this year.
If you've never heard of us, the Southern
Gateway Chorus is an award-winning barbershop chorus
that competes internationally.
It's a lot of fun.
If you're interested in singing a few acapella
Christmas songs, visit southerngateway.org and sign up.
Love acapella, but don't want to sing?
Come watch the show on December 13th or
14th.
You can find all the details on our
website's homepage.
I'll be performing with the chorus, as well
as a special quartet during the show, singing
an arrangement of Joseph's lullaby, a song made
popular by none other than Mercy May.
Excellent.
I hope I do a job.
Anyway, since I've used you for an advertisement,
I won't ask for any jingles.
Well, it's barely an advertisement.
It's like a solicitation.
I love you guys.
I love no agenda.
Here's to the shit that makes our love
lit.
Christopher Ryan, P.S. November 6th is my
birthday.
Please put me on the list.
You are on the list.
And that concludes our executive and associate executive
producers for episode 1814 of the best podcast
in the universe.
Thank you all very much for your support.
Remember, you get these credits automatically if anyone
ever questions them, let us know, we'll be
happy to vouch for you.
Go to noagendadonations.com.
Anybody can support us any amount, anytime you
feel like it.
It's value for value.
Set up a recurring donation.
Any amount, any frequency, noagendadonations.com.
Our formula is this.
We go out, we hit people in the
mouth.
Order.
Shut up.
Sleep.
Yowza, yowza, yowza, yowza.
So we have, I did have a couple
of AI things that I thought were reasonably
interesting that I wanted to come back to.
I didn't have time to get into, Oh,
I actually have a couple of AI clips
myself, but they're archived, so you have to
dig them up.
Well, then let me get to the fresh
ones.
The fresh ones first.
The AI bubble.
Are we in a bubble?
Are we in a bubble, bubble, bubble?
What's going on with the bubble?
We have the AI washing, which actually kind
of comes down to these types of reports.
Oh, I should have warned you.
It's Amy Goodman incoming.
Sorry, everybody.
In labor news, several major U.S. companies
have announced layoffs affecting tens of thousands of
workers.
Amazon said it'll eliminate about 14,000 corporate
jobs, with Reuters reporting that number could more
than double as artificial intelligence tools increasingly replace
white collar workers.
Meanwhile, turn.
Bullcrap.
But we've already determined that to be bullcrap.
Right.
So now I have some CNBC clips about
this very issue.
It's called AI washing.
Between January and September 2025, there have been
more than 946,000 job cuts announced, with
roughly 300,000 from the government sector.
That's the highest since 2020, and it's a
55 percent increase from what we saw last
year through the same time period.
It would make sense to think AI is
to blame for the layoffs.
Now that we've had generative AI come in
and kind of change the equation, investors and
boards are asking management teams, how are you
using AI?
Why aren't you using AI?
Can AI help you streamline costs?
But the latest round of layoff announcements in
the fall of 2025 suggest AI might not
be the root cause of the restructuring.
Oh, really?
They also seem to be real signs that
something new is happening, that we've turned a
corner in the economy.
So we've seen a wide range of reasons.
You're not really seeing companies say, I am
cutting 10,000 employees and replacing them with
one single computer.
Using AI and introducing it to save jobs
turns out to be an enormously complicated and
time-consuming exercise.
I think there's still a perception that it's
simple and easy and cheap to do, and
it's really not.
Yeah, this is what your No Agenda show
has been telling you for months, and now
it's all coming out in the AI wash.
There's no doubt AI is a powerful force
in the economy right now.
Powerful.
To which we think it's affecting the economy
and hiring is in graduate-level, low-skilled
jobs.
We haven't been able to find yet much
evidence that AI is capable at this moment
of taking over sort of white-collar middle
management jobs.
So why are we seeing so many layoffs?
And how much of it is because of
AI?
Wall Street has been hyping generative AI innovation
for several years now, which is putting pressure
on executives to make it a part of
their business model.
79% of CEOs in the U.S.
said they feared they could lose their jobs
within two years if they didn't deliver measurable
AI-driven business gains.
Man, this is like, have we seen this
movie before?
Like, oh, you got to have AI, you
got to have a website, you got to
have this, you got to have e-commerce,
e-commerce.
