PBD Podcast - Vivek Ramaswamy | PBD Podcast | Ep. 326

Starting point is 00:00:00 This episode is brought to you by WealthSimple. You work hard for your money. Does it work hard for you? It will at WealthSimple, where you can earn 4.5% interest if you're a premium client by stocks and ETFs commission-free or have your investments managed for you. Plus, you can get a transfer bonus of up to $2,000. Find out how at WealthSimple.com slash move and make the switch.

Starting point is 00:00:22 Minimum-required term supply annualized interest rate subject to change. like 100% Canadian-raised season chicken in every chicken McNucket. Are thing and Jacobs' thing together? It makes for a delicious mischievous game, even when he gets caught in the act by Sarah. Quality, it's a McDonald's thing. So podcast episode 326 we have the man who uses TikTok and pisses other people out. He's not afraid of calling people out. He apparently calls someone a dick, chainy, and three-in-chieels, right? And she corrected him and said, it's five-in-chieels. And I still don't know what the tweets all about when they talk about that.

Starting point is 00:01:41 I mean, I have no idea what that's talking about. I had no idea what she was talking about. But I called out two people in heels from the party. Yes, that's right. It was accurate. Yes, but it was constant calling out, it's great to have you back, man. Good to be on, brother.

Starting point is 00:01:51 Yes. How you doing? Good to be here. I'm feeling good. I'm feeling pretty unconstrained and... How was dinner with your family in Rana McNathiel last night? You know, it was... Well, she said she refused to pay the bill because she's not,

Starting point is 00:02:04 I'm gonna get another cent from the RNC. Yeah, I saw that. Can she say that? Can she say that? I mean, not legally. I mean, if you think about your duty is not your money, it's not your money, right? And so I don't know if people, you think people know what the, where I'm talking about. This is the story you talk about right here, right?

Starting point is 00:02:19 Yeah, people already know we're talking about, yeah. It's an absolute, total asshole. So, so, so, so just so people, if they didn't watch the debate the other night or whatever. I am a believer in accountability. Okay, so this woman is appointed chair of the RNC, Republican National Committee in 2017. Let's just do the math. It's not that complicated. 2018 loss.

Starting point is 00:02:40 2020 loss. 2022, no red wave. 2023, bad trouncing. So insanity is expecting a different conclusion unless you're going to make a change. This is the person who's running the Republican national committee. So that had happened the night before the debate, the 2023 trouncing. So I went on stage and say, wouldn else in every other candidate is supposed to delicately tiptoe around the gentile norms of the RNC. And it's not like I surprised her with this. Okay.

Starting point is 00:03:11 We actually, I didn't, I haven't talked to her this before. So we went, we had a debate walkthrough. You kind of go through in the morning of, I'm not making this up. It's like, I wish there was no cameras all out in there. We can catch this. She comes in. She's just like, trying to give me a hug. I'm like, I'll give you a handshake. And I was just like, I wish there was no cameras all out in there, we can catch this. She comes in, she's just like, trying to give me a hug, I'm like,

Starting point is 00:03:26 I'll give you a handshake. And I was just like, how are you doing? And she's like, she's like, how are you doing? I was like, not great. I mean, the election didn't go very well last night. It's not great given last night. And I'm not even kidding you. Here's what she says.

Starting point is 00:03:38 What happened last night? Oh my God. No, I'm not kidding. So I thought she was joking. So I'm just like, yeah, she's like, no, seriously, what happened last night? And then she got kind of combative about it. Who's around when this was happened?

Starting point is 00:03:48 Oh, like people from NBC, other like staffers from the Republican party. She didn't want to give you a hug. You said, I'll give you a handshake. Yeah, yeah. So I'll give you a handshake. Have you guys had any feud prior to this or no? No, no, no, but I'm just, I believe in,

Starting point is 00:04:00 well, we have, I'm not multiple, actually. Because, because it's not personal. It's the failure of how she leads this party. I mean, number one, at the start of this race, I said release the debate stage criteria. If you don't play games later, I believe that played a role and she was just like, no, but they actually released it earlier than they did last time around because I believe I called on them too. So they released it at least earlier.

Starting point is 00:04:20 So I gave credit where credit was due when they at least responded. First, she was like, no, we're not going to do it. We're staying radio silent. But I believe I had an impact on that and I gave credit where credit was due when they at least responded. First, she was like, no, we're not going to do it. We're staying radio silent. But I believe I had an impact on that and I gave credit where credit was due. So that was that loop was closed. Then Fox calls me after the second debate and Chris Christie and say, hey, do you want to, would you spar with Chris Christie or have a dialogue, open dialogue, since the second debate, I mean, the unspoken reality is that was useless. So I said, I would do it. The night before a Ronald McDaniel calls me on my cell phone and says, you will be disqualified from the next debate if you participate in this discussion with Chris Christie. I said,

Starting point is 00:04:51 Ronna, how does this advance the interests of the GOP? Like, like the GOP voter base, how is the GOP voter base better off if we hear less debate between the candidates? Explain that to me. She has no good explanation, but regardless that raised some of my recent sparring with her in public. But this has nothing to do with me and her. What happened on the night before the debate was the Republican Party nationally got trounced.

Starting point is 00:05:17 And everybody, if you're... Just Troy, Kentucky, all right. Totally, just great. Virginia, I mean, kind of Ohio, you just go, these are red states, okay? Oh, Kentucky, Ohio, certainly. And so I'm walking in, this is the morning after that trouncing. This is the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee. She's coming, she's like, hey, how are you?

Starting point is 00:05:37 I'm like, I'll give you a handshake. She's like, how are you doing? I said, not that well, given that last night, didn't go over what happened last night. Like a oblivion. So she's saying a joke. No, no, no, she's saying almost angrily, right? Because I was like, the last night, she's sending go else. She's challenging me. She says, well, what happened last night?

Starting point is 00:05:53 Oh, okay. Like, what happened last night? I don't know what happened last night. Tell me what happened last night. And I'm just like, this is the person who's accountable for running the Republican party. I said, who lost the election? She said, we have nothing to do with that. Really?

Starting point is 00:06:04 I run the national party. These are state races. We have nothing to do with that. So where's and then and then says and then starts to like escalate her voice and says, I refuse to follow on the sword for this one. I refuse to follow on the sword for this one. This is not my fault. And it's like, okay, clearly she's been, she's been criticized for this. How many minutes before you hit the stages this happening? Oh, this is like early, this is the morning, right? Okay. Like the pregame prep, yeah, you kind of go through. I got to walk through. They show you where you're going to be standing. Here's your microphone. So that's where this happens. So it's not like I surprised her on the state. Got it. All right. She knew where I'm at on this. She had already

Starting point is 00:06:41 had a long morning with this topic. Oh, of course, and should. I mean, she, 2018 lost, 2020 lost, 2022, no red wave, 2023, trouncing, total drugging for the Republican party. This is the individual who's the national chairwoman. She runs the entire Republican national committee. Where's the accountability? So I get on stage and you're getting some like, you know, standard, you know, beaten out dead old horse, Donald Trump question. I said, forget that. Let's talk about what happened last night because last two elections, he's been out. and you're getting some like, you know, standard, you know, beaten, dead old horse, Donald Trump question.

Starting point is 00:07:05 I said, forget that. Let's talk about what happened last night because last two elections, he's been out. Republicans have gotten trounce for different reasons. So stop blaming the boogeyman. There's an accountability problem within the Republican party. And so, so I say on stage that Ronald McDaniel, if she wanted to come up on stage, and I meant it, if she did want to come up on stage, you know, debate stage time is valuable, but I would still yield my time to her if she wants to use the microphone, look the American people in the eye and say she resigns, which would be

Starting point is 00:07:31 good for the Republican party. And I believe she should resign. So what does she say? So then the press reports, there's people apparently sitting in her row or behind her own front of her where she is. Think about this, the neutral arbiter of the Republican national committee later in the debate when I'm sparring with other candidates, booing when I'm speaking, clapping against other candidates when they're speaking against me.

Starting point is 00:07:52 So she was booing. She was booing me at other points in the debate. And I don't care about that, but think about your dereliction of duty. You're supposedly the neutral arbiter of the entire national Republican party hosting a debate. It's like a referee cheering in the middle of a game between two teams. It doesn't make sense. Like if you're, if the referee is like booing or hollering in favor of one team or the other, that's, that's what that looks like if she's the arbiter.

Starting point is 00:08:18 Then she's saying during the breaks, this has reported by the press. So I wasn't there, but it's apparently sources who are around her reported by multiple sources in the press saying that I would not get another cent from the RNC. So think about what that means. That means she believes that's her money. Right. She these are donations. She's collected from other people. But somebody said a mean thing about her. And it's not even a mean thing about her. Someone said that we need accountability in the Republican Party, that this person who has failed us four times in a row,

Starting point is 00:08:49 that there needs to be some accountability. She says, if he says that about me, then this money that I have been astured for, a fiduciary for, that I'm not gonna give a sent to him because he said something that I didn't like about me. That's a conflict of interest. So then I get a question after the debate in the press room. I don't know who it came from, but I'm presuming it's from, you know, one of the RNC aligned

Starting point is 00:09:09 people, which is, how come you would go on Rana's stage on her stage on her stages, what they said, on her stage and criticize her like that. My response is, that's not her stage. And that's the problem with this party. It doesn't belong to these corrupt establishment political creatures. It belongs to the voters and the people of this country. That's where the Republican party is badly mixed up. Question for you. Senator dinner didn't go well.

Starting point is 00:09:39 But I assume you know her last name or maiden name. Romney. Oh, yeah. I think it, I think she embodies it. Let me ask a question when she says, you can't, you know, go debate Christy, then how is she okay with the Sanctus debating Newsom? Because it's corruption, man. You think that's what it is?

Starting point is 00:09:59 Absolutely, it's correct. Because the people who are propping up Ron DeSantis, like the Super PAC money, all that's it's doing up. And this is not, I'm not, it's not criticizing Ron or not, it's not, it's not, it's not nothing to do with it. It's just the system is, there's tens and tens of millions of dollars in a system where supposedly the max you can give to a campaign is $3,300.

Starting point is 00:10:15 The people who have lobbied and gotten their special favors from, and it's not just Ron, it's the way politics works. The those people are the big donors to the Republican party. And Ron is debating another candidate who's running for US president that is called Gavin Newsom and the man who's running for US president flying around doing the funny thing about this is Gavin Newsom is not running for US president in the same way that Ron DeSantis was not running for US president, jaunting around on public money and private jets on matters that I'm nothing to do with the state.

Starting point is 00:10:41 That's what Gavin Newsom is doing now. And as I said on the debate stage as well, to the Democratic party, I call it Republicans Democrats evenly, called Democrats more. Be honest, your Biden's not going to be the nominee. So who's it going to be put up, whichever other person it's going to be so we can have an honest debate? But yet, but Ron is able to have that full on debate on the same network, Fox. But if they're calling me, I think what happened is at a certain point in the race, you know,

Starting point is 00:11:09 on late summer, initially they're saying, oh, yeah, young guy, I could check the box. We got, you know, a lot of boxes he checks for us. We get to say that this guy ran in the Republican party, young guy, different generation, first generation, whatever. Okay, we check that box. Oh, wait, he's, he's not going away when he's supposed to, right? The other no name candidates, and I was initially a no name candidate too. The other no name candidates had no chance of making the first debate.

Starting point is 00:11:32 They're all off. Nobody really paid attention to them. Wait, this guy's sticking around and then wait, he's saying some things that the establishment that has an allergic reaction to Trump. Wait, he sounds a little bit like that. This isn't supposed to happen again. Stop it. Okay. Okay, it was cute little bit like that. This isn't supposed to happen again. No, stop it. Okay. Okay. It was cute while it lasted. Like, make it stop. That's sort of where they were.

Starting point is 00:11:50 And so I think there has been a concerted effort amongst the donor establishment class that has convened private summits with the Haley campaign, the Dessanas, scott campaigns, the Pence and others, Christie. I'm the only person other than Trump that's not, you know, invited to these closed door forums. There's certain debates we want Ron desanis to get his airtime. You do what we're going to disqualify you from the next debate. And then you get to the place where now if you're critical of that party, she says, we're not going to use that she because she doesn't like what I said. It's a personal conflict of interest. It's gonna say you don't get another cent from the RNC.

Starting point is 00:12:29 So in a certain sense, they prove my point about the corruption to say that they view this as their money to treat it in a way that they're gonna pick whoever their favorite horses are. Yeah, that's very strange for because the voter, I'm sitting there saying, why is, and I even asked the governor, I said, why are you debating Newsom? I think a year ago made sense sense I think right now makes no sense for the two of you guys to debate but but Rob do you have the clip of

Starting point is 00:12:51 Rana McDaniel being confronted about what Vivax said and what a response is and she said I'm not the one running for president play this clip if you could There were allegations that were thrown on the stage by a number one of the canism Tickler arguing that the Republican Party has a culture of both saying. Specifically, the ACR, I'm a song they called for you to resign, would you like to respond to that? I'm going to focus on beating Joe Biden.

Starting point is 00:13:13 I wish that's what all the candidates did. I'm not running for president. I'm very proud of the fact that under my tenure, we won back the House. We now are getting investigations into the Biden's. I also as Michigan chair for the first time in 30 years, one estate that Democrats hadn't been in. I'm very proud of the fact that we're going to have staff

Starting point is 00:13:30 in 15 states heading into 2024. But you know, I'll leave other people to attack Republicans. I'm going to focus on Democrats. I will say this. We can't attack each other and win. We need all of us. So I said, you can pause it at this one. Comment on that.

