Piers Morgan Uncensored - “They’re Rejecting Kamala Harris!” Fiery US Election Debate!

Episode Date: October 31, 2024

With just one week left until the US presidential election, tensions are running extremely high. There have been accusations of fascism, burnings of mail-in ballots and people screaming in the faces of children. The issues that could decide the race are as divisive as you can get. While Donald Trump displays an obvious confidence, the poll figures remain within the margin of error, and Kamala Harris certainly hasn’t given up. Piers Morgan is joined today by comedian and podcaster Steven Crowder, libertarian political commentator Tim Miller, host of the ‘No Lies with BTC’ podcast Brian Tyler Cohen, host of the ‘Sage Steele Show’ Sage Steele and American investor and financial executive Dr Eric Weinstein. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's not about garbage. Desperate clingers, guns to their guns and Bible, deplorables, Nazis. This whole career is all he's done is a tech gay and trans people. Now he's like getting offended. If you are worried about trans athletes, how are you not talking about the issue of women's bodily autonomy? How about the border? How about the economy? How about endless wars across the pond? When you say Trump wouldn't be allowed to be president, what do you actually mean by that? Both of these parties should have thrown the bad apples out.

and competed for the middle of moderates and the reasonable people, and instead, they were pussies. President Biden's garbage smear has quickly entered the Hall of Fame for political blunders. First, there is the still inexplicable timing. His anointed successor, the apparent last bastion of democracy, was standing outside his window, literally, giving what she thought was a career-defining campaign-saving speech. Why on earth was Biden speaking on a campaign call on Skype at exactly at the same time from a few hundred yards away?

He was running his schedule. Next was the attempted cover-up. First, an important reminder of what he actually said. And just the other day, a speaker at his rally called Puerto Rico a floating island of garbage. Well, let me tell you something. I don't know the Puerto Rican that I know or Puerto Rico where I'm in my home state of Delaware. They're good, decent, honorable people. The only garbage I see floating out there is just supporters.

It could uncharitably argue that President Biden hasn't sounded that lucidly in years. But the president's team has been spinning like a tumble dryer. The official White House transcript added an apostrophe. Arguing nonsensically, that Biden was merely describing comedian Tony Hinchcliff's personal floating garbage. So just to clarify, he was not calling Trump supporters garbage. The president was referring to the demonization being garbage from one prominent supporter. By the way, as someone who had a stutter growing up, it's very obvious to me that there's an apostrophe at the end of supporters there. What a load of garbage.

This could be considered Orwellian if only 1984 was a comedy. The final component of garbage gate cementing its star on the critical walk of shame is the Trump campaign's gleeful exploitation of the gaff. Trump mounted a garbage truck in Wisconsin, a key swing state, before delivering his entire

rally speech in a garbage collector's fluorescent vest. I can tell you who the real garbage is, but we won't say that. That's shameless opportunism, has given the garbage smear another 24 hours of top billing. Cable News has now spent two straight days debating a phantom apostrophe. You might not like it, and I fully accept the half of this country. Seriously doesn't.

But Trump is closing his campaign with a real people's man swagger. McDonald's, Joe Rogan, a high-vis vest and a giant rally featuring Hulk Hogan and Dana White. The Harris campaign, meanwhile, is closing with Nazis and garbage. And we're all still talking about the one thing she really wants us to forget, the current president of the United States. What a moment, I'll be joined by Tim Miller, a superstar panel, plus Eric Weinstein will be here. But first, talking garbage is comedian and commentator Steve Crowder,

who's hosting the Rumble on Rumble next week, a massive election live stream that will run until a winner is called, even if it takes weeks. Well, let's go straight to Steve now. Steve, well, good luck with that if it drags on for weeks. Great to have you back on Unsensored. I didn't think after all the slings and arrows of this extraordinary race, including two assassination attempts and a change of nominee on a Democrat side,

that the one thing we'd all be talking about in the final week would be garbage. And yet here we are. How serious is Garbage Gate? It's garbage gate. Everything is a gate now. And it's funny when you look back that Watergate wasn't really the gate that we think it is. I don't think we're talking about garbage so much. I appreciate your introduction there.

And by the way, people who don't see your Instagram, Pierce's Instagram, he's a natural polar. He's lifting some heavy weight and proud of you. You're doing pretty well. I know you've been invigorated by that. And I mean it, I mean it. Thank you. Look, it's not about garbage.