You guys have e-commerce yet?
We have been through these things so many
times.
And eventually, something always turns out to be
okay and usable.
But this one, this one is different.
It's big.
Investors need to be a little careful with
what some people have called AI-washing.
And what that is, is this idea that
because business is deteriorating or there's some difficulty
going on with the business, you say, oh,
we're letting people go because of AI.
No, you're letting people go because the business
is hurting and calling it AI.
And because Wall Street is buying anything with
the letters A and I attached to it.
And so what you might find is you
would actually get a bump in your stock
because you're letting people go because of AI.
There's this kind of financial fiduciary incentive for
management teams to say they're using AI and
say that strategies are related to AI, even
if it's not totally related to AI.
There's been surveys that have come out that
found companies are attributing certain strategies and plans
to AI, but it could be as simple
as, using AI to write an email for
you.
Is that really a revolutionary use of this
technology?
No.
But can you say you're using it as
part of your strategy?
Technically, yes.
Even Meta's decision to cut 600 workers in
October 2025, they cut those workers from their
AI unit.
And that's because the AI unit had gotten
bloated.
Exactly.
I love this.
I know lots of people who, oh yeah,
I use AI at work to make my
email better.
And then I adjust it, of course.
But I mean, how can that be improving
productivity?
No, it's actually probably not.
Well, I mentioned on the show before, about
two months ago, that there was a study
done internally that has not been publicly discussed.
At a nondescript AI company, yes?
No, at NVIDIA.
Oh, NVIDIA.
Mm-hmm.
And they tried to find places where the
AI was actually increasing productivity, and they couldn't
do it.
It could be a bullcrap story, so I
can't say for sure, but it sounds right
to me.
And the fact that productivity is, if you
write an email, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
and then send it to, right now, from
the point where you're finished the email to
you sending it to AI to improve it,
quote, unquote.
It could have been done.
Right?
It would have been shipped.
So the productivity is going down, not up.
By the way, you're making a big mistake
here.
You're pronouncing it NVIDIA.
Yeah.
No, it's not NVIDIA.
According to Norah and President Trump, it's NVIDIA.
NVIDIA?
Listen.
I know we're out of time, but just
on that matter, we talked about that, because
I know how closely you follow the stock
market.
Do you worry about an AI bubble?
I guess.
I worry about everything.
I'm a worrier.
I worry.
But you know what I do?
I worry, and then I fix it.
I fix it.
That way, I don't have to worry.
There's a lot of money behind AI.
Well, there's a lot of money.
And right now, I'm taking advantage of it,
because we're leading AI.
We're leading it by a lot.
China's in second place, but we're leading it
by a lot.
We have the greatest minds of any country,
anywhere in the world, and we're using that.
I'm using those great minds to help us
now.
Will something happen later?
I guess, you know, something.
But it could also be something very good
happens.
And I hope it's going to be very
good.
But if it's not so good, we're protected.
I think this is the wrong clip.
This is the NVIDIA clip.
It sounds like it's the wrong clip.
Will you allow the chipmaker NVIDIA to sell
their most advanced chips to China?
No, we won't do that.
It's not on the table at all.
We will let them deal with NVIDIA.
NVIDIA is the prime media.
NVIDIA.
Anyway, let's ask Bill Gates if there's a
bubble, because if anybody knows, it will be
Bill.
I also asked him if he is worried
about whether we are in an AI bubble.
Here's what he had to say.
We need to define bubble.
If what we need is like tulips in
the Netherlands, that they went to look back
and said, what the heck?
There was nothing there.
Those were just tulips.
No, that's not where we are.
If you mean it's like the Internet bubble,
where in the end, something very profound happened.
The world was very different.
Some companies succeeded.
But a lot of the companies were kind
of me to fell behind burning capital companies.
Absolutely.
There are a ton of these investments that
will be dead ends.
What do you think, John?
What do you think?
No, Bill's right.
Yeah, but what do you what do you
think will be the what will the killer
app be?
Is it going to be porn?
Is it going to be Oh, the killer
app?
There's no the killer app is already is
chat.
GPT is already here.
But what but what is so killer about
it?
What is the people using instead of search
engines?