Starting point is 00:13:43 It was really funny. I hadn't seen this interview. I saw a different interview she did on Fox or Fox Business, where literally it was yesterday morning. She's going on air, national conservative audience and literally just stated as a fact that Vivek voted for Obama. Oh, yeah, that's right. 100% I just confirmed for you.

Starting point is 00:14:05 100% false. Never voted for Obama in my life. So you have the chair of the RNC, say, and I'm not going to criticize the Republicans, and then go on, go on national TV, say one of the Republican presidential candidates who you are booing. You have the middle of the debate. Oh, you have that one. It's 11 seconds.

Starting point is 00:14:19 You can play to clip. I texted it to you. You guys already, yeah. I'm looking forward to it. Hey, I saw it after you actually, there's. So, so that was press reports of people who were sitting in her row commenting on the fact that she said that there's going to be not one sent to me from the RNC fiduciary violation. This money thinks the situation is not one cent. How does it actually get divvied up? Because you're the only

Starting point is 00:14:41 candidate out there that has made their money as an entrepreneur to tell you the truth. I have no idea how the hell all of this sausage making works because I've basically said screw the system. Now what does that cost me eight figure sums of my wealth that we're putting into this campaign, 15, 16 plus million bucks already, putting in millions more. It's going to be tens of millions of dollars certainly by the time we're done. We're going to stop at nothing. But that's the cost of saying screw you to a corrupt system that otherwise wants you

Starting point is 00:15:11 to behave like their circus monkey, which I refuse to. But the point is, this is a person who's running the RNC managing other people's money and saying that because you said something I don't like, I'm not going to give you one cent, then goes on national TV and spews, I mean, it's just a straight up factual falsehood, right? The fake voted for Obama. Is it false? Yes, it is. Is it damaging? Yes, it is. Is it done with malicious intent for the person who was booing at me and saying those things? Yes, it was. Now, am I going to go after because I have better things to do in my life? Probably not, right? But this is, this is corrupt stuff on the first place, play this for a bit.

Starting point is 00:15:46 Wait, because it's 11 seconds. Go ahead, Rob. I know the Vakes kind of newer to the party. He voted for Obama, so he may not know that. She just flattens as I vote for him. It is a lie. I mean, look at this woman. Boldface getting up there loses four elections for the Republican party, pathetically

Starting point is 00:16:01 going up, literally just looking the American voters, Republican voters in the eye, and telling them a bold face lie. I mean, you just just play that. I just want people to get good again, because I don't want it, that I'm putting words in her mouth. I know the Vakes kind of knew her to the party. He voted for Obama, so he made that. He voted? I mean, this is a bad idea.

Starting point is 00:16:19 This is a woman with a fact with an Iota of bases. Is there a way to prove that so she loses? Yeah, actually, actually, there's a way to prove. Okay. It has voting record, right? Yeah, the voting record. So actually, I was so disillusioned, and I've talked about this. I voted Libertarian when I was young in my first election.

Starting point is 00:16:34 Then I got so disillusioned from politics that it's actually public record that in both those, I don't like John McCain and I don't like Barack Obama. And I didn't like Mitt Romney and I didn't like Barack Obama. So I actually didn't vote in those elections. I sat him out. I'm not, I'm not particularly proud of that. It was my 20s. I understand why many people are disillusioned from politics.

Starting point is 00:16:52 I was disillusioned back then too. I voted for the libertarian candidate back in 2004 and that I basically said screw this. This is a, this is a better thing to do with my life. I'm going to be an entrepreneur. I could care less about politics, but then came back around to it later. But literally that is now public record actual falls lie. Flat, bold face lie to the American people, say they won't give money. And so that proves the corruption.

Starting point is 00:17:14 So that's the Ron and McDaniel corruption. But then I decided when I was on stage, I can waste in too much time on this stuffed suit of a bureaucrat running the RNC. Let's focus on the real problem, which is the equivalent, the Ronald McDonald of media. There's many of them, Christian Welker, sitting right there from NBC News. And there's a connection between the two because who decides to put up the Christian Welkers

Starting point is 00:17:36 of the world to moderate a Republican debate? It's none other than the RNC, the failed establishment that Ronald McDonald's run, that's lost its last four major cycles relative to what it was supposed to do. So that same, it's almost proof sitting on that stage. But back to the other side of the rest of that. So that's why, I mean, it is almost, they're repeatedly proving my point based on the

Starting point is 00:17:56 kind of debate they were hosting and the moderates they hired to the things she's saying in the audience during the debate, to booing me during the debate, to now say in that false things, I'm not telling you. What would be a good RNC? Who would be a good RNC? Any name? It's a good question. Yes. So let's, because I think first term, the first term, the first term, the first term,

Starting point is 00:18:11 the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first

Starting point is 00:18:19 term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term, the first term But Charlie said that about me. Yeah. Well, I'll return the compliment to him. I think he could actually do a good job of it. I think it's crazy. I don't think it's crazy, actually. I mean, he's from a different generation.

Starting point is 00:18:30 They would not let him do it. I mean, this, that's almost a credential. So whoever they shouldn't let do it, that should be a requirement for whoever does do it to actually get put in that place. I mean, Harmy Dillon, very good. She ran against Ronaldonomic Daniel. She's competent. She's a lawyer.

Starting point is 00:18:48 She understands, and I think the lawyer thing helps because there's an element to running the elections in a way that's competitive that you make sure it's actually run fairly for the Republicans to be able to compete. So harmy dillon is a good background. There's this guy Scott Pressler, who's, I don't know if he's a Republican activist. He's nowhere on the radar of the Republican national committee, but he's a guy who got to know, talked to him from time to time, was tried to be very helpful in some of the other elections that have played out in the last couple of years, but a grass roots act, that has actually focused on the way elections are run. So Scott Pressler,

Starting point is 00:19:20 harmy Dylan, I mean, these are all good people. I mean, I, I, you know, I assumed Charlie wasn't serious when he suggested me, but I would say in the civil society. I think I saw somewhere him saying, by the way, did you have, that there's a video of you talking to somebody, were you talking to her or no? I think that a debate, that's somebody else. I didn't, I had, to my knowledge,

Starting point is 00:19:36 I haven't talked to Ron, I sense after debate. There's a lot of people piling in, so if she was in that, I got you, throng, screening something. So, let me, I have no idea what the other part of that is. That's very confusing for me I want to play this and then we can go in two bunch of different topics. We got time right pull up the three poles So there's three poles. I want to show you okay first one go to the

Starting point is 00:19:54 And by the way before we go to this poll Let's go to our sponsor because we haven't done that yet Rob Let's go to our sponsor and then right after this. I want to show you three poles Each of them are contradictory of each other and and then I want to get your thoughts. Go ahead, Rob. So look, I've been the financial industry since 9-11, the day before 9-11, and I've owned stocks, bonds, mutual funds, real estate, crypto, gold. You name it up on the. But the one thing that's very important part of my portfolio,

Starting point is 00:20:18 all these years, is gold. I love having a percentage of my network in gold that I have access to in case of many different things That's what we chose to work with our new sponsor American Hartford Gold If you have retirement funds that you cannot afford to lose American Hartford Gold will ship physical gold or silver directly to your door Also, if you have retirement funds that you can't afford to lose now is the time to call American Hartford Gold a precious metal dealer you can trust. They have the finest products, amazing customer service, and a buyback commitment.

Starting point is 00:20:47 They've earned a five-star rating from thousands of reviews and an eight plus from the Better Business Bureau. Tell them I send you and they'll send you up to $5,000 worth of free silver on your first order. So click on the link in the description or call 866-939-6984 again. 866-939, 6984. Okay, so Rob, are we back on? Okay, if we're back on, so here's what I wanna show you. I wanna show you three polls. Okay, and one of them may or may not be a poll

Starting point is 00:21:14 and we'll get your thoughts on it. So, first thing that's going around, here's New York Times. Okay, who did well in the debate? I was about to say podcast. So, did did better score 10 Niki Haley then they have the Santis then they have Chris Christie then I have Tim Scott then I have you last okay Yep, now keep in mind. This is New York Times. Let's go to the next one. It's not a poll. You know that Yeah, this was yes

Starting point is 00:21:37 Go back to go back to go back to it. I want to make sure that's right. Yeah opinion writers and So their own opinion writing staff. I think there's contributors. Yeah, their own staff who writes for the. Which is right. By the way, to me, I see this as flip it. It's how I see it. 100%. But go to the next one.

Starting point is 00:21:55 Go to this is David Pakman. You've been on a show. And I thought it was a very good show. The two of you guys together. This guy's a far left hardcore liberal guy. He thinks Biden's doing a fantastic job. Talk to the left, I like talking to you. And I thought it was a very good conversation

Starting point is 00:22:08 with the two of you. At the bottom here is Tim Scott, okay. Dennis DeSantis, then it's you, then it's Chris Christie, then Nikki Haley. By the way, the weird thing is Democrats, 37,000 votes, so this is actual votes on Twitter, are choosing Nikki Haley, then Chris Christie, you in the middle. This is how I process this. On New York Times, they won him last. On a David

Starting point is 00:22:34 Pacman, they have you right in the middle, and they won DeSantis last, second to the last and Tim Scott. Okay. So now go to Paul that we ran, and this sample size to the by the time it ended up being 165,000 votes 83% you then the Santis then Haley then Tim Scott were capitalists So you know our audience is gonna be an audience that you are business owners entrepreneurs guys who like running businesses Conservative ideas, but this one has you first the Santa second Haley third Tim Scott We didn't put Chris Christie because he just wasn't fighting. I thought he was just kind of lobbying for a job.

Starting point is 00:23:09 So how do you process when you read all these articles, New York Post, here's what New York Post said about you. I didn't see that one. Okay, well let's read it. If you can pull this up Rob, Republicans debate verdict, impressive, Haley shines, stupid, Vivek's self destructs. Okay, this is the ghost.

Starting point is 00:23:24 Impressive, impressive. Impressive, Haley is struct. Okay. This is the ghost. Impressive. Impressive. Hayley is stupid. You know, it's interesting. I would take a lot of criticisms and it's a fascinating one. It's never before other than in the media's and Nikki Hayley's assessments of me. Last time she called me in the last debate.

Starting point is 00:23:42 She said, I feel dumb or every time I hear you speak is what she said last time. If you actually think about that, I understand why she feels that way. But that's the dumb of the stupid criticism. It's that's a new one for me, you know, in this in in in present. I mean, you were valid the turn. You went to Harvard. You went to yeah, you ever been called stupid in your life. That's not a word I like. So I like new experiences. So it's been interesting. You know what this does. Yeah, you know what this does to me. There's so many other adjectives or words you can use than that.

Starting point is 00:24:13 You lose credibility using a word like that. And this is new your post is to oldest. It's been around for God knows how long. So why would they you're conservative? Okay, you're calling that anti-establishment. Doesn't this almost position? But that is new your post as established. But new your post is is establishment. So who do you think they're conservative? Okay, you're calling out anti-establishment. Doesn't this almost position? But that is new your post as established. But New York post is establishment. So who do you think they're for? They have they phase one of the campaign. They were for

Starting point is 00:24:32 Ron Sanders, phase two of the campaign. They decided they're for Nikki Haley. That's the answer. And the really think they're against is Trump or anything resembling what Trump was for this country. All in in some ways, and I respect and admire the New York Post for its reporting when the Hunter Biden laptop story came out that was suppressed. And so, you know, it's a paper that is founded by Alexander Hamilton. There's a lot that I've liked about it when they're going against the establishment of the left. But the fact of the matter is they are the establishment just with the conservative

Starting point is 00:25:03 sheen and they've gone all in it and I think that here's a third rail for them. I've realized this. If you're doing the wokes, anti-woke stuff and whatever, you know, I mean, I wrote this book. They've given me plenty of favorable coverage when I'm talking about domestic issues related to being anti-woke. It's like, yes, we're in for that crusade.

Starting point is 00:25:18 Good. And I actually exposed a lot of the illegality of the way their own stories were suppressed about Hunter Biden. But the real third rail is foreign policy. If you're given up on the interventionist, neo conservative model of liberal hegemony, that's the real third rail for these people. And so when I've touched that third rail and Trump touched that third rail as well, then it's gloves off game over because that threatens the existence of their very identity source of power and for people like Nick Hayley, the source of money.

Starting point is 00:25:50 So that's what I've realized in this campaign is that I thought a few years ago, like when I wrote this book, Woke Ink, I thought I was hitting the third rail. It felt like it, right? I was a guy who was running a business. And it's funny, these, you know, I'll put some of these other recent attacks to inside. They're not important. This clown called Chris Sununu, a man who is a governor of New Hampshire, but is another establishment creature is, you know, believes that somebody who speaks with the candor that I did on that stage does not reflect the temperament to be present.

Starting point is 00:26:25 Oh, I mean, these people are, these people are all different versions of the same thing showing up in different stuff suits somewhere heels, somewhere different kinds of heels. Male heel, manhills and women heels, but there are a bunch of stuff suits with the same thing inside. It's Dick Cheney, 2.0. But when I wrote that book, I felt like I was hitting the Third Rail as a CEO calling out the woke cancer. And it was at the time.

Starting point is 00:26:49 Now it's easy, much easier to criticize wokeness than it was back then. This is in the aftermath of George Floyd's death. But actually, here's what I've learned in this campaign. That wasn't really the Third Rail. The Third Rail is really going heavy on clarity that the U.S US should not be electing to enter wars. That war should never be a preference only necessity. That the sole obligation of a US policymaker is to US citizens here in American soil, period, not to some other person in another country. That the corruption is bipartisan and that the super PACs are a cancer in American politics.