Desperate clingers, guns to their guns and Bible, deplorables, Nazis, garbage. The key difference here that we see. And I've gone through this quite a bit because the New York Times has a whole running article, at least between 2015 and 2015. as to all of Donald Trump's insults on Twitter before he was banned, you won't find Donald Trump insulting the American voter like you do with the left. They did refer, we can argue a phantom

apostrophe, like you said. I appreciate you recognizing it's absurdity. Donald Trump goes after those who are in power, the elites. He refers to the DNC. He refers to the establishment. You may not like him referring to the swamp. You may not like him referring to people inside the Beltway, but he's never gone after the American voters. He actually does respect them. he's trying to win them over. That's what we're actually talking about. And it's the Achilles heel of the Democrat Party today. They're very elitist. That's the problem with garbage. Was it still damaging for Donald Trump to have this guy, Tony Hinchcliffe, at Madison Square Guard? And I was there. And aside for anything else, the joke fell completely flat in the room.

So it didn't work even on a comedic value with him. Although I thought John Stewart made a good point that this guy's a roaster. It's what he does. He roasts everybody and everybody. everything. But putting that aside, I saw Megan Kelly and Bill O'Reilly both saying, look, if you're going to get to the last week of a race, you don't want to have people at your rallies insulting the whole of Puerto Rico, given how many Puerto Ricans, for example, are in the state of Pennsylvania, a crucial state. Do you agree with that? I don't care. And I mean that. I know we're discussing perception. Look, I think there's a huge difference, for example, between a roast comedian or an insult comedian making a joke. I think

There's a big difference between that and the sitting president of the United States between biting baby stints, referring to the American voters as garbage. You may not like one, but I don't think that we should be applying the same standard. Donald Trump has never called anyone garbage. Barack Obama referred to half of America's bitter clingers, Hillary Clinton, at least half of Trump voters as deplorables. And you know what? I've heard people refer to that joke as horrifying. I hate it when people feign offense, when they're not really offended.

Maybe some people are offended. I think a lot of people aren't that offended by the joke, at least not as much as they let on to be. But I've heard a lot of people refer to what is horrifying, that rally. I don't think a joke from an insult comic is horrifying. You know what I do think is horrifying. I don't know if you know this. Adolf Hitler, the Nazis, killed six million Jews. I know it's lost on a lot of people.

I think that's horrifying. And I think to belittle the horrifying acts of the Nazi Party, the National Socialist Workers Party, by referring to Donald Trump as a Nazi, which is largely the reason he was a, the subject of an assassination plot, at least two times that we know of. I think that's horrifying. But that's just my opinion, and I'll disagree with people. Well, I actually agree with you, but someone who doesn't is the host of the ballwalk, Tim Miller, who has this to say in response.

Tim? I was just laugh and listening to all that peers. Donald Trump's never called anybody garbage. Donald Trump called Kamala Harris' advisors' garbage just like the other week. Donald Trump said America is a trash can and the world is sending their garbage. which is migrants here. Donald Trump's called me and other people

that oppose him in the media, the enemy of the people. He's called people human scum. He said that Haitian migrants were eating cats and do we need to keep doing this? Like this, we're going to pretend to be offended on behalf of Donald Trump. I mean, and Stephen Crowder, by the way,

his whole career, this is why he's on Rumble, not on YouTube, he got kicked off YouTube because all he does is insult gay people, insult trans people. Yeah, the only garbage I know is Stephen Crowder and Donald Trump. So they're garbage.

I don't think all of Donald Trump's supporters are garbage. I think that many of them are good people that have been misinformed by Donald Trump and Stephen Crowder's lies. Stephen, your response. Yeah, well, look, one thing, I don't like the way that these panels sometimes or sometimes some people descend and did nothing but ad hominum and interrupt each other.

So I promise you, I'm going to respect your time, and you will not hear me speak a single time today, not one interruption until you hear this bell. I just ask that you give me the floor. So I'm not going to address the ad homonym, but I've never been banned from YouTube. As a matter of fact, this will be up on YouTube, the election live stream of the century will be on YouTube as well.

Every single example that was just given was not addressed to the American people at large and not even the Democrat voting base at large. America is for Americans. Are black people not Americans? Are Hispanic Americans not Americans? The qualifier that I have always made and Donald Trump has always made and the reason that so many Americans support them is because there aren't those qualifiers of race that we see in identity politics. Every single example. I could go through all of them, the people around Kamala Harris. The people surrounding her are scum and garbage.