OK, so that's going.
So that's a big deal.
I mean, one of the things a lot
of people only do on the Internet is
do searches.
I mean, Google the rest of them.
Yeah.
Duck, duck, go.
So just grok, grok and chat GPT, which
is more or less the same price.
I think grok delivers better results personally.
But I like have you put grok into
expert mode and then and then done a
search?
This actually, I think, is is interesting because
it will go out and it will scan
through 10, 20, 30, 60.
I've seen 90 Web pages and something that
I could do myself, but it does it
faster than I could do a lot faster
than you will.
Yeah, it still takes several minutes to come
back with an answer.
But yeah, and I just like I'm not
paying for this.
Who how can this happen?
Yeah, well, there's your there's the yeah, there
in lies the rub.
And this is exactly what came up with
in a conversation that open investor Brad Gerstner
had on a Zoom call with Sam Altman.
And funny enough, such an Adele was also
on the call.
It's a three way.
And here's Brad's question and Sam's answer.
Quite arrogant.
You know, how can a company with 13
billion in revenues make 1.4 trillion of
spend commitments?
You know, and you've heard the criticism.
So we're doing well, more revenue than that.
Second of all, Brad, if you want to
sell your shares, I'll find you a buyer.
I just enough like, you know, people are
I think there's a lot of people who
would love to buy OpenAI shares.
I don't I don't think including myself, including
myself, who talk with a lot of like
breathless concern about our compute stuff or whatever.
That would be thrilled to buy shares.
So I think we could sell, you know,
your shares or anybody else's to some of
the people who are making the most noise
on Twitter, whatever, about this very quickly.
We do plan for revenue to grow steeply.
Revenue is growing steeply.
We are taking a forward bet that it's
going to continue to grow and that not
only will try to keep growing, but we
will be able to become one of the
important AI clouds that our consumer device business
will be a significant and important thing that
AI that can automate science will create huge
value.
So, you know, there are not many times
that I want to be a public company,
but one of the rare times it's appealing
is when those people are writing these ridiculous
OpenAI is about to go out of business
and, you know, whatever.
I would love to tell them they could
just short the stock and I would love
to see them get burned on that.
But, you know, I we carefully plan.
We understand where the technology where the capability
is going to grow, go and how the
products we can build around that and the
revenue we can generate.
We might screw it up.
Like this is the bet that we're making
and we're taking a risk along with that.
So that is the most arrogant response.
Oh, already you want me to buy your
stock or you want to buy stock?
Exactly.
I can find someone who wants to buy
your shares.
What's interesting is Altman has an amazing tell.
He really believes what he's saying, because when
he answers a question, these questions, you know
how in NLP and neuro linguistic programming, if
someone looks to the right and up, they're
lying.
If they look to the left and there's
a bunch of these different theories, he looks
up to the left, which which means he's
visualizing.
He's visualizing his PowerPoint presentation is his deck.
He looks up.
It's almost like he's looking at the light
bulb on the ceiling.
The guy goes all the way up.
We're going to have a lot more revenue.
And he said something interesting, which I was
kind of overlooked.
He said our consumer devices.
I only heard that in the second run
through, as I had already clipped this, his
consumer devices, what consumer devices would they be
coming out with?
That could be interesting.
I think maybe that maybe he gave something
away unless he thinks that just the website's
a consumer device, which is nobody else would
define it that way.
And regarding shorting Michael Burry, the guy from
the big short, he has put a one
point one billion dollar short on Nvidia and
Palantir and Palantir.
Actually, everything crashed a little bit, not a
crash, but eight percent down.
Yeah, we talked about that on the DHM
Plug Show, which runs every Tuesday.
Yes, it should download it.
It starts at eight o'clock Central, nine
Eastern.
It's live.
It's on the stream.
It's Andrew Horowitz, who is a money manager
and a fine human being.
One of my friends.
I love him.
Love him very, very much.
His services are beyond compare.
He's fantastic.
And columnist John C.
Dvorak.
Let's join Andrew and John now.
Yeah.
Good.
Yeah, what was the challenge here?
It's got a ratio of 200.
A 100 ratio is like a hot stock.
So there's 200.
The stock should be half the price.