Starting point is 00:27:24 I mean, if you're hitting these points, that's the real third rail for the establishment. The corruption is bipartisan and that the super PACs are a cancer and American politics. I mean, if you're hitting these points, that's the real third rail for the establishment. They're happy with people going hard on anti-woake, at least from the right wing version of the establishment. And so that's been one of my learnings in this campaign is what you think is the third rail and you're riding it. If they're really still propping you up, you're not really hitting the third rail. You're not really getting to the depth of talking

Starting point is 00:27:48 about what others aren't willing to talk about. But it's, I just was speaking my convictions as it relates to the war in Ukraine, which I think has been a corrupt intervention and something that has not advanced US interests. That's really where we say, oh, no, no, hold on, hold the phone, make sure this guy, we suppress this guy in a way

Starting point is 00:28:05 that to bring it full circle was the way that we were suppressed when we reported on the 100-by-and-laptop story. So it's interesting how that kind of comes full circle, but that's where we are today. Why do you think they jumped ship from Rhonda Santas to Nikki Haleck? You said the first part of the election. Yeah.

Starting point is 00:28:19 It was the second part. She's been very hawkish. I think you just became quickly evident that Rhonda Santas has no, well, yeah, I mean, he has no chance that they've concluded, I think, correctly. I mean, I think the same is true about Nikki Haley too, but it became so obvious that with that much money behind him, I'm talking like mega amounts of money that have never been spent in a Republican primary before.

Starting point is 00:28:39 If that couldn't lift up this dead weight that's still hanging on the ground, then okay, that's a lost cause. Let's just find the next puppet we can prop up. And, you know, I think that Nikki Haley came out to be actively pro-war. I mean, there's a woman who calls her heels ammunition. This is a woman who, you know, I think, when she, I mean, I felt like saying on the stage,

Starting point is 00:28:59 you know, I'm not some third world nation that you wanna come bomb, right? That's what she sees. The bombs explode. Her bank account grows that's the kind of person that says okay if she has really greased the wheels of her own bank account to do the thing that we want america to be doing that's our new puppet she has no chance right i mean this woman's going absolutely

Starting point is 00:29:16 nowhere in this election but it's the new thing that the establishment has chosen to see if they can't poor the same cash that they were throwing it on DeSantis to prop up this new puppet. And you know, I think this one's worse than the, than the Ron DeSantis puppet. Ron DeSantis, I wouldn't call him corrupt, right? I actually think he was a good governor. I think he's a good dude. Actually, like at his, at his heart, he's like his family is a good family.

Starting point is 00:29:41 I think he's been exploited. I think that's actually what's happened here is this man would have just continued being the governor of this state and probably done a pretty good job of it. And then the establishment decided to, no, no, no, that's not your choice. You will be the chosen one to run for president. You don't think he wanted to.

Starting point is 00:30:00 I don't think he wanted to. Really? No, I don't think so. I don't think so. I mean, I'm giving you my opinion on this side. Sure, sure. Yeah. Certain things I can tell you are hard facts.

Starting point is 00:30:10 Everything we've talked about so far about Ron McDaniel on all that corruption, that's hard fact. Now I'm just giving you my opinion here. I don't think he, I don't think he and his heart would have wanted to do this or felt called to do this. I think he was dragged into this. And it was a form of sort of abuse of a guy who wasn't wired for this, right?

Starting point is 00:30:32 I mean, he doesn't have the personality for it. He's not, I don't think that he has a personal appetite for it. I think he cares about the country. I think that he has, you know, he served the country in the military as a lawyer and otherwise he seems to be a service-roaring person. I think he was doing a good job in Florida.

Starting point is 00:30:48 I think he cares about Florida. I think once they started putting them up to this, then it changes your mentality and you use Florida as a pedestal to achieve national ambition, but him left to himself without the establishment taining him. He would have just been another of many good governors across the country. That's the right role for someone like him or he's an executor. In some ways, people who use this expression, they meet it as a slight. He's about somebody they could say, he's all talk, no action. In some ways, Ron DeSantis was for a while, all action and no talk. And

Starting point is 00:31:20 I don't mean that as a negative. You could take that as a positive. But when you're talking about running for president of the United States, you have to be able to articulate a vision of who we are and where we're headed. That's part of the job. And that's not a guy who has it. But they propped him up. They forced him into it.

Starting point is 00:31:35 But I would not, I would not call him really, you know, corrupt. I think he has to dance to the tune of his donors, just because that's the way the game has played in the mother's milk of politics. And so he does that like any other puppet would. But the person who's actually corrupt in this, like outright corrupt is Nikki Haley. Really? Yeah, she's corrupt.

Starting point is 00:31:53 And in the way that like Joe Biden is corrupt. Is that when you said you made money with Boeing board? Yeah, I mean, you just kind of go through the facts here, right? I mean, it's like, this is not, is somebody privately benefiting from their public service, right? This is wrong. It's wrong when Hunter Biden doesn't. And by the way, all these people, including Ekehli, will talk about Hunter Biden, interesting how that works.

Starting point is 00:32:13 Joe Biden's son, she's happy to talk about him without talking about the corruption in her own family. So she's, she's, South governor of South Carolina does special favors for this company called Boeing, her entire time while she's in office. After her time in public service, she has a nice little kush board seat, ready, warm waiting for her at Boeing.

Starting point is 00:32:36 A private company, a private company flies around a private jet. I think it was some, some nephron pharmaceutical, some pharmaceutical company, I forget what name was. I'd never heard of it. It's not even some major company and I was come from that industry, but it's some random companyron pharmaceuticals, some pharmaceutical company, I forget what name it was. I had never heard of it. It's not even some major company,

Starting point is 00:32:45 and I was come from that industry, but it's some random company that's getting, I don't know what the name of it is. That I haven't heard of, is okay, but flying her around on their private jet, making their private jet available to her get state contracts from that governor. And I could go on,

Starting point is 00:33:04 I mean, this is just a consistent pattern. Okay. This person has repeatedly milked and done favors for people who have scratched her back. She does her short live, you know, cup of coffee stint at the UN. Okay. Very short live stint. Her real foreign policy experience wasn't her time at the UN. It was the millions she made afterwards. After she steps down, her family starts a military contracting firm, allied defense LLC. If the mainstream press were doing their decisions, allied defense should have to disclose who their clients are. I did something that no normal business people don't do.

Starting point is 00:33:37 I've put up 20 years of my tax records, personal tax filings. She should put up 20 years of her personal tax filings and put up the client of allied defense LLC filings and put up the cry clients of allied defense LLC. If you're running for US president, tell us who the damn clients are of the military contractor that you started presumably using your connections from the UN. It starts the military contracting firm. It starts again, then serving on the board of Boeing. It ends up giving secretive speaking fees from foreign actors while also running a military contracting firm. Think about that. It's Hillary Clinton on steroids. You can just go down

Starting point is 00:34:09 the list. She's somebody who literally during this presidential campaign, as far as I know, it's unprecedented in US presidential election history, collecting corporate stock options while running for US president. And now she's a multi-millionaire. And by the way, what I left out was at the time she left the UN, she and her family were drowning in debt. By the way, for somebody who's an accountant, that's a discussion for another day. But goes from being and wants to run the US and says that she's a candidate who's going to fix our national debt problem. Comes out of government drowning in personal debt, uses connections to start a military contracting firm without naming their clients, somebody who actually then joins the board of Boeing, the company who's back she's scratched

Starting point is 00:34:51 forever well, Governor South Carolina, another military contractor, speaking fees, including with foreign actors, Hillary Clinton style, collecting stock options, while running for US president, all of that, then emerges just like Joe Biden, a multi millionaire. These are not the people, whether it's Biden or Haley, these are not the people we should want deciding, whether to send your kids to die fighting somebody else's war. It's disqualifying it, they're very least be transparent about it.

Starting point is 00:35:16 And then you get a question of the press. Where's the press asking the questions? Okay. What are the clients of allied defense LLC? Is it is a dereliction of your duty as the press as the certainly conservative press to ask that basic question. Why shouldn't the American people know who are the clients of the military contracting firm that her fortune bumps up eightfold becomes a multi millionaire exploaire exploiting our connections at the time of the U.N. Now running to be command and chief on a hawkish worldview marching us into World War

Starting point is 00:35:50 three. We deserve to know. And yet the same establishment that props up our dynamic Daniel as the chair of the RNC, the same establishment that hires the likes of Christian Welker to run that debate, the same establishment that tried to prop up our condosantists antis but realized that even Reims of millions could not lift up that dead weight. So now has shifted to niki hailey Does not want other people like me asking that question, which is why they're so keen to silence me And that's why she called you scum. Oh, yeah, I think it's a lot of projection going on Yeah, cuz you're cuz you're the wall of the wall of the wall of the if you think about it of the veck

Starting point is 00:36:28 That everybody in that stage was pro war and and pat made a point about a month ago when you see a thirsty. Yeah, when you see it, when you see a hospital veck, all those rooms there in business, they need sick people to be in there. We need a war and it's a conflict of interest. If you're a defense contracting your whole family or husband, Michael, Haley's owns one. It's a, would you, you become president of a veck, would you, would you put legislation to like not have that happen? All of this corruption should be banned. You should not be able to lobby the government for 10 years until after you've left the government.

Starting point is 00:36:52 If you have regulated a company or done a deal with a company, you should do in South Carolina with Boeing, you absolutely should never be able to join the board of that company, certainly not for 10 or 20 years. Okay, you should be able to trade individual stocks with your own individual investment discretion. If you're a congressman or a regulator of an answer to the history. Yeah, or an anti-policy, but, but here's the thing, man, because I have been very critical of like the

Starting point is 00:37:15 corrupt democratic establishment, the Pelosi's, the Biden's, the Hillary Clinton's, of the world. But I can't do that with credibility if we have the same problem in our own house, but then you're not supposed to talk about it. Okay, and here's the thing that, the Republican Party claims to be the party that is against identity politics. I mean, there's an unspoken rule in the Republican Party that if you have two X chromosomes, you gotta be careful about going after her.

Starting point is 00:37:39 And I get that, I mean, the political consulting class tells me that as well in the first couple of debates. Yeah, I've probably got the bad advice, but she know, she's been, I mean, she's called me four letter words each of the last few debates, but there's a certain thing if you have two ex-chromosome, somehow you're immune from criticism. That's not that what the Republican party stands for. Identity politics. If you're on a US president, you can't handle the heat.

Starting point is 00:37:58 You stay out of the kitchen. You want to sit across the table from Xi Jinping? You better be able to confront basic questions like your tax returns or how you made your money or who the clients of allied defense LLC are and how that relates to your foreign policy that frankly makes more money by taking us to war. And I think that these are real questions we got to get into. Let's talk foreign policy. Let's talk foreign policy. So Israel, Hamas, Palestine, you're seeing what's going on there. Numbers being reported, what's taking foreign policy. So Israel, Hamas, Palestine, you're seeing what's going on.

Starting point is 00:38:25 There are numbers being reported, what's taking place. Erdogan's coming out saying he's declaring Israel war criminals as Turkey rallies behind Hamas. We're seeing the protesting all over the place. You're seeing US forces under fire in the Middle East as America slides towards bring a defective drone launched by an Iranian-backed militia- US forces at the air-built airbase in Iraq but failed to detonate, sparring casualties.

Starting point is 00:38:51 This incident was one of 40 drones and rocket attacks on US troops by Iranian-backed militias in response to American support for Israel during the Gaza war. We can keep hearing about these stories. One open-ended question, what's your position with what's going on here? How would you, if you were the president right now, how would you put a stop to this? Slay the holidays with Reaconating Superstores PC Holiday Insiders Report.

Starting point is 00:39:14 Serve Appies under $16, like PC, Polenta Fries, PC, Cranberry, Breeb pastry bites, and PC, Eggplant, Parmesan, Esfolia, Telle. Only at your super holiday store. It would be a tragedy if we were losing one person to drug overdose every day. Even five, seven, or 12 people. It would be unimaginable if 15 families a day received news of a lost loved one to overdose.

Starting point is 00:39:39 But in Canada, we lose 20 people to overdose every single day. That's a crisis. At Cam H, we want back down until there's no one left behind. Donate at camh.ca to help us treat addiction and build hope. This is those a is there's so much to talk about here. We got time though. Yeah. This isn't cable news. I like that. No, it's not. So there's no buzzer that goes off in 30 seconds? No, I mean that. Okay.

Starting point is 00:40:09 Yes, and this is what, this is why this new media is important. By the way, they hate that I come on these kinds of, I mean, I go on all these podcasts. So something that we'll say here, here's how it works. Here's the gameplays. cable news does not like that you all exist. And so they create a disincentive for candidates like me to come on here. Why? They're going to take something I say here.

Starting point is 00:40:29 Happens every time. Air lift it out of the context of the conversation that we're having. And then put it on the three minute or two minute version that they have or thirty second version that they have, which is their mode of media. And they know that that purposefully distorts what the candidate says which creates a disincentive for candidates to actually engage in real human conversation. And that's why other people, even when they show up in podcasts, are coming in, you know, stuff suits.

Starting point is 00:40:53 That being said, let's talk about foreign policy because this is the third rail. So here's my view. My job as U.S. president is to look after the interests of Americans here in the homeland. I don't think that should be controversial, but that's my view. I think the job of Israel's president is to look after the citizens of Israel. I think that we're an ally of Israel. What do we do as an ally of Israel? I think it is to provide diplomatic support without military intervention.