That's not going to be misinterpreted as Kamala's supporters are garbage. The voters of Donald Trump are deplorable. These people are scum. Kamala Harris is dumb, whatever he said. That's very different from the hatred, the reviling of the American voter. Your floor. Yeah. You know what?

Tim Miller, What I would say is people on the left, they're very, very quick to be very offended by Trump's rhetoric. This has been going on for eight years now. This guy talks in a disparaging way about people. It's unacceptable. It's awful. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But you think nothing as a group of constantly flashing the Nazi word around, fascist, Nazi, and now garbage.

Why is it one rule for Trump? Why do you want him to clean up the way he talks, but a completely different set of rules? for your own side? Why are you allowed to just go around calling people mass murderers? I'm not. Like I said, the only people I called garbage were Donald Trump and Stephen Crowder, because they've acted like garbage by disparaging people their entire careers. Like, that was the whole premise of both of these two guys' careers. Donald Trump's just been a little bit more successful at it. So I don't, Joe Biden's statement, I think, was like totally nonsensical marble mouth.

And I was maybe one of the most vocal people saying Joe Biden shouldn't run for president again. Joe Biden isn't running for president. Kamala Harris is running for president, and she gave a speech on the ellipse, where she talked about how MAGA voters would have a, and MAGA politicians would have a seat at the table in her administration. So you guys are trying to make something out of nothing, and you're trying to do this fake outrage where it's like in soccer peers where you guys are flopping. You're flopping on the ground hoping the refs call a foul and Joe Biden when Donald Trump's whole career has been insults and lies and disparaging people. And also his actual actions have been hurtful. note the sexual assault that he committed on women, the fact that he banned people from coming to

this country based on their religion, this separating a family. We could just go on and on about Donald Trump's behavior, the cops that got injured at the Capitol because of the riot that he started. So Donald Trump, it's not just his words, it's his actions that have been harmful. And you guys can get mad about what the soon-to-be former president, Joe Biden, like, incomprehensibly said, but he's not running against Joe Biden. And it seems like a desperate ploy to like put on a fancy costume and dress up like an umpalumpa. All right, Stephen, I mean, last time I checked, Joe Biden remains the current president of United States.

He is the leader of the free world. And for him to pop up as Kamala Harris is delivering her supposedly great final mission statement to the electorate on a Skype call calling half of America garbage struck me as just, never mind anything else, incredibly bad timing to the point where you think was that deliberate? Is he trying to sabotage you? Thank you. Again, I'm really going to avoid Ed Homon, which is really tough because it seems to be coming from the other side of this panel here. I will note for the record that you have not gone ad hominem. And Tim, to be fair, all you've done is abused. All you've done is abused Stephen. All you've done is abuse to even on a personal level.

I actually would like to rise above that. This whole career is all he's done as attack gay and trans people. Now he's like, now he's getting offended and called out for it. Just look, just Google his history of his comments about gays, trans people, women. He is Mr. Adhomidim. So don't like try to be like, oh, I'm Mr. Nice Guy now. Come on. Give me a break. Let's be honest.

Stephen? Okay, thank you for giving me the floor. As far as it being ill-advised, I would, yeah, I would say so with Joe Biden. The problem is that Kamala Harris was given so many opportunities to distance herself from Joe Biden. The Biden-Harris administration, she chose not to. She said there's not a thing that she would do differently, and she was one of his most important advisors in all of the decisions that had an impact.

Vice presidents aren't always given such an easily identifiable pet project. She was. And I know the talking point is she wasn't the border czar, even though Biden said that. The point is she was in charge of she was being tasked with discovering the root cause of the immigration issue. Well, we had $3 million under Donald Trump's tenure,

and now we have at least $15 to $20 million on the low end. That is a huge impact that affects Americans. If we want to talk about Donald Trump's actions hurting Americans, look, I guess this is, we're back to 2016. The issue is no Americans have lived actions that have harmed them more than the latest administration. They've lived it.

They lived Donald Trump for four years. They've lived Biden Harris for four years. It doesn't work. It falls on deaf ears. It's like Paul Revere. The exact same economy is coming. The exact same economy is coming. You want to talk about actions that have hurt?

I would argue that the actions on the border, the actions on American energy. The policies, which I would like to discuss, have hurt Americans. it's why they're rejecting Kamala Harris. It's why they trust Donald Trump more on issues like the economy and immigration. And by the way, I'm one of them, but we still, the point remains. Not one example has been presented. And by the way, I'm not offended by any of this. You haven't heard me feign outrage of just tried to describe the situation why Americans don't like it.