It is the way I see it.
And Horowitz did not agree with me.
I mean, he did agree with me that
the prices of the stock is ridiculous.
Yeah.
Because people don't understand what earnings per share
or I'm sorry, PE ratio, the ratio of
the price earnings ratio, what it usually indicates
the number.
That number usually indicates the yearly rate of
growth.
That's what it's supposed to reflect.
So if you have a PE ratio of
30, that means the company is going to
grow by 30% a year.
Hopefully.
It's just a guess.
And so if you have a 200%
or a 200 PE ratio, the stock is
supposed to be growing at 200% a
year.
No, it grows 100% a year.
That's doubling.
So can I give me a break?
So and so you look at these PE
ratios and you try to determine if they're
sensible.
We both like Palantir, by the way.
I think it's we both think it's a
good investment, but not at these prices.
Not financial advice.
Not and we don't give financial advice.
What else?
So any.
That's it.
That's all I got.
No predictions on a crash or anything that's
I mean, this can't.
I don't see a crash until the first.
Actually, I don't see personally.
And this is just because I have these
20 and 40 year cycle things that I
like to play with.
And the last crash was in 2008 and
2009 era.
So the 2028, 29.
It has to be after Trump's out.
So it'll be in and you could push
it off a little bit.
So you have a crack.
I foresee the following.
Trump's presidency reflects that of Reagan's and in
his vice president, George Walker Bush became vice
president, and then he had a small blip
in the economy just before the election that
Clinton won.
And that I I think will be the
same sort of thing, because Vance will get
in there probably with Rubio as his vice
president, which would be my guess.
I was betting I would say the other
way around.
I think Rubio with Vance.
Rubio would like to see it the other
way around, but I don't think that's what's
going to happen because Rubio can still become
president.
You have two Vance's and then Rubio could
take over.
So you'd have the long stream.
It wouldn't work out the other way.
So you end up with.
But it's not going to matter because what's
going to happen in the 28 to 30
era, you're going to have another crash enough
so that it's going to shake the Democrat
Party and you're going to end up with
Democrats and the Republican Party and the Democrats
will get in in 2032.
Well, hopefully we're dead then.
But we won't be dead that far from
now.
I want to see that.
We'll still be spitting in the mic, baby.
Four more years.
I got to wash my.
Never mind.
Yeah, you're you're.
What does it call the thing that you
have in front of the mic?
The the the windscreen windscreen.
I have to wash my windscreen filter pop
filter filter.
That's it.
I use one.
Let's do a I have two clips here
to commemorate the passing of former Vice President
Dick Cheney, the man who had his heart
in a bag for the past 10 years.
There were some things that I remember when
he had the mechanical heart they had to
take out.
Yeah, yeah, because he did because there was
no rhythm.
If you have a mechanical heart, it's just
pumping blood continuously.
You you can't keep track of time.
You can't do anything.
There's a lot of things Dick Cheney, the
CBC did.
I'm surprised there wasn't more.
I thought we would have had more obits.
Did they not?
Did they think that Cheney would just live
forever?
They didn't have anything pre-produced on the
on the everybody hated this guy.
Pretty much didn't even acknowledge that.
I know that he died because, you know,
he had to vote for Kamala.
The guy was a terrible person.
Let's listen to the CBC obit.
Trust this stress the Canadians to do it
for us.
So help me God.
Congratulations.
By the time he was sworn in as
U.S. Vice President to George W.
Bush in 2001, Dick Cheney had already been
a longstanding force in Washington.
I picked him because he's strong.
He's steady and he gets the job done.
A White House staffer under Richard Nixon, chief
of staff to Gerald Ford, 10 years a
lawmaker on Capitol Hill and secretary of defense
to George H.W. Bush.
It was as vice president that Cheney became
as divisive as he was consequential.
The enemy has shown a capacity to inflict
great damage on the United States.
And we have to assume there will be
more attacks.
After 9-11, Cheney cemented the widely held
view it was his hand that guided the
Bush presidency.
Dick Cheney's legacy is fundamentally complicated.
Garrett Martin, professor at American University School of
International Service, says Cheney will be forever seen
as promoting the most controversial U.S. policies
of those years, including pushing the false notion
Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
Enhanced interrogations or torture, essentially, the Patriot Act
or surveillance, also domestic spying on Americans.