Starting point is 00:41:25 And so all of this stuff about sending this kind of aid or that, I think it's better for Israel and better for the United States. If we mind our affairs and they mind theirs, but we give them the diplomatic support they need to say you get to do whatever you need to to defend your homeland. I think that's why I said in the state. I mean, if I was in the phone with BB, I tell him, you know what? If you need to smoke the terrorists at your southern border that are invading and threatening your country, you go do that. And I'm going to be smoking the terrorists that are trying to smoke this country on our southern border if they're

Starting point is 00:41:55 entering here and attacking our country in the same way that they're attacking yours. That's what I'm going to do. You do you. And we'll give you the diplomatic support without the UN or anybody else second guessing your decisions and micromanaging you or us do. You do you. And we'll give you the diplomatic support without the UN or anybody else second guessing your decisions and micromanaging you or us micromanaging you. And I think that's part of the where we muddy the waters is when we give them some kind of check, but then we have to then become the backseat driver, the armchair quarterback, and then also have to assume and bear implicit responsibility for what does or doesn't happen. I don't think that's good for the US and I implicit responsibility for what desert doesn't happen.

Starting point is 00:42:25 I don't think that's good for the US and I don't think that's good for Israel. And actually, I want people to understand this, the founding vision of Israel, the George Washington figure in Israel was a guy by the name of David Ben Gurion, here's the founder of Israel. The whole premise in the founding of Israel,

Starting point is 00:42:40 he said basically words to this effect, he was an eloquent man, about five feet tall, but a big man, a mighty man, who said, we don't want to depend on the sympathies of the West or anybody else in the United States or anybody else. I want a country where we will defend our own existence without depending on anybody else to do it.

Starting point is 00:42:57 That was the premise of Israel. So I think that this whole idea, now as US President, I think it's totally messed up that we're giving foreign aid to any country whose national debt per capita is less than ours. But from an even Israel perspective, that was the founding vision of Israel itself. So my view on here's what I would do is let Israel do whatever Israel needs to do to defend itself. My job as the US is to look after American interests.

Starting point is 00:43:25 We'll give them diplomatic support to be able to do that. But don't intervene militarily and that makes it clear to Iran. So I can say publicly to Iran, you stay the hell out and we'll stay out and we'll let the IDF get its job done. In the meantime, because you read some of those headlines, if you hit us, the United States of America, if you hit our sons and daughters on military bases, our troops who are serving this country, if you actually hit them, we will hit you, whoever that is, whichever group that is, we will hit that group back, the person who actually hit us 10 times harder.

Starting point is 00:44:00 This against the backdrop of my view that we shouldn't be in places like Syria and Iraq in the first place. We were told we left Syria and Iraq now we find out we've got what thousand couple thousand people in place that we were told that we were left Sitting there is sitting ducks and targets to get hit so that should have been there in the first place, but I'm always Pro-American here if you hit us We will hit you back But what's interesting is there's also an interesting story. I don't know when when Trump gave the speech, it was in Texas recently, I want to say, what he recounted, I think an interesting story that went under reported.

Starting point is 00:44:34 You guys probably find it and pull it up at some point. It was interesting where he told the story of after they took out Soleimani, the Iranians gave him a message or gave the, you know, White House a message or gave, you know, white house message that, hey, listen, we have to have pride here. We're going to hit back, but we're not actually going to hit you. We're going to send some missiles, but it's not going to hit anything. And that's exactly what happened. These are like very precise missiles they send up and then they explode in the air without

Starting point is 00:45:03 hitting their actual targets. When, in fact, these are very reliable, precise missiles. So in a certain sense, and that was interesting. It was fascinating. He hadn't told that story before. I hadn't, I mean, I think certainly the government hadn't told that story before. And so it's interesting where the responsible job of a US president is to advance our interests, to be strong, to protect Americans. But it's not in our national interests

Starting point is 00:45:25 to automatically sleepwalk our way into World War Three. So for the people who are saying that because Iran funds in a Hamas or has below or the Houthis or other groups, and those groups hit Israel that that gives the US a reason like the Lindsey Graham's of the world to make this argument to preemptively strike Iran. Think about that logic. According to that logic of proxy warfare, Russia would have the right to hit the United States now because we're funding Ukraine to hit Russia. So those messed up theories of proxy war, that's how you get to World War III.

Starting point is 00:46:03 And I think it is a vital national interest. So we have this thing I rolled out the night before the debate. It's our no-toneocons pledge. Actually, people should go there. We're not asking for money or anything else. Just sign the pledge if you're on board. Notoneocons.com, okay? And every person who is a political appointee

Starting point is 00:46:21 might be an administrator off to sign it. Yeah, there's this. There's the no-toneocons pledge. No-toneocons.com. You go there. Yeah, there's this. There's the no to neo cons pledge, no to neo cons.com. You go there. Look, just scroll down. This is not controversial stuff. If you scroll down to the three elements of this pledge, avoiding World War Three is a vital

Starting point is 00:46:34 national objective. I mean, maybe Nikki Haley agrees with me on that, disagrees with me on that, but I think most people agree with me on that. War is never a preference only in necessity. Well, for those for whom war is a preference, you know, from Karl Rove to, you know, John Bolton to Lindsey Graham and Nikki Haley, they will disagree on that. War is never a preference only in necessity. Okay. That's number two.

Starting point is 00:46:57 Number three is the sole duty of U.S. policy makers is to U.S. citizens. So, if these things should not be controversial, but I will require any political at point T, in my administration, to make sure they're aligned with these three elements of a basic foreign policy vision. But that's what puts me at odds with close to the Republican party. You bet. How close are we? I think we're closer than we've ever been in our lifetime, Patrick. In our lifetime, you and I, okay. I got you. And so, you know where you sit down

Starting point is 00:47:32 and you ran a company, you're like, okay, we're negotiating with XYZ. We want the price to be this. If we push a little too much, they may walk away. We don't want them to walk. We want them to stick around. How far do we want to go? What's the risk we want to do?

Starting point is 00:47:43 And are you kind of making decisions? What could tip them off? What could cause them to stick around. How far do we want to go? What's the risk we want to do? And are you kind of making decisions? What could tip them off? What could cause them to do something? If you were to say, this could cause World War III. These three things could cause World War III. What would those things be? So I'll give you a couple, like, principle answers, and I'll give you a couple of fact answers.

Starting point is 00:47:57 Sure. The principle answer, how you get to World War, is World War isn't rarely, it's never in the interest of any of the countries who enter it. So that means you it's a trip wire that accidentally forces a bunch of people into a situation that's not actually in their individual interest. You could call it a collective action problem. Here's how world wars happen. They read lines. So when you don't know what somebody's actual red lines are, then you accidentally end up doing things that cross somebody's red line without knowing it.

Starting point is 00:48:29 So my view is the US has operated according to this model of strategic ambiguity. I think we need strategic clarity. Be crystal clear and mean it. As I said, if you hit us, including our sons and daughters who are troops, station wherever they are. We will hit you, not some other vague, other act of, we will hit you 10 times harder. That's a clear red line. That's how you avoid world wars.

Starting point is 00:48:54 And now, I think the other thing you got to look at is, isn't my job to be a global policeman? If so, that's a clear path to world war, because you have conflicts that don't relate to your self-interest, or is it my path only to look after my self-interest? So if you start with the first premise that it's in everybody's every nation's self-interest

Starting point is 00:49:14 to avoid world war, and every nation is only acting in their self-interest, then you avoid that world war scenario. So now let's get really specific. What are the series of events that could lead us here? One thing we're doing right now that increases the risk of World War is that our policies are driving Russia further into China's hands. And in order to have a World War, what you need is two different super, at least two different superpowers,

Starting point is 00:49:43 neither of whom can obviously prevail in victory over another one. I think that the US visa v China alone or the US visa v Russia alone actually is objectively going to be stronger than each alone. But if Russia and China are allied as we're forcing them to be, and I'll explain how, then they could arguably outmatch the United States, because Russia has nuclear capacity ahead of that of the U.S. Russia has hypersonic missile capabilities ahead of the U.S. What is hypersonic missile travel faster than the speed of sound carrying potential nuclear loads that could hit the United States?

Starting point is 00:50:20 China's naval capacity is arguably ahead of that of the United States, and we then depend on China's economy for our modern way of life. And so China and Russia already and an alliance was one another, but we're driving Russia further into China's hands, how, by isolating Russia economically, so they need more China. If we've cut off the West, they need to actually depend on China economically. How? We're arming Ukraine to the teeth to fight Russia. That's why China's arm, I mean, to arming Ukraine. That's why China's then arming Russia,

Starting point is 00:50:46 again, driving them further into China's hands militarily. Economically and militarily, the policies we have adopted are driving Russia further into its military lands with China. We made a commitment. James Baker, the US Secretary of State, did in 1990 to Gorbachev, who led the USSR, that NATO would expand not one inch. It's like, it's like, it's like, Ronald McDaniel's not one cent commitment to me, not one inch past East Germany.

Starting point is 00:51:13 Well, we haven't kept that. NATO has expanded more after the fall of the USSR than it has ever after. Again, then encircling Russia, at least from Putin's perception, driving then further into a need for military lines with China. So that's the number one precipitating factor. Here's the Russia China alliance that raises the risk of world war three. And then if you combine that with these vague rules of proxy war, right, the vague rules of proxy war are, well, we're saying in the Middle East that if somebody pays a group to hit somebody who's allied with us,

Starting point is 00:51:48 that gives us the right to preemptively hit them. If we do that in act on that, that automatically then Russia's justification for doing the same in return to us. And then if I'm US president, I have to stick to my principle, because if you hit us, I will hit you back 10 times harder whoever you are

Starting point is 00:52:02 and I will always keep that. Well, then we hit Russia 10 times harder than they hit us. That's World War right there. Allied with China. And by the way, the wild card in all of this is, you have nuclear weapons involved. We had the first nuclear non-proliferation agreement that's absent. The first time we've had no nuclear non-proliferation agreement between the US and Russia since the early 1970s. And then China's sitting here when we're wearing thin and Ukraine and the Middle East to go after Taiwan, which is in our vital interest. So again, here I've done something that no other presidential candidate has.

Starting point is 00:52:32 I'm clear. We will defend Taiwan. That's different than the US policy in both parties right now, which is strategic ambiguity. I think we need strategic clarity. Draw that red line. We will defend Taiwan at least Until for the foreseeable future At least until we have achieved semiconductor independence because

Starting point is 00:52:53 You have China squatting on the semiconductor supply chain then they have an economic gun to our head You know, you can't be using that phone that computer that camera these lights We have to depend on China and ask them for permission now one company TMSC TSE a, Lynch pin, until all of the chip fabs get built in the United States and the brain power that's gonna be designing those chips are back in the United States. Or at least in Korea and Japan and the United States.

Starting point is 00:53:16 If you look at the market share of global reliance, Taiwan is the most overweight in any industry you could ever lay out. Totally, and it's sad that we got to where we are, but we are where we are. And so my view is that that then becomes a precipitating factor because, again, it's strategic vagueness, right? China does know what we're going to do. Versus if you say outright no, you do not do this for the foreseeable future, at least it's a little more semiconductor independent. And after that, we will resume our current position

Starting point is 00:53:46 of strategic ambiguity, a current position, resume it later. This is how you avoid World War III. And I'm deeply worried that we have, and I know that was a lot going on there, and so there's a lot of different factors and foreign policies complicated. And I understand why the likes of the Neocon hawks, like Nikki Haley would say,

Starting point is 00:54:04 I feel, Dumber every time you speak, yep, I understand you can't process all of that because you want to go to war and make money and put more money in your bank account. As a consequence of it, I get that. That's fine. So why these people should never come with an spinning distance at the White House.

Starting point is 00:54:14 But we are closer to World War Three than we have ever been in any of our lifetimes in this room of those of us who are in this room. And I think that that requires a president who at least states that as a commitment and has a clear vision of how to do it. And for that funny, it's not funny, but you were talking right when you said China, Russia, and that alliance, just two days ago, Putin met with the senior Chinese general and they're hailing ties of growing military ties.

Starting point is 00:54:40 Yep. That was just two days ago. And they're doing joint military exercises off the coast of Alaska. Right now they're doing joint military exercises off the coast of Alaska right now. They're doing that It's like crazy. It's as it's it's it's this is people here in this country We have been lulled into submission So if everything I said isn't scary enough. Let me just say one more thing to wake people up world were three is scary But I want to I want to now put a fine point on this

Starting point is 00:55:00 This not hyperbole If Russian China and the military alliance with each other and we enter World War 3, I want people to understand what that means. That means the United States of America, as we know it, could cease to exist. Okay, with two nuclear allied superpowers, I want people to understand this. It's not some vague idea of Lloyd World War 3. Like this country that we know, 250 years in, the greatest country I believe known to understand this. It's not some vague idea ofoid world or three. No, like this country that we know, 250 years in, the greatest country I believe known to man,

Starting point is 00:55:30 to secure freedom, to advance human beings, to allow human beings to achieve the maximum of their potential, that gift to human history that we have the blessing to live in today, that nation will be at a high likelihood of ceasing to exist if we enter World War III right now. Why do I say that? Because that same foreign policy establishment that led us to Iraq and Afghanistan had spent

Starting point is 00:55:51 $7 trillion and killed tens of thousands of our sons and daughters fighting somebody else's war, which is a mistake. And I don't want that Dick Cheney goes to the past to come retake over the Republican party like they're trying to with the Nikki Haley's of the world who were doing it now that same foreign policy establishment as they were doing those things failed to protect the borders of this country failed on cyber defenses completely missing failed on and i want people to understand this with country like iran could hit us with

Starting point is 00:56:20 the super e m p in electromegetic pulse attack what does that mean it takes out our electric grid in a matter of days. You could have millions of Americans impoverished instantly if our electric grid is taken out. You could have tens of millions of Americans impoverished instantly if our entire electric grid is taken out. Space-based defenses.