Not one example at all of Donald Trump referring to the American people at large as garbage or insulting them as the Democrat Party does every single election cycle. your floor. The other thing I would say to you, Tim, is what I find as an ongoing, bizarre set of circumstances, is that I keep hearing again from the left that Trump is the most racist candidate has ever been, et cetera, he's a fascist and so on. How do you explain if that is the case? How do you explain that his support amongst black and Latino Americans is rising to record levels for him in the last eight years? Why is that happening? Why are they gravitated? to somebody who is supposedly this terrible racist.

I mean, we haven't voted yet, Pierce. So let's see how that turns out next week. It looks like we're going to have record turnout in Detroit, they just said. We'll see if that's a surprising turnout for Donald Trump there. I kind of doubt it. But this whole thing that's like, you guys want to play in this fantasy pretend world where it's like Donald Trump doesn't insult people.

What? Everyone watching those that's not true. Donald, why is the left calling Donald Trump a fascist? The left isn't calling Donald Trump a fascist. John Kelly, who Donald Trump made the head of his Department of Homeland Security, who oversaw the Muslim Band 1.0, and then Donald Trump promoted him to Chief of Staff. And then he was his longest serving chief of staff. He wasn't a never-trumper like me.

He wasn't a moderate Republican rhino. He's a down-the-line conservative American hero that Donald Trump hired twice, who says, concerned that Donald Trump has fascist tendencies. And there were times during the first administration where Donald Trump's wanted to do things against the law. And it required him and Mattis and Millie and others to prevent him from doing it. And he's worried that those guardrails won't be around the next term. So it's not the left. It's not MSNBC. It's not wild-eyed liberals. It's John Kelly, a conservative American hero that Donald Trump hired twice that is saying that about him. And you guys need to reckon with

that rather than just pointing fingers. All right. I mean, Stephen, that's a fair point. There have been a number of people of John Kelly's ilk who have come forward and said they think Trump is dangerous, who did work with him at the White House. What's your response to that? Thank you. Well, this is the same John Kelly, by the way, in the Atlantic, the same journalist who spouted the losers and suckers lie, right? This is a disgruntled former employee. Now, maybe it's true. Only that same article included Donald Trump saying that we don't need to spend that much for an effing Mexican.

By the way, the soldiers' family immediately came out and refuted it. So if we're going to talk about people who don't like him, he said, she said, we can do that, or we can discuss the results for the American people and what affects them at large. We can reckon with that.

There you go. That's the reckoning. I don't really care what John Kelly says. But here is the fundamental dynamic. And this is why the left, and this is certainly why legacy media. I'm not saying the media, but legacy media, ABC, NBC, CBS, and Big Tech.

They're demanding that Americans trust their institutions, and they're blaming Americans for not trusting their institutions. This article in the Atlantic, John Kelly, is exactly why Americans don't trust those institutions. I trust the family of the soldier, not John Kelly. I trust the American people who want us to have voter ID, not people who say the most secure and fair elections of all time. When we look at the Hunter Biden laptop story, which I know will be dismissed, and people say that it was allowed to after a day.

That's the perfect encapsulation of the institutions that were demanded to trust who have failed us, whether it's intelligence officials, whether it's Facebook and the CEO, of which apologizing afterwards, Jack Dorsey, YouTube, I mean, the fundamental Democratic Party, and we're told, wait, trust your institutions.

Well, I don't trust the institutions that repeat lies that have been debunked, including some specifically from John Kelly. I don't trust those publications. I trust the voice of the family. of that soldier. And by the way, the families of all the soldiers who overwhelmingly support Donald Trump and the Republican platform, in contrast to Kamala Harris, your floor. Tim Miller, I want to talk to you directly about the fact you went down to confront the MAGA

mastermind Steve Bannon when he was released from prison at his press conference, and Bannon decided to have a bit of fun at your expense. Let's take a look. This is Tim Miller, one of my favorite guys from MSNBC in the bulwark. Used to be the spokesman for the Republic. When I met Tim as a younger man, he was the spokesman for the RNC, the old RNC, the establishment RNC, the RNC of Mitt Romney, not the RNC of Donald Trump. But go ahead, question.