And of course, his most hawkish line on
the war in Iraq and being largely unapologetic
about it.
What we did in Iraq was exactly the
right thing to do.
If I had it to recommend all over
again, I would recommend exactly the right same
course of action.
And then there was my favorite about Dick
Cheney.
In 2006, Cheney accidentally shot a friend while
quail hunting, though another Cheney friend described it
as a peppering.
Late night comedians had a field day.
Peppering is what you do to a Caesar
salad.
He shot that dude.
George W.
Bush today called Cheney a decent, honorable man.
His death, a loss to the nation.
But the current president is a big time
Cheney critic.
As a Republican lawmaker, Cheney's daughter Liz supported
Donald Trump's impeachment.
Here's Trump in 2022.
The Cheneys are diehard globalists and warmongers who
have been plunging us into new conflicts for
decades.
Just last year, Dick Cheney took on Trump
directly with a campaign ad for daughter Liz.
There has never been an individual who is
a greater threat to our republic than Donald
Trump.
Cheney, a lifelong Republican, said he'd vote for
Democrat Kamala Harris.
Today, Trump's White House lowered the flag to
half-mast for Cheney, underlining U.S. law
requires it to do so.
I loved it.
I loved it when he shot that guy
in the face.
Remember how funny that was?
I didn't see it, so I don't know
how funny it was, but yes.
It was, it was, we didn't have memes
back then.
But if we imagine, oh man, he's like,
oh, sorry, man, I shot you in the
face.
No, I just peppered, it's okay.
And who was the guy who got shot?
And he was like, oh, it's okay, it
was just a peppering, it was not a
big deal.
His face was full of buckshot.
No, it wasn't buckshot, it was birdshot.
Birdshot, okay.
Anyway, big difference.
He's gone.
Ding dong, he's gone.
I wonder, I wonder if he's meeting Jesus
right now.
I have my doubts.
I doubt it.
I have my doubts.
So a couple of light clips, let's go
with these TikToks.
I got a couple here.
All right, this will be it because we
got to get out of here, man.
It's way too much content.
Okay, this will be the end of it
then.
Okay, which one?
Well, just one of them.
If I'm going to pick one, I think
we'll go with the non-binary girl.
All right, non-binary girl, you're up.
Two things to know.
I'm non-binary, I go by they, them.
And I work in a store that is
pretty much all women.
So whenever they're like addressing us or when
they're talking, they're always like, hey ladies.
So I've taken it upon myself as someone
that is non-binary to use this to
not listen.
And whenever anyone addresses a group as ladies,
I am not included.
So when they say, hey ladies, let's like
stop talking or hey ladies, let's like get
to work.
I will do none of it because you're
not talking to me.
You're not talking to me.
So I will not listen to anything that
is said when it is started with, hey
ladies, I'm a theydy.
Not a lady, a theydy.
Oh, a theydy.
Oh goodness gracious.
Did you share this with Chanel?
Theydy, no, not yet.
I can't wait.
But there's definitely a point of information, the
new term they.
I never heard this before, theydy.
Okay, theydy.
Oh, theydy.
So we're going to have Adam go through
the people that donate over $50 and then
he'll take us to the meetups and some
other housework.
Yes, we have Ed in Summit, New Jersey.
And he actually has a switcheroo.
He wants us to switcheroo this to Capitalist
Agenda who helped me out with an amazing
image, bringing Apple Juice, the hockey player to
life.
He says, from this day forward, I claim
167.41 shall be known as the Apple
Juice donation.
Okay, Ed, good luck with that.
Oh, Sir Bernie Adema.
Haven't seen him in a while.
No, he hasn't.
That's right.
One, two, three, four, five.
And it's a John-specific request to mention
postcard book he received a few months ago.
This is up to you.
What is this about the postcard book?
Well, he had me do a blurb because
I do blurbs at the drop of a
hat.
And a lot of people got impressed by
it.
He does it at SiouxCityHistory.com.
Go see SiouxCityHistory.com.
And it's a book of antique postcards about
Sioux City, Iowa.