Starting point is 00:56:40 Russia and China both have space-based offensive capabilities. We have neither meaningful space-based offensive or defensive capabilities when it comes to space-based nuclear capabilities. So cyber, super-EMP, space, border, missile defenses, all missing. So our homeland is as vulnerable as we have been in a long time. Russia has actually been accumulating nuclear weapons at a much faster pace, way faster pace in the United States, hypersonic missiles that beat old outdated missile defense systems. Against this backdrop, do you really want to march away to World War Three?

Starting point is 00:57:14 It's bad enough to say I want to send $200 billion of our taxpayer money so that some Ukrainian middle-level kleptocrat can buy a bigger house because that's what's been going on so far. Well, with $34 trillion in the hole over here, bad enough here. And that's all bad enough. But that's not even the biggest risk here. Biggest risk is at a moment where we're bankrupt, where we have no industrial capacity in the United States and the foundation of war is absolutely economics. And we have the economic backbone not to fight this war right now from an industrial capacity standpoint. But our own homeland is as porous and vulnerable as it is. And so there's a reason why younger people

Starting point is 00:57:50 do not like the idea of going to war, right? Young people who are disinfected from politics, you wanna pay attention right now? It's gonna be a gun over your shoulder while you're sitting in some trench, dying in a world war three, at worst even somebody else's war that gets us there along the way,

Starting point is 00:58:04 if you put the people in charge, in either party, right, it used to be that we would have one party on one side and one party on the other side of this issue. Now it's even this is another factor domestically that could increase the risk of world war three. It's not like you have a Democrat party that's against a pro-war Republican party or a pro-American interest Republican party that's against wars, the Democrat party's pushing. We also live in a moment now where even as we're having this election and tug of war

Starting point is 00:58:31 between two parties and, you know, who's going to defeat Joe Biden and Ron McDaniel talking about defeating Joe Biden to deflect from her own failures as a leader here. That's it's all a deflection because both parties agree on the pro-war agenda right now. That is another danger that increases the risk of World War III. And they say the most dangerous ideas in Washington are the bipartisan ones. Well this is the most dangerous idea of our generation. And I think that the policies that they're advancing of arming Ukraine and otherwise to the teeth. Driving Russia further into China's hands.

Starting point is 00:59:10 Yes. Our own policymakers are driving us into World War III where the risk of doing so is at the highest point it's ever been in our life. And at a moment where we could very well lose it, which means our nation ceases to exist. And there isn't a single person, either political party, laying that out for the American people who will be left holding the bag, suffering and possibly dying as a result of it. And the worst part about this is the Nikki Hale, these are the world. I mean, she'll send her, she'll send our own sons and daughters

Starting point is 00:59:39 to go die so she can buy a bigger house, just like that Ukraine, Kleptokrat. That's corrupt. And I think that that needs to end. You know needs to end you know you know what it makes me think about when five years ago you voted maybe not five years ago ten years ago when you voted you voting democrat versus republican and republicans had the reputation of pro-war party and all this other stuff and for long as i'm that's what the case was totally and then gradually twenty

Starting point is 01:00:02 sixteen twenty fifteen things changed and then all of a sudden you started noticing, this isn't about Democrat against the Republican. It never got this public. Remember social media is one of the best things that ever happened because it exposes everybody. I mean, a guy like you, you take social media out, you're not going to be on the debate stage. They won't give it to you because you're not. So social media became the great equalizer for a guy like you to come out and call these guys out. Today is the ultimate establishment versus the anti establishment vote. So on December 6th, we're doing the town hall with RFK. What are your thoughts with RFK?

Starting point is 01:00:33 RFK, if you want to pull this up, Rob's, you know, on, on, yes, the day tired of Biden and Trump, 10% of swing state voters are back in RFK. He was watching a debate and he actually liked some of the things that you said. I don't know if you saw when he was commenting. I didn't see that now. Yeah, so what are your thoughts about him? And who does he hurt?

Starting point is 01:00:51 What does this say about today's election? Is he a modern day Ross Prober's? It's a complete different case study of an independent candidate. So I like his spirit. I like a lot of his, the spirit I like is the willingness to challenge the establishment in what was his own party.

Starting point is 01:01:09 I think his commitment to speaking about topics that the Democratic party doesn't want him speaking about. And I think of all of the other candidates. I mean, I don't think he has offered the clarity of exact foreign policy that I have if I may say so, but, or, and I don't know that he's in the details on the stuff, but his instincts are at least understanding that World War III is a really bad option to the United States. So I appreciate those things about him.

Starting point is 01:01:34 We have some policy disagreements. Those are less important than what I'm about to say. I mean, he has in the past, things said things like, and maybe he doesn't mean it anymore, but he has said things like people who spread climate disinformation should be put in jail. Ah, look, I think the whole climate change agenda is a hoax, we can have that discussion and let alone, even if you didn't agree with that,

Starting point is 01:01:53 the answer to speech or disagree with is not censorship, and on a good day, RFK knows that too. He believes in affirmative action and racial reparations. I'm against a lot of that. I think it's divisive. It's toxic. We have plenty of share of policy agreements, but at least I think his heart is in the right place.

Starting point is 01:02:11 And he's somebody who is unafraid to challenge orthodoxies. And I respect that about him. I just wish he wasn't so scared of me. What do you think you're scared of? Oh, I mean, the number of networks, I mean, you should, I don't, if the dates work out, could you could, I'd go to the same thing. I mean, I can't tell you the number of

Starting point is 01:02:27 podcasts, networks, et cetera, that it said, Hey, would you have an open discussion with RFK? I said, absolutely, I would do it. And every time he backs out of it, and I think that, look, I think that if somebody sees the way that I'm going after other Republican candidates on the debate stage, I actually would not, that would not be my treatment of RFK. I think that if somebody sees the way that I'm going after other Republican candidates on the debate stage, I actually would not, that would not be my treatment of RFK. I think we would have in a different format more of a conversation like you and I are having. And so I think that he, I don't,

Starting point is 01:02:55 I mean, I could understand why if somebody's building their brand, they don't want the anti-establishment sheen to wear off if you're getting, you know, called out, but I would, my goal and meet a call them out on the stuff. We have some disagreements, but let's have actually, I think he's probably the one person in the American politics. And I should put in some presents Donald Trump in this category too, but that's

Starting point is 01:03:17 about it. Who you can actually end up having a conversation that's unscripted. And you could actually be much more mutually respectful about your disagreements. And so, I'd pledge to say that if he, you know, manned up and agreed to one of those things, my goal would not be to play Gacha with him. I mean, here's just a fact of the matter, is that different people are different leaders

Starting point is 01:03:42 of different styles, right? I can't speak for him, but he's not in the details, right? In terms of domestic policy or foreign policy or the how. I'm a CEO by nature. I enjoy writing reading these books and things like this. And so I am a details guy, but my goal will not be to the extent that part of his concern would be because I'm in the details, play gotcha games with them. That's not, that wouldn't be the point. The point would be to actually have a conversation that advances true discourse in the country in a way that challenges a bipartisan

Starting point is 01:04:17 establishment that's by large equally corrupt. And I think he gets that and I respect him for that. But I think that, you know know if he's running to be president in this man wants to and i don't know the key things are in one thing he's gonna you know i think he believes he's in this to win i think he's in believes in this to move the conversation but if he's running for president you want to sit across a table from shesian paying and your advocate for free speech

Starting point is 01:04:42 you know i i i'm not i haven't been you know, I mean, I've been networks that have repeatedly been pounding both of those. Every time I say yes and every time it's, oh, he didn't want to do it. And I think that that's a little bit unbecoming of him because this is a guy, I love the fact that he's fearless, go all the way with being fearless. And that's what I would say. And so maybe he will. And so I want to give him, give him room for that. But that's all I would say. And so maybe he will. And so I want to give him, give him room for that. But that's all I would say is the one. He's going to see this. He'll see this. Who do you think he is? He's a good dude. He's a good dude. And he's he, and you know, we have our disagreements, but if my only advice to him would be, if

Starting point is 01:05:15 you're going to be a free speech guy, go free speech all the way. Don't do this climate-change misinformation censorship garbage. If you want to practice free speech, give credit. Recredits, Zulvie Vek makes some good points on Ukraine. Glad to see some of his, some of the awareness of the Republican party. Who do you think he helps or hurts? That's a little bit of an, it's a little bit of a, a light touch understatement there.

Starting point is 01:05:33 Cause I think, I think the good points on Ukraine, we got to go deep into the details and it's not just on Ukraine, but broader foreign policy, but he's, he's a thoughtful guy. And so I think a lot of good would come out of an open conversation, but I just think if you're running for US president, it's a place to me, it's a place to everybody.

Starting point is 01:05:50 Hold me to the standard. Call me out if I'm not doing this at some point too, right? And I get it because my sense is if you look at people who are running his campaign, you got a lot of swamp creatures from prior democratic establishment campaigns. And I have, you know, I get this. If you're surrounded by an establishment that can still shave off a little bit of the edge, I'd say bring back the interview and let's actually lay it out on the table. And so yeah, if you talk to him, I would just, my, my encouraging the thing I would do. And I've talked to him

Starting point is 01:06:20 a couple of times as a campaign. I think that, you know, he's, he's doing a lot of important things. You guys have spoken. He was looking a few times. Yeah. Yeah. I've talked to him a couple of times this campaign. I think that, you know, he's doing a lot of important things. You guys have spoken. He was talking a few times. Yeah. Yeah. I told him the same thing when I talked to him too, is practice what you preach when it comes to free speech and free speech is about a culture and an example that you set for the country.

Starting point is 01:06:35 You know, Barry Goldwater, I think, was it him and J.F.K. Whoever it was, I mean, they would talk about potentially flying around the country on the same plane, you know, do do Lincoln Douglas style debates. I mean, that doesn't happen in this country anymore. And I think there's an opportunity to set a good example, but you got to man up and there's some risk involved in every conversation you have, but you got to take that on in a way that advances the interests of the country.

Starting point is 01:07:02 And if you want to sit across the table from Sheshen Penger, whoever else, and you got to show the people you're fit enough to sit across the table from somebody who has different opinions than you and may have different knowledge based than you. And that's a good thing if both people are approaching it. I think if there's a leader's bulletin in who has agreed to face off anybody the most, anybody opposing, supporting anybody anybody, your number one, okay, and that. I think number two would be RFK, and then it's just everybody else is going to become, I give the census credit for being here.

Starting point is 01:07:35 Haley didn't want to be here. We invited Nikki Haley. She didn't want to come and talk on a podcast and do a long, I don't know if she's done any long form podcasts herself. It's all going to be pre-vetted, pre-scripted. You know, I'm sure there'll be a lot be pre-vetted, pre-scripted. You know, I'm sure there'll be a lot of rules. You have to send the questions in advance.

Starting point is 01:07:47 And by the way, to give credit to the Santas, nothing was off table. They just said, hey, that's the question. I think you give credit. Especially for a guy like him where he's not naturally comfortable doing that, or at least wasn't, you know, you got to give credit what credit's to. I agree with that.

Starting point is 01:08:02 Yeah. You've mentioned she multiple times. I'm not sure if you saw the breaking news that Biden is planning on meeting him in San Francisco in the coming weeks. Obviously, this is the most consequential relationship in the world. You've talked about what's going on with China.

Starting point is 01:08:16 You've talked about clarity, right? I saw sort of the premise of that meeting is they don't want any surprises. They want to have reestablished military connections or re-communications. They want to have reestablished military connections or communications. They want to address climate change. They want to address open borders and drugs and fentanyl that's coming across drug trafficking, South China Sea.

Starting point is 01:08:33 What do you envision? What do you see happening with Biden and Xi next week? Or what happened? I think Xi Jinping will be running circles around Joe Biden. I think it's just, it's a capability issue at the top right now in the United States of America. I mean, the climate change agenda is part of what China uses to laugh at and trample and stomp all over the face of the United States of America. I mean, there's

Starting point is 01:08:59 a word in Mandarin. It's called a bite-itzule. You know what it means? Refers to progressive white people in the United States. Doesn't apply to me. Some of you guys. But it's like a derisive term. How do you say it? It's B-A-I-Z-U-O, if you're looking it up. So I'm not fluent Mandarin,

Starting point is 01:09:24 but it'd be something like bitzule, b you want, if you're looking it up. I'm not fluent Mandarin, but it'd be something like Baisuil, Baisuil, something like that. And so, there it is. Yeah, actually, yeah. Why not? There's a derogatory Chinese neologism. Western leftism. Western, okay.

Starting point is 01:09:37 I think it's actually very specific to white in particular. That means such a Baisu. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I don't think so. No. They're referring to the kind of people who support Biden actually.

Starting point is 01:09:51 Yeah. So, so, and to some extent, Biden falls into this category. So the climate change agenda, the idea of putting through climate change in that, is the useful idiot. Yeah. It's very easy. It's in Russia, right?