Tim, I mean, you went down, you quizzed him on whether he would attempt another coup as an encore to January 6th, and Bannon gave quite a serious response. Let's take a look at that. Nancy Pelosi gave an interview to Rolling Stone magazine. She said her number one priority. Her number one priority is to make sure that Donald Trump is not only not elected, a re-elected President of the United States, but he never sets foot in the White House. Nancy Pelosi and Jamie Raskin right now are thinking about it, and they're very open about it,

of not certifying a Trump victory on November 5th. So, Tim, I know you're going to leave us in a few minutes. Just your response, really, to what Bannon said there? Well, that comment is based on nothing. I do think that there's kind of a delusion in there's sort of this every accusation is a confession a little bit sometimes with people in MAGA where it's like they're not going to certify the election. Like we didn't certify the election. If Donald Trump wins, the Democrats are going to certify the election last time, just like the Democrats did in 2000 in a much, much, much closer election than 2020 when Al Gore conceded to George W. Bush after his legal challenges. had been exercised. Donald Trump didn't do that. And when I asked Steve that you didn't play there,

and I've quizzed Steve many times. I interviewed him on the circus several times. We've gone back and forth. And so it wasn't like it was confronting him. They invited me to the press conference. And what I asked him there was he got out of prison. And I was wondering if he, sometimes when people get out of prison, they feel like they're reformed. And they look back on their actions and they say, you know what? Maybe I went too far. Maybe in 2020 by advancing these lies about the election. I thought it was all part of the political game, but then things got out of hand. Dozens of police were injured. The vice president had to be scurried off by Secret Service.

The vice president's life was in danger. Senators and House members' lives were in danger. I was really the ringleader of pushing that in the media, in the MAGA media world. And given that the results ended up so disastrously for the country and for those individuals who were harmed that serve our country, maybe those four months. in low security prison, he had a chance to reflect on that and say, you know what, next time I'll do things differently. And I got to say, I was pretty alarmed that the answer to that question was no. He did not, he doesn't see that he'll do any change. And if we are in a similar

situation this time, I think both him and Donald Trump will act the same way. And I find that very alarming. Final question, Tim, before you go, who do you think he's actually going to win this election? Not who do you want to win, but who do you think may win? Yeah, I mean, I think it's It's utterly close. I think if you listen to David Plough on the Harris campaign or Steve Vannon, when we were talking more politically outside of the context of January 6th, they both kind of sound the same way, which is that Kamala Harris has a narrow path through the blue wall states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. I think that she's very narrowly in the lead there, but I would not feel at all comfortable if I was their campaign. I think that gives Donald Trump's campaign three outs. They can crack the blue wall, win one of those states. I think he's probably the president. I think she has maybe one out in North Carolina. So I think she has maybe one out and he has three. So I guess I would rather be her than him because I do think she has a narrow lead in those three states.

But I think it's extremely close. And I think if anybody telling you anything else, like really, is gas-liding you. Well, my thanks to Stephen Crowder and to Tim Miller. We're going to go to the next stage of our debate now and begin with a bizarre new Harris campaign ad, voiced by Julia Roberts, which urges women to secretly defy their mega husbands. Your turn, honey. in the one place in America

where women still have a right to choose. You can vote any way you want and no one will ever know. Did you make the right choice? Sure did, honey. Remember, what happens in the booth stays in the booth. Vote Harris Walls.

Well, the subtext appears to be that women aren't capable of making their own minds up and own decisions, and even worse, that they should be afraid if they do so. Here to debate that, more, a panel of a man and a woman were certainly not shy about their politics. Brian Tyler Cohen, host of No Lie,

and Sage Steel, the host of the Sage Steel show. Well, welcome to both of you. Brian, I've got to say, I found that ad patronizing and nauseating. And if I was a woman, I'd be like, sorry, what? I think that we are defying reality or denying reality. I think we're denying reality if we are sitting here and pretending

that there is not a culture of misogyny in the United States. If you're offended by that ad, can you actually not tell me that you're not more offended by the fact that Republicans have stripped women of their bodily autonomy in this country? Is that really what we're pretending that we're upset with? I mean, we have J.D. Vance, the vice presidential nominee right now for the Republican Party, who has gone on some tour across the country where he's called women who don't have kids, childless cat ladies, who's attacked them, who's denied the legitimacy of families that don't have children. I mean,

Can we really say that we're more offended by that ad than the reality of the situation on the ground in the US right now? Let me just ask you, Brian. If the Democrats are the party of fairness and equality for women and are the standard barriers and flag waivers of women's rights, why is it that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris continue to support trans athletes competing in women's sport,

which everybody knows is a grotesque attack on women's rights, to fairness and equality. I'm bemused. Pierce, again, the same concept applies. The number of people that that actually, that are, A, worried about that in this election, and B, that that actually impacts. Again, if you are worried about trans athletes, how are you not talking about the issue

of women's bodily autonomy, of their reproductive freedom of Republicans' threats to block women from traveling between states in this country? I mean, you try to have it both ways where you pretend that the trans issue is something that upsets you to the ends of the earth. And yet that impacts how many people, how many people does that impact in this country?