Or is it South Dakota?
SiouxCityHistory.com.
Yeah, Sioux City, Iowa.
And I found it fascinating.
And he probably needs to sell a few
books.
So go check it out.
Hey, so a Dutch guy, he sold a
book in Holland, a self-help book, 350
,000 copies in Holland, which is a lot.
That's a lot for here.
Yeah, his name is Michael Palachik.
And he's a DJ, former DJ.
He's kind of from the generation that came
after me.
And he has it translated in English.
And he asked me to do a blurb
for his book.
Would you mind just adding one as well?
I'll be glad to.
Yeah, exactly.
That's what I thought.
You know me, I said it before.
Just throw it in there.
No problem.
We got a twofer.
Dame Rita, Sparks, Nevada, 11106.
She appreciates the humor.
John Robinet, $100.
Thank you, John.
Another name we haven't seen in a while.
Ash from Texas, 8667.
God bless you, Ash in Texas.
Kevin McLaughlin, Concord, North Carolina.
Boob donation, 8008.
He says, Laos Deo, which translates to praise
be to God, inscribed on top of the
Washington Monument, facing east towards the rising sun.
Stephen Hutto, St. Petersburg, Florida, 75.
Servant, 6767.
There you go.
The only 67 donation for this show.
David Cox in Austin, Texas, 6325.
Teresa Andrews in Camarillo, California, 6161.
Les Tarkowski in Kingman, Arizona.
Smallboob, 6006.
Susan Brendel in Wexford, Pennsylvania.
Happy birthday to Lori, our wonderful sister.
Love from Karen and Susie.
Birthday is 1111, and that is $60.
Steve Banstra, he's one of our pilots.
Nashville, Tennessee.
EGGS, over easy.
Oh, yes.
EGGS, over easy, 5993.
Got it.
Dame Nancy, San Bruno, California.
Donate, it's good for your soul and for
the show.
Love, Dame Nancy of the Confused, 5721.
Brian Furley, 5510.
Double nickels on the dime.
Cameron Linge, North Branch, Minnesota.
Double nickels on the dime.
Troy Funderburk, Missoula, Montana, 55.
Hakon Anderson from Portland, Oregon, 5272.
And here are 50s.
James Sherimeta from Nappanoag, New York.
Chris Conaker from Anchorage, Alaska.
Tony Lang from Castle Pines, Colorado.
Esther Alex Zavala from Kyle, Texas.
NickUDads.com, NickUDadsPodcast, 50.
Alex Stubbings and Leslie Walker from Roseburg, $50.
They love the show.
Eichi Kitagawa from San Francisco, 50.
Jason Deluzio in Miami Beach, Florida.
And Walker Phillips from San Rafael, California, $50.
These are the 50s and above.
Thank you for your courage and for supporting
the best podcast in the universe.
Of course, we only mention over 50 and
keep the rest, the under 50, anonymous.
We do have people on layaway programs, et
cetera.
Go to noagendadonations.com and you can find
out all of the wonderful things you can
do to support us.
But ultimately, it's value for value.
Whatever value you get out of the show,
send it back to us.
We accept it and love it all.
noagendadonations.com.
A pretty short list, but a very important
birthday right off the bat.
Greg Speed wishes our very own speed racer,
Ashlyn Speed, a happy birthday.
She turned 19 on November 5th.
And we love what Ashlyn Speed does.
Christopher Ryan celebrates today, actually.
And Karen and Susie wish Lori, their wonderful
sister, a happy birthday.
She'll be celebrating on the 11th.
Happy birthday from everybody here at the best
podcast in the universe.
So we have no knights, no dames, no
title changes, but we do have one International
Peace Prize to give away, one No Agenda
International Peace Prize.
Thanks to AUG for AUG's donation of not
just $1,000, but 1776 and some dimes.
So you can go to noagendarings.com and
let us know where you would like to
receive and in what name precisely, AUG, your
International Peace Prize should be.
These are the real deal, No Agenda International
Peace Prizes.
President Trump and Vice President Vance and Whitkoff
gets one.
Who else gets one?
Trump.
Whitkoff.
Kushner.
There you go.
So these are the real deal and go
to noagendarings.com or noagendadonations.com.