Starting point is 01:10:01 Because there's the modern version of the useful idiot. Idiotic liberals, right there, second line. So it is. It's the communist useful idiot in the 90s. Exactly. So when I hear climate change on that agenda, that's useless for the United States, because that's just a way for China to run laps around us while we're flagging ourselves. And you know, I think that that's kind of what they've done on some of these issues of

Starting point is 01:10:24 race and human rights. I mean, a couple of years ago, what was Xi Jinping saying, black lives matter shows the United States is no better when he's questioned about putting a million religious minorities, Uighurs and concentration camps and subjecting them to forced sterilization and communist indoctrination and worse. So I think that because of that self-hatred that exists in the United States today, particularly on the left, China understands the use useful idiot, the Bites will, to be able to exploit that psychological insecurity

Starting point is 01:10:50 back against us. And because Biden is so obsessed with self-flogging the United States for our modern way of life and our sins of systemic racism and everything else, dating back to the Apologist agenda that the modern progressive left embraces, that puts China at a competitive advantage in any discussion that looks like the one they're about to have. My discussion with Xi Jinping will be

Starting point is 01:11:09 different. Yeah. You want to know what that would look like? You unleashed hell on the world with the COVID-19 pandemic. We know it was a lab lake. You lied about it. The only question is, was it intentional? If you don't tell me now and we find out separately, there's going to be even bigger consequences that are already going to be. We know it's intentional because, well, here's what it's going to be. Financial consequences of the highest order. Using every financial lever we have available, if we don't hold you accountable for that, then we know we can expect worse in the future and I'm not going to expect worse in the future. Financial consequences using every lever available up to and including the national debt held by China. We will extract our appropriately due reparation for the COVID-19 pandemic.

Starting point is 01:11:56 Oh, by the way, you're not playing by the same set of rules. You're going to be kicking you out of the WTO and any sort of relation from a trade perspective of the US, unless you're playing by the same set of rules, no IP theft, no data theft, no forced technology transfers from American companies, no turning our companies into lobbying pawns. None of that until we're playing by the same set of rules or else we're done. By the time I show up at that meeting,

Starting point is 01:12:17 I don't have done my homework. We're already onshore into the United States. And we've already bolstered relationships with Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, and otherwise. Such that he knows when I'm sitting across the table from him, I'm not, not beessing him, right? We have a stronger hand than he does. That's worse for him than it is for us.

Starting point is 01:12:35 He knows that. And so then he has to fold and he knows that. But he has to know that when he shows up, which means you gotta do your homework before you show up at that meeting. The other thing I will say is, don't you touch and come within spitting distance of the idea of annexing Taiwan anytime in the foreseeable future because we will

Starting point is 01:12:50 defend at least until we have semi conductor independence in this country because you will not hold an economic gun to our head. I know that's the wet dream the China has. No, we're not going to let you do that. It's not going to happen on my watch. And then after we have semi conductor independence, we'll resume our current position of strategic ambiguity and see what that looks like in the future. You know, this is what's scary about this election. No one is paying attention to it. Because, and what you left out, I know you didn't leave it out.

Starting point is 01:13:14 You just didn't list it there, which is also tie your damn currency to trade and float with the international currency markets, right? Because they create... Time is manipulative number one in every different direction, but it's not just the currencies, it's manipulation of data transfers, it's manipulation of every set of rules.

Starting point is 01:13:30 You're correct. On every point, I was just adding currency to that. I think that if China senses that there is a conservative victory with someone's gonna sit at the table and put those cards down, they will move on China before November 1st of next year because they have to. They need that because everything you're talking about here

Starting point is 01:13:53 is, okay, first of all, I'm stopping your repayments. Now I'm stopping on all trillions of T-bills. I'm doing this and this and this. They are tightened up so many ways. You're so correct. They have to move on Taiwan before the election. If someone like you is leading in those polls, and they think that's the best way to have this before.

Starting point is 01:14:09 There was a former leader of another nation, former head of state, as an event. He approached me afterwards. He said, you know, they're not happy that in an American, and particularly you, is running for US President. I said, oh, you know that from having known them. He's like, no, and I know that from knowing it now.

Starting point is 01:14:28 I said, okay, well, it's interesting to know. You know, China's, you know, I don't think our adversaries are gonna like it very much. If you have somebody who's in office that can't be exploited in the way that Biden is, however, I will give the world our allies and adversaries and our own citizens the same message. That's what makes it credible.

Starting point is 01:14:50 Our sole obligation is to protect us citizens here at home. So it's interesting how much more credible your message is. Your allies can take it more seriously. Your adversaries can take your red lines more seriously. Our citizens can take it more seriously. It's actually saying the same thing to everybody, my sole obligation as the US president, my moral obligation, is to the Americans here at home.

Starting point is 01:15:13 And everything that I'm gonna draw as a hard red line, tracks that, and that's how you know I'm gonna keep it. And so they will take it more seriously. And I don't think world wars in China's interest, and I don't think world wars in America's interest, and I don't think it's in Russia's interest, and I don't think it's in any nation interest and I don't think world wars in America's interest and I don't think it's in Russia's interest and I don't think it's in any nation's interest. And so the way we avoid it is by having those clear red lines, clear answers about what

Starting point is 01:15:33 we will and won't do. Don't drive our adversaries in different ways into alliances with one another, get Russia out of China's hands, be very clear with our own people that war is never a preference for us. It's only ever gonna be a necessity that avoiding World War III is a vital objective. And then we protect our own homeland enough. Say, God forbid there's a major conflict in the future. We know that we're not as vulnerable as we are today.

Starting point is 01:15:58 Those are the basic next steps when it comes to foreign policy of the next US president. And then reducing that economic dependence on China is an easy win that we can deliver along the way. I love that. And you talk also about serving US citizens first. And one other way is that we need to be served right now is energy.

Starting point is 01:16:14 We see fluctuations in prices. We've also seen the green lobby pushing EVs, electric vehicles cars. And someone like Gavin Newsom puts these artificial percent by this date, percent by this date out there in the future, and he's not thinking about his own power grid, the California power grid is taxed right now to get to a hot summer. And they're arcing and lighting up birds and causing their own wildfires because they

Starting point is 01:16:36 don't have the infrastructure. You have been correct, in my view, correctly talking about nuclear energy, I'd like you to elaborate on it. Because if California meets that they are selling 35% EVs in the next five years, they don't have the grid to plug them all into charge them so people can get the work in the next morning. But nuclear energy offers that. When people hear nuclear, they fear Chernobyl, they fear a three mile island that know their

Starting point is 01:17:00 history books. But fifth and sixth generation nuclear power is much different. You've been clear on this, but it didn't come up in the debate. Can you? Yeah, they're coming to debate because the other candidates in the stage have no clue what the hell they'd be talking about. So the Republican establishment wants to protect the voter base from seeing that their pawns are, you know, we're not prepared with those talking points.

Starting point is 01:17:19 I mean, that's why it's not going to come up in a Republican debate. I don't think maybe now because we're talking about it, then they'll have enough time to cycle it through and maybe I hope it'll be good if they include it in the next one. Your position. Yeah, and my position is shut down the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Let's start with that. The NRC has been fundamentally hostile to nuclear energy in the United States of America to new nuclear power plants.

Starting point is 01:17:44 And think about the result of that yields. So before the nuclear regulatory commission came into existence, the average time to build a new nuclear power plant in the United States was about five years. What is the average time in a place like Japan today around four to five years, France a little slower, five to eight years. Guess what it is in the United States now after the existence of the nuclear regulatory commission. Say about it, take a guess with the Times. 25 to 40 years. 25 to 40 years, which is a bunch of way of saying, yeah, which is basically a way of saying, just for the environmental clearances, which is the first step of the process.

Starting point is 01:18:20 So basically, they've said that, hey, we haven't banned the creation of nuclear energy in the United States because the American people wouldn't really vote for that if they're educated on it. But this reveals the dirty little secret American politics. The people we elect to run the government are not the ones who actually run the government. It's the shadow government in the deep state. So the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, nuclear energy isn't banned in the United States, but they believe there should not be another nuclear power plant built in the US.

Starting point is 01:18:43 So even though Congress hasn't banned it, they've just used bureaucratic power through the back door to say that we will make sure quietly through the shadow government that there's not a new nuclear power plant built in the United States. Now why? Because the three-mile-hour Chernobyl concerns about safety. Now let's double click on that. Gen three and Gen four nuclear reactors are by a measure safer lower risk than Gen two nuclear reactors and much smaller and much smaller and more efficient and productive

Starting point is 01:19:11 Because of this policy We're not building the new safer versions of nuclear reactors So the only ones that are actually operating the United States are Gen two or earlier the only country in the world that has a Gen four nuclear reactor I'll let you guys guess, which one do you think it is? Russia. China. China.

Starting point is 01:19:29 Yep, for civilian nuclear energy. So because they have no choice. So in the name of protecting Americans, what are we doing is actually, who would have ever thought, increasing the risk of further harm. By the way, the FDA does this to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the three letter agencies. That's why my objective in there is to get in there and shut them down. You know, I was thinking about it. I was having an interesting conversation with somebody in the last few days. How are you actually going to lay off a million federal employees? Anyway, to finish answering this question, shut down the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Starting point is 01:19:58 and follow the actual laws we have in this country, allow for the construction of Gen 3 Gen 4 Nuclear reactors and catch up for the most productive form of energy known to mankind, nuclear energy. And by the way, here's the ultimate irony on this. The very people who are most opposed to carbon emissions, and I favor more drilling and fracking and everything else. I'm all in for that. I've been a evangelist for it.

Starting point is 01:20:24 But the people who are the biggest opponents of more fossil fuels also include some of the biggest opponents of nuclear energy. Which tells you that that climate agenda actually has nothing to do with the climate and has everything to do with letting China catch up to the US. Global equity is what they call it. The problem with nuclear energy is not that it's not good enough at supplying our energy needs. It is that it might be too good at allowing the West to continue in the US in particular to remain ahead of China. And that's what the climate change agenda is really about. It's about letting China catch up to the US, which is why I brought that up in the Biden Xi Jinping discussions.

Starting point is 01:21:03 This isn't about the climate. It's about what they call global equity, which is a fancy way of laying China catcher to the US. That's why China's burning more coal last year than they ever have, while the US is burning less than we ever have in the name of stopping carbon emissions. That's why petro-China's buying up projects that Chevron is dropping. BlackRock makes Chevron an ex-San do, but without causing Petro China to do it. And that's why the people who are also opposed

Starting point is 01:21:27 to those carbon emissions in the US are also against nuclear energy in the US while China is trouncing us when it comes to nuclear energy. So anyway, how are we gonna shut down these agencies? I've given a speech in DC on exactly the legal authority we would use to shut down these agencies and go into the details matters. But one of the ideas I've been entertaining for how we, you know, this is less of a legal

Starting point is 01:21:49 point, but more of an operational point in the business guys. Well, we're talking about millions of federal employees. I got to get this job done not in four years in the first 18 months, right? Because that's really what gives you the momentum for the rest of your presidency. You don't get that right, you're done. I mean, you're just, you know, you'll be waiting through to do some small thing here and there, but driving the big change we want to drive,

Starting point is 01:22:10 I got 18 months, maybe more like six months to get started. So, I think one of the ideas I'm warming up to is, I need to laugh at least a million federal bureaucrats in the first year. I'd like to pace faster than that. But how are we going to do that at scale? Yeah, everybody has social security number. Bet on the NFL with Fandule, official sportsbook partner of the NFL. Download the app today to see why we're North America's number one sportsbook.

Starting point is 01:22:40 19 plus and physically located in Ontario. Gambling problem call 1865-312-600 of VisitConnectSentario.ca Metro links and cross links are reminding everyone to be careful, as Eglinton Cross-town LRT train testing is in progress. Please be alert, this trains can pass at any time on the tracks. Remember to follow all traffic signals. Be careful along our tracks and only make left turns where it's safe to do so. Be alert, be aware, and stay safe. Pick the last digit of your social security number. If it's an odd number we're keeping you and if it's an even number you're out keeping you. And if it's an even number, you're out.

Starting point is 01:23:26 Just do that on the first day. Just that simple. Boom. Fifty, I mean, because I'm not saying it's a perfect method, but you got the law of large numbers working in your favor, right? So you're going to lose some good people yesterday, you're going to lose some bad people, but the law of large numbers work in your favor. You believe there's just too many darn federal bureaucrats. Day one,

Starting point is 01:23:47 if your social security number is an even number, you're out. I can almost state with certainty that on week two of that, nothing's going to be different other than having reduced the size of the federal employee base by half. And my suspicionally what we will find is that's still too many people. So as I take the first number of your social security number of who's left. And if it's an odd number, we're keeping you in it. If it's an even number, you're out. That's a 75% reduction then in the federal employee head count. Not a darn thing's going to work less effectively.

Starting point is 01:24:23 It's actually going to work more effectively as a consequence. That's how you then get to say, okay, this is sizeable change. We can start with zero based budgeting and go in forward. We'll say what is actually necessary. I'm going to start with last year's budget. The administrative state tells us it's necessary. I will start with zero as the baseline. Ask what's actually necessary.

Starting point is 01:24:42 And that's how we solve the national debt. That's how we solve the crisis of the deep state and the shadow government. That's how we restore accountability in government. That's how we make sure the people who you elect to run the government, the ones who actually run the government. And so I think there's, I think that is pretty darn close to what my plan is going to be. It's pretty bold. How are you going to downsize the federal government? Last digit of your social security number. And then the first digit. I mean, you may lose some guys that are credible guys. I mean, I understand what you're saying.