Let me ask you a question. I love the way that Democrats like to pretend nobody cares, one, when they do. And secondly, it has no real impact on women's sport. The United Nations last week, hang on, the United Nations last week came out with a report that said that around the world, 900 medals had been deprived from going to buy

biological women because they had gone to trans athletes in women's sport. 900. That is not a small thing. That is an erosion of women's rights around the world, and it's being promoted in the United States by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. So when they position themselves as we are for women's rights, I say, as we would say in Britain, to appoint Lord Copper, because you're not when it comes to women's rights in sport. And there is an absolute conflict there. Let me bring in Sage here. I mean, Sage, this is where I think there's a real contradiction.

How can you be for women's rights on abortion, but not in sport, for example? It's completely hypocritical, just like what happened with the vaccine and that forced a mandate, which I had to do to keep my job as well at Disney. So my body, my choice, when it's convenient for you. And again, hashtag science, right? There has never been an issue that is this black and white. We can, Brian, we can go back and forth and. debate on the vaccine and the efficacy of it and all that did it help did it not have

many like there has never and ever and the history of this universe been an issue between men and women and all of a sudden well i don't know xx x y and it's okay if he has this and stop it and at the end of the day it's actually much more it's almost 1100 now peers and this is just from a couple of days ago trophies that have been taken away from women or girls but that doesn't count on the lower levels where there are no trophies given out per se and We're talking about Olympic boxing and stuff like that. But when you look at, you know, junior high school, high school, track, scholarships, you've got to finish in the top three to go ahead to state.

But now you're fourth because I live in the state of Connecticut, where one of the major lawsuits first came from five or six years ago, actually, young woman I live next door to. This is happening everywhere, but you don't want to talk about it because you know deep down, you're not going to admit it, but deep down, you know that it's wrong. And I also think it's interesting that you go with this low-hanging fruit and all those talking points of the childless cat women,

from four plus years ago, completely out of context. At the end of the day, stick with the facts. By the way, I'm not offended by that Julia Roberts, you know, stupid commercial. Like, I think it's so lame and it is very condescending. Like, I'm not, I'm afraid to tell my husband, my boyfriend, my partner, whatever it is, who I'm going to vote for and just be quiet about it. Like, stop it. And most importantly.

Do you think that that ad? That is the only issue. Why is that the only issue that you guys are focusing on? abortion, abortion, abortion, women's rights. Have things changed, yes, but there are still, there are plenty of states that have zero restrictions where you can do it up to the moment the baby's born, and I guess you're okay with that.

Do you think that that ad is more offensive and more condescending than women's bodily autonomy being stripped away? Are you more offended by that ad than the actual reality on the ground? Well, maybe because of the, maybe because of the fact that women's bodily autonomy is not being stripped away. It has never been part of the Constitution. It never has been. It never has been.

There isn't an abortion desert in the South. There are more restrictions. Women are able to go get abortions in the South. But it also, there are more, you ask me a question to let me answer. There are definitely more restrictions depending on where you live. There are also many states where there are fewer restrictions, hashtag none, where you can do it up to the moment a baby is born. And even in some cases we have seen after. So let's not act like it's only one way.

There are less restrictions in some states, 10, 11, and then there's many others where there are, where there are, So there are so many more. This has been through the years. This is before Dobbs, by the way. There's so many things. But tell me why this is your only issue. What and what? Tell me why this is your only issue, Brian?

Why is this your main focus? How about the border? How about the economy? How about endless wars across the pond? Like that's the stuff that, by the way, black voters, Hispanic voters, everyone's talking about it's the economy. This is the one thing because that's the only thing that you think you can quote unquote win.

When this country is falling apart and people don't feel safe. Which cases have we seen abortions happen after the baby's born? Because you just said that. So I'm curious where that's happened. It happened for sure in Colorado. I believe it also happened in Minnesota. I'll be glad to you know what. Give me the example.

I mean, like educate me. Excuse me. I'm sure peers can connect us. I'm sure peers can get there were babies left. Do you have no proof? You're just saying you're sure it's happening in Colorado. Give us the proof. There's a lot.