Yeah, the meetups.
Another great way you can participate in our
value for value economy by organizing one or
just going to one.
It's really good for you.
It's good for the soul.
You will meet people who are like-minded.
You'll have great conversations.
You'll meet, you'll make connection that is automatically
protection.
And of course, these will be your first
responders in any emergency.
Today, the Northern Wake Post Halloween Recovery Hugathon
kicks off at six o'clock in Hoppy
Endings, Raleigh, North Carolina.
So many meetups there.
They never send a meetup report, which is
a little bit disappointing.
Please send one.
On Saturday, the Treasure Valley Boise 330 at
Old State Saloon in Eagle, Idaho.
Also on Saturday, Holy Hobos and Pretty People
Part Two.
Five o'clock at Post Brewing in Fort
Collins, Colorado.
And the rest of this month, we have
Oklahoma, Collierville, Texas, Fort Wayne, Indiana.
Big one on the 15th of November in
Albany, California.
John will be there.
Central Ohio, Zurich, Switzerland, Charlotte, North Carolina, Wilmington,
California, Burlington, Kentucky, Spokane, Washington, Wageningen in the
Netherlands.
Many, many meetups that are taking place around
the globe.
Don't miss out.
Become a part of the movement.
We're not just a podcast.
We're a movement.
You know who always says that?
No.
Glenn Beck.
Who always says that?
Glenn Beck.
This is not just a podcast.
It's a movement.
So join in the movement.
Go to noagendameetups.com.
You can't find one, you start one yourself.
It's always a party.
And before we get to the end part
of this party, which is a real party
with a whole bunch of AI slop, end
of show isos, end of show mixes, we
actually try and select an iso that we'll
play at the very, very end of the
show.
You once again only have one, which means
you're very confident.
It's like Sam Altman confidence you're showing us
here with the, oh, I just had one
iso.
I know be the winner anyway.
So, no, I never said I gave up.
I had one the other day that Alex
Jones beat.
That's true.
And I don't have any Alex Jones today.
Otherwise, I've got a chance.
Well, let's listen to mine.
Here we go.
Seems like it's making a lot of people
gay too.
Okay.
Can't beat that one.
Here's another one.
We did such a good job.
No, no, not too bad.
A bit better than this one.
It seems magical.
Okay.
Those are my three entrants.
Okay.
I have one.
Okay, here we go.
I double dog dare you to find a
better show than this.
I don't know.
Seems like it's making a lot of people
gay too.
I mean, that's- No, we're not using
that.
It's Jon's AI iso and here's his tip
of the day.
And sometimes Adam.
So since we're approaching the holiday season, I
thought maybe it's a good idea to promote
booze a little more.
Yes, booze is always good.
And people love these tips on alcohol.
The bunch of winos are people.
Well, this is not wine, but this is
a product.
And I have a story.
This is a product with a story.
So we were in South Africa back just
before Mandela got in.
And- Who's we?
Who's we?
The family.
Oh, the whole family?
Yeah, took the whole family.
Wow.
I was invited to buy a very important
group down there to talk about stuff.
Oh, spook, spook, spook.
And very important, the VIPs.
Spook work.
It could have been.
But so we were there for a week.
And so I'm going to a lot of
bars and restaurants.
And then I ran into this product there,
very well presented.
It's stunner.
and it never had, they did not bring
it into the United States until probably five
or six years later, and I was stunned
when I saw it here, because it's one
of the tastiest.
You know, familiar with these, with Irish cream
and some of these cream liquors?
Well, they're delicious.
But although they're not nearly as good as
the South African product, which everybody, this, everywhere
in the country, it's called Amarula, A-M
-A-R-U-L-A, it's got a
big elephant on the label, and it's a
cream liqueur made with some screwball citrus fruit
from Africa, and it's just, one of the
most stunning products you can ever just have
a little glass of, it's delicious.
And do you think I can pick this
up at H-E-B, Amarula?
Yeah, I wouldn't, definitely a liquor store in
your neck of the woods would have it,
somebody would have it.
I'd be shocked if you can't find it,
because it's everywhere.
Because I just picked up two more bottles
of my Robert...
The Mondavi stuff.