Starting point is 01:25:06 But we're going to keep a lot that still are too. Totally get it. I understand what you're saying. And then if you cut into the muscle patch, you can always, you can always see. Bring them back like Elon brought them back. Stuck the Elon fired the 50% and he's like, shit, we need that guy.

Starting point is 01:25:16 We need that guy. We can always do that. That makes sense. I'm just thinking purely as a Twitter didn't go off there. I get it. I get it. By the way, it's funny. Twitter did not. You're talking, Marab, can you just put this up?

Starting point is 01:25:26 Put this up before we go to the next stores. We got a few minutes here left. Nuclear energy just helped Finland slash electric cost by a Stagrin 75% so if the average person just listened to you and they're like dude, I have no What he just said I'm gonna kick something here. You what? What? You guys still hear me? No, we're still on. Yeah, okay. Good. So if the average person is watching this and it's I'm going to kick something here, man. You what? You guys still hear me? No, we're still on. Yeah. OK, good. So the average person is watching this, and I'm not following the so nuclear energy. We've done a few episodes on this.

Starting point is 01:25:50 So why doesn't the US follow suit? It's got the three reasons. Below one is fear, one is cost, one is time, 75% of electric cost. The average person listens to that and says, man, I'd love that, especially now that insurance cost is going up in certain places. This can help me get some more discretionary income. But let's go to the next topic. Next topic.

Starting point is 01:26:09 So Tucker Carlson, Trump yesterday, about six months ago, could have been six months ago when Tucker won with Elon. This was probably in May, yeah, exactly six months ago. I said, I think there's an alliance being built between Trump, Tucker, and Elon. That's what I said. Remember I said, what are you talking about? So well, Tucker chose a retweet by Elon

Starting point is 01:26:29 overgoing anywhere else. And I think it was a good move because Elon's got 160 million followers, boom, that's a great place to be. And then he aligned himself with Trump, you know, right before the debate, they're going out with the video, got a few hundred million views on Twitter.

Starting point is 01:26:42 And I guess today Trump's being asked about Tucker, what do you think about a VP option? Trump said seriously considering Tucker Carlson for VP. Okay, as a VP, I don't know if you saw that. I did not see that. That's very interesting. That's fascinating to say the least, right? One, what do you think about it too?

Starting point is 01:27:00 Have you thought about who would be a possible consideration for you as a VP? Yeah, so I think Tucker actually could be very interesting as a choice. I mean, I think I'd say he's one of the smartest individuals I've met when it comes to understanding the soul of our country and is despite the establishment media's attempt to paint him as some sort of right wing character, he's not actually a partisan figure at all. I mean, I think many of his positions defy partisan orthodoxies, an independent thinker, and I think could help rebuild. I think he has

Starting point is 01:27:36 already helped rebuild trust in this country. And so I've been grateful for the relationship. I didn't, I've known him for, you know, nearly for nearly as long as others in the world of media or politics. I've only gotten known in recent years. And particularly in the middle, last two years. But I think he's a thoughtful individual. I'd want somebody in that role. Depends on what you want in the role. For me, if I'm looking for an advisor

Starting point is 01:28:00 and I want it in that role, I think that he's not a bad choice to be able to put in that role and actually be thoughtful about it. I think that there's a different role you could have for your VP, which is also an executor. And so there I might be thinking about somebody coming from the private sector. I mean, Elon Musk is, he's not a natural born citizen born in the United States, but I think he would be an outstanding partner to have, to be able to do the thing that I just talked about right here, right, which is 75% head count.

Starting point is 01:28:31 Odd numbers go, or even numbers go to the matter, whichever one. Cut number one, cut number two. I mean, he's a guy who's actually done it and understand and has also built things up from scratch. And I'm an entrepreneur. He's been, you know, I've been more successful than most, he's been more successful than all. So including me.

Starting point is 01:28:48 And so I would want the rule of thumb for me is, it's how I built my business, this is how I want to run this country. Who is better than me in each of the domains where I'm going to need it, okay? I want to pick the areas that I'm already the best at and still find who's going to be better than me. And that's how we're going to have to do this not just at the level of the VP, but some of the most important positions like the office of management and budget.

Starting point is 01:29:14 It's like the CFO of the federal government. You want somebody who is deep in their understanding of actually the flow of numbers and the flow of money. Who's going to run the office of personnel management? Somebody who is going to be unsparing in their assessment of who's actually doing a good job and who's not, it's like the HR department of the federal government. And so for me, it's gonna be who's gonna be the,

Starting point is 01:29:36 who's gonna be better than me in each of those positions. Would you choose, let's just say, because let's go there, okay? We got a conversation conversation maybe even yesterday. So, okay, you know how super Tuesday, hey, you know, Biden's number four in New Hampshire, or whatever, number three, Kirk and I are talking about this in Vegas.

Starting point is 01:29:54 And in all of a sudden, Warren drops out, Buddha drops out, everybody drops out. We're all getting behind Biden. Wait, what? He was losing. What do you mean he was getting behind Biden? Well, you know, the establishment, maybe Obama called the shots behind closed doors.

Starting point is 01:30:06 Buttigieg's gonna get this job. This guy's gonna do this, Warren, you gotta do this. Boom, everybody get in line. Boom, we're getting in line. And they're very unified, right? It's not the case where Republican party right now, and you just call that the establishment, which means let's say the day comes,

Starting point is 01:30:19 let's play two scenarios. One scenario is, Trump is not running. Okay, one scenario is Trump drops out, which it's not gonna happen, but let's just say he does. If it does that he is not running, he had a massive event right before the debate down the street, a couple miles down the street. If he's not running,

Starting point is 01:30:36 Mac is not gonna go behind Haley. Mac is not gonna go behind any of those guys. Okay, let's combine them together. Say Haley picks up Christie, let's just say, if Haley picks up Christie, he picks up Tim Scott, maybe they all go behind Haley, or maybe they go behind the Santas, okay? Maga has a choice on who to go behind.

Starting point is 01:31:01 Who do they go behind? Are they gonna go behind you? Yeah, I'm gonna be a split between you and Santas is no no i mean forget i mean the santa says is not part of the america first movement at all i mean i think that he's just described it and put himself out as a different type of establishment politician what percent of there's two america first thing goes behind you though what percentage of america goes you think eighty percent i think that i think that it's a matter of earning the support of our base and the maga base and america first base will choose the next president.

Starting point is 01:31:27 I'd like it to be over 90%. I think that, you know, I think that I'm representing the ideas that the Maga base represents. Okay. That's the answer. And the America first base represents. Putting the interest of this country first, I want to take that to the next level. Right. And so my view is, you know, America first is going to outlive Donald Trump.

Starting point is 01:31:44 I mean, it's going to be, it's going to be a defined nice. Well done. I like that. I like that. I like that. Watching for that. That's good. Help that. I like that. Yeah. You got, you got the, you got the agility. It's me. I'll be son. Yeah. I might, I might need you. I'm, you know, we need to think about catching bureaucrats in the federal government. I want people who are better than me, right? So well done. No, this is, I want people better than me is what I said. For those of you that didn't see, Pat just called a fly. He's not just taking a fly. He owes them a skeet.

Starting point is 01:32:07 It was a mosquito. Well go ahead, you were saying. Yeah, all I'm saying is that there's two America first candidates in this race. The America first movement will outlive Donald Trump into the decades yet to come. Okay, so my view is that it's gonna require leaders who understand what that's all about, who are outsiders,

Starting point is 01:32:24 who have the capability to actually execute that and translate that to action. I think it helps to have fresh legs and be from a different generation. So in this race, there's only one person who fits that description. There's one America first candidate on that debate stage two nights ago. Okay. That's me. That was, I mean, that was dead obvious to anybody watched it. And I think I would expect and hope to earn the support of that base to lead this movement forward to the next one. What I, what I I loved seeing when when every debate happened, first one, when there's something right now, that's not just in that scenario, right? That's right now. I want to I want to earn the support of that base in the next several months before the heat of the primary

Starting point is 01:33:03 voting season. You're talking, you're talking. You told me I got you. You told me America first. I got you. Absolutely. Because as I said before, America first does not belong to one man. Does not belong to Trump. It doesn't belong to me. It didn't belong to Reagan. Sure.

Starting point is 01:33:16 It belongs to the people of this country. And so you're asking about that scenario. I'm asking about, I'm saying the whole race. Nobody is going to become this nominee without the full support of the America First movement behind us. Whoever that nominee is going to be, there's only two people in this race that I think are eligible to do it. That's Donald Trump. I don't disagree.

Starting point is 01:33:38 Well, let me go a little deeper. So first debate, I was there Milwaukee during the break, nobody would come talk to you, right? You're kind of like who is this guy? Well, you don't belong up here. Why is this guy here? He's spent it going to be done. Anyways, I don't know how he made it.

Starting point is 01:33:50 Second debate, you kind of try to add Reagan, try to be like, hey, let's bring the party together and he's like, no, they're not going to do that. They're backfire and can be attacked you. Right. And in third debates, you're like, no, here's what we're doing. Boom, boom, boom, boom. But in the first two breaks, you guys got three minute, three and a half minutes, right? This you got three and a third debates, you're like, no, here's what we're doing. Boom, boom, boom, boom. But in the first two breaks, you guys got three and a half minutes, right?

Starting point is 01:34:07 This, you got three and a half minutes, go to what you're doing. And you for first two breaks, you talked to DeSantis for 90 seconds. Oh, you were watching, oh, wow, you know more than I do. He was standing next to me. Yeah, but you went to him, which is kind of, by the way, that's a sign of somebody that's willing to talk. So you guys are hashing it out and a European to go talk to him. What was that experience when you brought your dreams? Okay, that's what you of somebody that's willing to talk. So you guys are hashing it out and a European go talk to him. What was that?

Starting point is 01:34:25 It's a has your own. Disad dream. Okay. That's what you're talking about. We were continuing some of the, you know, I told him, I told him I disagreed with the law that he passed in Florida on the, you're telling him this on stage. Yeah. And what do you say to you?

Starting point is 01:34:38 He said, well, I mean, he was given his, he was giving his, he was giving back, but I already, I mean, I already knew with that. He seemed offended. It sounded like that's how we're civil conversation. Yeah, it's a conversation. At a certain point, he, he was giving back, but I already, I mean, I already knew with that. He seemed offended. It sounded like that's how we're civil conversation. Yeah, it's a conversation. At a certain point, he, he walked away. Yeah, I saw that he walked away. Yeah, which will, long Florida, the abortion law, which is a, so, so, so, disbanding

Starting point is 01:34:54 students, China, disbanding, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no go the direction of the government deciding what speech doesn't go, pretty soon they're going to say, if you question of vaccine, you're a bioterrest, if you, you know, say a J6 peaceful protestor shouldn't be in prison, you're an insurrectionist terrorist, that's where this is going to go in this road never ends well. That's a pretty slow question. I was asking you. I don't mind disagree with you on that.

Starting point is 01:35:22 Is the Santa say possible, like, would you consider her as a VP if if mag goes behind you? Because I you've said a couple things favorable that I think you're being strategic here. So no, I mean, I need to drill to tell you truth. I need to understand what his capabilities would be and he would mean the advisor type, right? Tucker Carlson would be the advisor type. He would be he would be a guy can he can he be the guy Elon would be higher advisor type. He would be a shithand though. He would be a guy. Can he be the guy?

Starting point is 01:35:47 Elon would be higher in my list, but Elon is ineligible constitutionally to do it. But Desanis, could he be the guy who gets in there and guts the bureaucracy that 75% head count reduction? Can he see that through and use the skill sets that he's gained as governor, knowing the executive branch of the government to do it? That would be the question I'd want to get comfort with.

Starting point is 01:36:07 And if so, I think it could be an interesting candidate. So here's what's crazy. Somebody could watch this and they could say, what an insult. Who the hell are you to think you get to choose the census as your VP? He gets to choose if you can, you know, this whole ego thing, that's it. But let me just make my point to where I'm going with this. Look, I think in an X3 to 6 months, I think 2024 is going to be the year of chaos. I call 2023 the year of investigation.

Starting point is 01:36:31 I think 2024 is going to be the most chaotic year of our lifetime, okay? Our lifetime. I don't know if we can say hour because we have some people that are older than us at this table, but I'm going to say hour lifetime here, time we're not talking about. I'm just kind of putting it out. I'm as more our lifetime here, Tom, we're not talking about you, I'm just kinda putting it out there. I'm as more wisdom. Thank you very much. Respect, yes.

Starting point is 01:36:49 So here's kind of our bone with this. There's a few guys that are saying, okay, one, what are they gonna do, what they're trying to do right now with Article three, of him being in correction, they're trying to get rid of the fact that he can't even run inside of it and all this. Okay, so that's one. Okay, the 91 felony set them aside, but the one thing they can do, that's why these guys were brilliant

Starting point is 01:37:08 to say no call it an insurrection. This is our way to get him to never come back and mess with us. We don't have to worry about that guy. Let's just say he's out. If he's out, we could wake up one morning and you're at 6.3%. We could wake up the next morning and you're at 49% and it could be like this. It could go, right? But the part I want to go right now is as of today, and I just want to be on clarity on this. I think that would be sad for the country. If this is the way they play out is trying to eliminate this man. That's why I've been against the same page. But chaos is chaos is chaos. But but at the same time, you have to as a way you got to be prepared for all scenarios. Okay.

Starting point is 01:37:50 So two is wild card black swan event. They do something to the man. He's not one that's not in the public. He's always out there talking. You saw what a few people have said. That's possibility of what could happen to him. Okay. They take him out.