There are a lot of viewers. We'd love to know where babies are executed after they're born. We would love to know where babies are being executed after they're born in Colorado. Let us all know. I just told you. And I don't know how you define executed, but left to die. That has absolutely happened before. And it is something I talked about with RFK Jr. on my podcast several months ago when it was late-term abortion and all that whole debate.

Again, I'm sure peers can connect us. I'll gladly go back and forth with you because I kind of, I respect the hell out of you. At the end of the day, my question for you is, isn't there, How about the topics that I listed that you completely ignore in the border and 10.4 million minimum people coming over the border. That's who we know about. I love to talk about the other people that have got. I love to talk about that.

You're talking about women's autonomy. And by the way, I'm a woman. You're not. Focus on the other things as well as that because there's so many more important things and you know it. But because you guys are stressed out about how this campaign is going, you're focusing on that one issue, abortion, abortion, abortion. How about protecting our borders?

So those young girls don't have to make that kind of a choice if something bad happens when a criminal comes across the pond and hurts them or rapes them. Focus on that. It's so bizarre to say that I can't talk about the issue of abortion when it's one of the most, if not the most important issues that Americans are voting on right now. And you want to talk about women getting raped by people coming across. No, no. I'm talking about all of it. I'm talking about all of it. I'm talking about all of it.

I sat here quietly while you spoke. You got, you actually wasn't quiet. I sat here quietly while you're going to let me speak, and what's the point of this? You just said that you want to talk about, you said that you're worried about women getting raped by people that come across the border. And then what?

And then not being able to exercise their bodily autonomy. Again, like all of these issues are connected, but you don't want to talk about the issue of bodily autonomy, even though it is the most important issue that Americans are facing right now, even though in 2022, even though in 2022 and 2023, Republicans were losing on this,

issue in places like Ohio, Kentucky, Kansas, and Alabama. And yet you're pretending that it's not an issue. You want to talk about the... I'm not pretending, Brian. I promise you. I'm not pretending, but I want you to look at the polls. Hang on. Let me jump in. Let's not the number one issue. Let me jump in. Let me ask Brian. Here's what I'm curious about. Because take Europe, for example, in Europe, there are a number of countries where it is illegal to have an abortion at all. Conversely, there are countries like the UK, where, say, in England, I think it's a 24-week term limit, right? So there are all sorts of varying abortion laws through Europe.

But it's nowhere near the Tinderbox issue that it seems to be in the United States of America, which, you know, is the equivalent, if you like, of Europe. Why are you so opposed as an American to the principle of taking an issue like that back to the States? Because this is the first time that, a personal freedom, a right, has been rolled back in the United States in our history. We have never had an instance where women had rights before, and then they've been rolled back by people who are trying to impose some theocratic edicts onto this country.

It should not be up to a politician to insert themselves between a woman and her doctor. That's it. I mean, it's as simple as that. Why are you here advocating for politicians to insert themselves in a doctor's office between a woman and her doctor? Well, I'm not. The right person still there. Hang on, Sage. Hang on, Sage, hang on. Sorry.

If you want my personal opinion, I believe in a woman's right to choose what to do with her body. It's not about my personal opinion. I'm just curious as a European where there are so many different varying laws around Europe and no one seems to get too head up about it. It just seems to be such a hot potato in America to take it back to the states where when there are a fact a number of other laws, obviously, which are governed by states, not federally. And I'm just curious why this one is deemed.

to be so sort of sacrosanct, given that 50 years ago, before Roe Wade came in, it wasn't a federal law. So why are you so exercised about it? I'm just curious. Because I believe that people should be able to exercise rights over their own bodies. I mean, prior to black people having the right to vote, they weren't allowed to. I would be worked up if that was rolled back too. Prior to women having the right to vote, they weren't allowed to. I would be worked up over having that too. Prior to black people having freedom, they didn't. I would be worked up if that was rolled back. was rolled back as well. We deserve rights. We deserve progress. And the notion that we should just take it lying down when those rights are rolled back is defies reality.

I don't think that most sane people are thinking that way, honestly. I do believe that this will always, always be an issue no matter what to the end of time because there's morals involved. But again, my body, my choice, when it's convenient, and I respect everybody's opinions on it. I do. I have great discussions with my female friends and men. No, excuse me, let me clarify. So you know that there are states in this country, there are states in this country where women can get raped. Brian, there are states in this country where women can get raped.