Yes, yes, it's still the bottom shelf, last,
there's one, I left one bottle for that
one Noah Jindal listener in Fredericksburg who wants
to go get it, and that'll be it.
So, Amarulo, okay.
Yeah, it's Amarula.
Amarula.
It's A-M-A-R-U-L-A.
And is it like a nutty taste, or?
No, no, it's a citrusy taste.
Citrusy taste.
But it's got an aftertaste and an acidity,
everything.
This is unbelievably tasty.
We cannot wait to taste it.
We're all rushing off to our local liquor
store.
Find all of John's tips at tipoftheday.net.
♪ Create a glass for you and me
♪ ♪ Just a tip with JCB ♪
And sometimes add-on.
Created by Dana Brunetti.
But before you go, we've got some end
-of-show mixes.
We got, man, we got a lot here.
Danny Lewis, Bonald Crabtree, MVP.
We got tons, tons of A.I. Slop.
Find it all at Gitmo Jams, gitmojams.com,
if it works.
Hey, coming up next on your modern podcast
app, noagendastream.com, That Larry Show.
And I guess he's mad about Mom Donny,
the type of show that he's been doing
and the title of this show is The
Big Rotten Commie Apple.
That's Larry for you, that's Larry for you.
And we, of course, will return on Sunday
to bring you another several hours worth of
media deconstruction.
There's always something going on in your world
and you can get informed here without the
spin, without getting spun up, without all the
nonsense.
But of course, if you want to hear
us say, mmkay, we'll be here for that
too.
Coming to you from the heart of the
Texas Hill Country in Fredericksburg, Texas, in the
morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
And from Northern Silicon Valley, I'm John C.
Dvorak.
We'll be back on Sunday.
Until then, please remember us at noagendadonations.com.
Any amount, it always helps.
It's value for value.
Until then, adios, mofos, and hui hui, and
such.
♪ Shuba, shuba, a wop, a balloon, a
beep beep ♪
♪ When he was at every single call
♪ ♪ With his amendment
DC, oh no ♪ ♪ Some folks said
he pulled the strings ♪ ♪ Controlled the
budget, controlled the things ♪ ♪ Oh, je
voom, je voom, je voom, je voom, je
voom, je voom ♪ ♪ Hey, wop, shuba,
shuba ♪ Where music means nothing There's jams
Gives you joy Trigger warning And five worst
enemy crushing their credibility with hilarious clarity No
agenda in the morning no ads no dependencies
the trolls in the troll room doing their
thing Nights at the round table raise your
rings most podcasts are paid for and bought
no agenda uses the ancient art of free
thought So i'm hitting you in the mouth
think i'm joking Around and find out they
have been around the block once or twice
It would be nice if you donated some
time double nickels on the down that would
suffice No blankets just send your cash.
There's nothing to watch just sit back and
laugh and you don't have to listen to
mustache grooming Agenda
In the morning It's nine o'clock do
you know where your agenda is my words
No agenda stream you want slop sloppy joe's
it's what's for dinner no agenda averages to
Count them two slops per hour.
Oh my god Yo dog, we heard you
like fed music The blue pill is for
normie.
The red pill is for insales.
Are you ready for the next level?
Yes Then you want the fed pill fed
pilled records the official global fed pill industrial
complex supplying the world with the music they
crave Oh boy, we've got all the hits
from totally real actual musicians From parodies to
paradox originals to covers silly to bangers hear
us on the no agenda music stream or
occasionally on the end of show mix also
available on youtube global fed pilled industrial complex
Forget your med bed and take your fed
med, please.
Just leave me alone I'm radiosack ceo of
fed pilled records also known as putty mouth
the bun of crap tree I am not
a fed and have zero agendas.
Adam curry absolutely did not mk ultra me
in to make this.
That's a spook See right there Come and
take your fed pill today Fed pill may
cause hallucinations memory loss clod urethra hair loss
consult a doctor immediately If you experience an
episode of delirium causing you to believe your
neighbor's daughter has kicked your dog Or if
your hallucinators space days are hovering above your
house for longer than 48 hours consume responsibly
With a show to invent the crackpot and
buzzkill their talents were lent Parodies
I double dog dare you to find a
better show than this