Starting point is 01:38:03 I mean, the level of temperature in US is going to go to a whole different level. We're hoping that doesn't happen at all, hasn't happened since Reagan, and we're hoping that doesn't happen. Three, which is the most likely thing that happens. He is the guy. Okay. If he is the guy, it's a different scenario for being a second term president, which is what he would be. He can only go four years. So he has to be thinking about a person to bring in, to be a VP, that's really gonna be the next two term president. So you're not bringing the person in,

Starting point is 01:38:32 that's gonna be, you know, just a mic penstapa guy. I think it'd be a mistake if he hires a mic penstapa personality, it's gonna be somebody that's gonna be vocal like a fly carry roll, you're going around young, doing the part. So a lot of people are thinking carry legs, a lot of people are, you know, thinking different names around young, doing the part. So a lot of people are thinking, carry legs, a lot of people are thinking different names and tuckers down the conversation.

Starting point is 01:38:48 You know, for you, you've said you only have interest in one is what you've said. You only wanna be the guy that's the leader. But if the opportunity rises and comes to you, that could be 12 years of what you could do. Let's just say that opportunity comes because you have to know guy like him, he hasn't taken shots at you yet. There's not been any shots.

Starting point is 01:39:06 We have a good relationship of the dual respect actually. For sure. And that's felt. But to me, if that happened, would you actually entertain the idea? Always really wanting this holiday at Amazon Stuff that is discounted if you're naughty or you're nice Stuff to buy your grandma Who drinks her shard of nailnights Stuff to make you big and strong Stuff we can't even in this song Stuff along to begging holes

Starting point is 01:39:36 Take beef on the stuff at Amazon Stuff What's behind a life-electrified? What's lighting up our communities? Powering more carbon-free commutes? And boosting homegrown innovations? Its electricity generated right here at home. From renewable hydro to nuclear, our lowest carbon energy source. Ontario Power Generation is shaping the clean energy future

Starting point is 01:40:07 by investing in Ontario and electrifying life every day. See how at opg.com. So I'm not a plan B person. I'm trying to, I'm like, I'm in phase of this campaign. I just want to answer with total candor, but it's just my brain does not work that way. I didn't get to where I am in life by having plan A goals and then setting up your, your bifurcated backup plans on the important things, right? On not important things, yeah, we'll have some plans. If I, if I don't go to lunch here, we'll go to the other place.

Starting point is 01:40:45 Okay, that doesn't matter. But the important things in life, when you're guided by your mission and purpose, you set out and you accomplish plan A, and if you fail, then you figure it out then. But I'm not a guy who is, you know, I mean, I'm not saying this boastfully, but I've built successful businesses, right? I've built a multi-billion dollar company that got multiple drugs approved the broken bureaucratic fda process challenge black rock built business i'm thirty eight years old i'm running for president right now

Starting point is 01:41:13 my wife didn't get to where she is by successful surgeon lived her version of the american dream or the best of the world of what she does we made this commitment together as a family and men sacrifice with one purpose in mind. It's not even winning the presidency. That's just a step along the way

Starting point is 01:41:28 to reviving this country and our national soul. All right, that's what we're dedicating the next phase of our life to. So we didn't do that to pursue a plan B path along the way. And so I think it would be fake to just sort of say under any scenario, I'm not going to run in 2028 or I'm not going to, you know, if I don't win or whatever, I just am not going down the track. I'm not going to take any game out of time. This is what I'm doing. That's

Starting point is 01:41:59 what you're saying. Exactly. Okay, fair. That's what I'm at. So let's go. We got nine, we got 11 minutes left. I like to do two more things before we wrap up one. Masha yes, it gives a speech. He's not, you know, gonna be running to do what he's doing, but at the same time He teased this third party presidential run in announcement that he won't seek reelection for Senate. Okay Masha is a In what state West Virginia Republican state is this is your guy you've always talked about him So how many people you think on the left right now are sitting there seeing this as an opportunity Saying hey, there's a chance for me to come through here with mansion being one with newsome being one

Starting point is 01:42:35 Are you are you cuz you're boldly telling everybody Biden's not gonna be the party? It's not gonna be he's not gonna discuss our third party. I still think there's a path to mention Manchin. Yeah, I mean, oh, maybe he. I just don't think there's a path to mention. Who mentioned? Yeah. I mean, maybe he will, but I don't think he's going to go anywhere with that. I think that there's a version of the world where he tries to compete within the democratic party, but Newsom, Michelle Obama, any of these other ambitious governors in the democratic party, Buttigieg, Kamala Harris isn't going to go away lightly. It's not going to be Biden. How convinced for you are that? Because you said

Starting point is 01:43:10 that. I'm very convinced. I'm very convinced it's not going to be Biden. I think they're just waiting for the Trump trials to start and then just slip in whoever that alternative is going to be. Is it a health issue? Is it the DNC stepping in? Is it the base base is saying, dude, we are not voting for this guy? What is it? It's the establishment and the Democratic Party that will decide the time has come. And Biden really is a puppet for that establishment. You don't think he has a say in this at all?

Starting point is 01:43:37 I don't think he has a say in this. No, I don't think he has one Iod of a say in this. And the proof is, but like the proof is how many times that we've seen a video where he says, I can't, they're telling me I can't. Who the hell is that? I mean, the proof is countless, right? And you just, even without those, he's, yet the party's not supposed to say out loud. But yes, there are many instances of, of seeing the fact that this is not the man who's

Starting point is 01:44:00 in charge. You keep saying Michelle Obama. Everyone talks about Gavin Newswin. Everyone's, I don't think she wants to. I've never seen her give any inclination to actually do it. The Republican, the Democrat governors that are super ambitious, they're, they're the ones that want to do it. I doubt she wants to do it, but they will, if necessary, the powers that be will drag

Starting point is 01:44:17 her out, just like the powers that be decided that Biden's going to be their puppet until they're not having any appetite for this. Let me throw another one here. Let me throw another one here. Let me throw another one here. But you're pretending like that's a factor. Right? Just like Biden has some say in what he's saying. It's not what I don't want to do.

Starting point is 01:44:35 They will say you are doing it. Let me give you a scenario. You're doing it. Let me give you a scenario and walk me through this. This is one when I'm looking at Kamala Newsom. Ideal Newsom for the left, he's the guy. I mean, they're who they're prop. I think that's the likely one. Okay. So let me let's play a democratic political strategy. It's one in a room. Okay. It's me. You want a couple of other guys. And here's what they say. Vivek, P.B.D. Here's a concern.

Starting point is 01:44:57 I know we want Newsom, but how the hell are we going to do this? We have to get rid of a black woman that's standing in front of the VP. How are you gonna make her the VP of Newsom? What if she says, no, I'm not gonna do it. She doesn't have a say in the matter. Again, she does not have a say in the matter. But what if she comes out? What if she comes out? She just says she don't think she will. No, I think that I think that she she becomes a back to back VP with newsome. Yeah. Yeah. Interesting. Yeah. I think that's how to take-to-back VP with no some. Yeah, yeah. Interesting. Yeah.

Starting point is 01:45:27 I think that's how to take care of that. I didn't even find it. Very convinced of this. It's almost like you've seen what's going on behind the wizard of Oz. Like, when you were here and you did the first interview with us, what was that? Six months ago, they knew the town hall. You've almost been enlightened. You've seen what's going on behind this scene.

Starting point is 01:45:41 Totally. How convinced are you? There's this machine that's going on and they don't have choices? On 100% convinced that the machine runs the show. I am offering a prediction that I have reasonable confidence in but I can't say is 100% certain because I don't know what the machine is going to produce but it's them, whatever it's produced

Starting point is 01:45:56 it's going to be the machine. There's a machine on both sides of the eye. Absolutely. So is it a fake open primary? Is it a fake open primary? How do they mechanically do it? Well, how do they mechanically do it? Well, the way they mechanically do it is aligning all of the donors.

Starting point is 01:46:09 I mean, the mother's milk of politics is money. This is why they actually, both parties have an incentive to keep the mega money in politics because it prevents the grassroots base from having a real say in deciding who actually runs the show. Grassroots only gets to candidates. The super PACs are held by the big treasure chests.

Starting point is 01:46:25 They are in CDNC. That's right. Exactly. And so because money's the mother's milk, that's kind of the one lever they hold. And then the administrative state that actually runs the show, I mean, Biden's not really the president. It's the shadow government underneath him, have a lot of levers. And then they use, they use hard power too.

Starting point is 01:46:38 I mean, you know, that documents case you haven't heard about for Biden for a while, right? Yeah, not at all. Yeah, but it's kind of hovering there. It's not open, it's not closed. Interesting how that works. Yeah, a little bit of some independent council thing going on with Hunter Biden. Maybe that can go on with another.

Starting point is 01:46:51 Maybe that can go on with another prevent. Yeah, but the case is hovering too, right? So there's the hammer, right? I mean, if the guy does have a moment of clarity and decide, well, that's when the documents case. Mark, before we wrap up, we got to, and they got the perfect air cover because that's what we got it on Trump.

Starting point is 01:47:06 And so it even legitimizes the Trump prosecution because it's a, and now we're applying it in a bipartisan manner against Biden. That's what they're saving it for. So people got to see this out of Republicans and Democrats. This is the real game and you got to be able to see it for what it is. That's what's happening. Five minutes left. Okay.

Starting point is 01:47:20 Guys, if you're watching this, Vivek has two books, Nation of Victims, and he's got one thing. And I didn't come here to promote it. No, he didn't. We got my sign. I didn't even know they're going to be here. Both of these books are going to be signed. There's a question, they're actually our sign. Both of these books are signed.

Starting point is 01:47:33 Two of you are going to get it. There's a question, there's a link. You can click on it at the top of the chat. It's a question. If you've been following the whole thing, we talked about one thing. If you get the question right and you want the first to do it, we'll send these two copies to, we'll announce it by the end. Here's my question for you. There's further record.

Starting point is 01:47:48 I did not put these books. No, we put it there. No, we put it there. No, we put it there. Perfect, I'm taking it. Here's a question from a user. It's a good question. That's watching.

Starting point is 01:47:56 Fahad Malik, question for Vivek, legit, glad we had someone who will fight for America first. What would you say you would do for people under DACA? You know, most of them have lived here and their entire lives want to school, work, for the U.S. How would you help them out? Is this a dreamer to be clear? Yeah, yeah. So, I, yeah, this is a hard question. Okay. So, everybody tells you an easy question, it's just lying to you know, for a glib response. I don't blame many of the people who have entered this country illegally under Obama or Biden when you have a president that has effectively given you a wink and a nod and permission to come particularly Biden. However, we're a nation founded. Oh, his brothers here here. His brother's here. Oh, we're good.

Starting point is 01:48:45 We're nation founded. The last one was the odd number ending in social security. The first one, it starts with a phase two. But I got these two coming right here. So the short answer is, and I think we got a role where, you know, I know we're having too much fun, but I think I can fill my phone buzzing, which means they say 1130.

Starting point is 01:49:03 We're about to rock. Okay, got it. but I think I can fill my phone buzzing, which means no. They say 1130, we're about to rock. Okay, got it. So, anyone who's in this country illegally, if we're thinking on the time scales of history, I think has to be returned to their country of origin.

Starting point is 01:49:18 Against the backdrop of, at least for those who have demonstrated themselves to make real contributions as country and abide by the rule of law to have a legal and a Reformed and sensible legal path to immigration. If I'm in the White House as a father of two sons, I have an awful hard time looking my two sons in the eye and telling them you have to follow the rules. If the government that I am leading doesn't follow its own rules. And so it's with empathy, compassion, we will be as respectful, we'll never separate families,

Starting point is 01:49:53 we'll take the whole family unit, and have a legal path back for anybody who meets the standards of legal immigration. One of the ways you could have meet that is to meet the standard of saying that if you've already been a law-abiding citizen and you've demonstrated and made useful contributions and have skills that can contribute to the country in the way that any other legal immigrant would, then there's a legal path back in. But I think if we're thinking in the time scales of history, the long run, to say, we are a nation, not found out on ethnicity or on a cuisine, we're a nation founded on a set of ideals. That's what unites us.

Starting point is 01:50:28 And one of those ideals is the rule of law. Then we have to stand by those ideals and mean it, not just when it's easy, but when it's hard. And that's the way I lead as commander in chief. And I, the person asked that question may not agree with what I had to say. And I respect that. But that's where I would land. and I would lead nonetheless with compassion and dignity for every person involved.

Starting point is 01:50:50 And make sure that we handle it after we've done the first step, which is making sure that you're in this country illegally. You can't be here. Got to respect the fact that you being honest. Here's the winners. Jason, Nolesco, you get one of the copies, Brandon. If you want to send me the other one or Rob will give the announcement here as well. Aside from that, it's a pleasure having you on as usual, RFK, if you're watching this,

Starting point is 01:51:12 I'll message you afterwards to see if you're open to the idea or not. If those of you guys want to see him and RFK, cut that clip, put it on Twitter, tag RFK, tag Vivek, I'm sure Vivek, his camp's going to be seeing that as well, and maybe we can make that happen as well. I don't want to force this, but people have asked me to be great conversation with you. And I think we could. Davi Jenkins is the other winner that we have for the book. We'll send that over to you December 6th.

Starting point is 01:51:34 RFK Town Hall, 5990 Live. You can register. Take everybody. Have a good one. Bye, bye, bye, bye, bye. Thank you, guys. Yn yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw you

PBD Podcast - Vivek Ramaswamy | PBD Podcast | Ep. 326

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.