And yet it's inconvenient for them to try to exercise their bodily autonomy with an abortion? I said that I said this before and obviously you took it the way you wanted to take it. My, when it's convenient, meaning science following my body, my choice. So for this, but not for COVID, right? That was my point. So don't act like convenience with rape. Don't bring that in. It was when it's...

Say, let me ask you this. Only when it's convenient. Okay, Sage, let me ask you this. I thought Megan Kelly made an interesting point about the Madison Square Garden rally about it being too brotastic. Let's take a look at what she said. But I'm telling you, even for me,

and I voted for Donald Trump last week, it was too brotastic. Okay? It was. You're trying to win an election in which you're hemorrhaging female voters. Maybe when you present in front of hundreds, thousands, at least, at Madison Square Garden,

you clean up the bro-talk just a little so you don't alienate women in the middle of America who are already on the fence about Republicans. Now, Sage, I was there. It was pretty brotastic. There's no denying that. You had a procession of very bro-sounding speakers. And a new CBS poll says that women are breaking 55-43 for Harris,

men 54-45 for Trump. Should Trump be doing more in these last few days to reach across two potential female voters? You know, I believe that clip was the context of it was in relation to the comedian and the Puerto Rico comment that, of course, stirred up so much controversy. No, no, she was talking about the whole thing. In general. Okay. I was there as well. I saw you outside just before. I think back to the women that were there, a friend of mine, Tulsi Gabbard, who is as classy and a strong woman as we will find in this country. Alina Habib, the lawyer, how about Melania Trump? I would have loved to continue to see more women there, but I didn't feel that in the moment being there looking

around, and especially with the 20,000 people, at least half being women there. And also, I will say this, I have been volunteering for the past couple of, I guess, probably about a month now. I don't know if you've seen the pink jackets that women for Trump are wearing. And I've been going around the country talking to women, supporting women's businesses. We've been going to food banks. And it's led by Laura Trump and Tulsi's been there and Annika Patrick's been there and Elizabeth Pipco. And so many women who are just coming together and volunteering as women. Because I think so often we're told, how can you be a woman in support Donald Trump?

And there's obviously millions of women who do. And so I think it's just been really fascinating for me, never having done any of this before. I mean, this is the last thing I thought I would be doing is doing anything political over with campaigns. But going into these communities and talking to women, women of color, people, I cannot tell you how many women and men, but women have come up to me in my travels, in airports, on the streets here in New York City, and just said why they're voting for Donald Trump and how pissed off they are. that they're told they shouldn't based on whatever someone else's opinion is. So I do think that they are doing more as a campaign. I do because I'm part of it. Okay.

Brian, conversely to you, I was surprised Kamala Harris didn't fly and do Joe Rogan, even Joe Rogan's podcast studio. It's the biggest in the country. Trump got 40 million people so far have watched that interview. It's a great way to get to men where she's clearly struggling. We saw that off-guard clip of her talking about. She needs to get a better. resonance with male voters.

Was it a mistake, a misstep of her, not to go to Joe Rogan? Well, I don't know if she's going to ultimately do it. I mean, there's still a few days left into the election. I can say personally, I do hope she does the Joe Rogan podcast. To your exact point, I think it is a great opportunity to reach a lot of people. I don't think that Joe Rogan is an especially contentious interview, where I think a lot of times he's ignorant on what he speaks to and open to hearing other perspective.

So I think that this would be a good opportunity for her to do it. look, everything is just a matter of time and opportunity cost, spending three hours in the state of Texas, which isn't exactly a swing state in the presidential election right now, as much as I hope it would be, it means that she wouldn't be able to spend that time in Nevada or Wisconsin or Arizona or Pennsylvania, Michigan, you know, like these other states. So I do, you know, to your exact point, I do hope that ultimately she does make the time. I think three hours is a big ask in these final last few days of the election. every minute in this campaign counts. And so I think that there could be some compromise there. What I hope didn't happen is that he said, okay, well, we're either going to do three hours in Texas

or nothing as kind of a way to pretend that he offered her the platform. So I do hope that there is some compromise if she is able to make some time. Yeah, and finally, Brian, who do you think is going to win? I think that Kamala Harris is. I would rather be Kamala Harris than Donald Trump right now. But look, it's going to be tight. It's going to be close.

Let's not pretend that either one of these people has a clear path, a clear path right now with regard to the polling. I think that especially with regard to the blue wall states, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, I would, again, rather be Kamala Harris than Donald Trump right now. But I think, you know, if the polling has shown us anything, it's that everything is within the margin of error. Everything is basically tied at this point.

So we can look at the enthusiasm gap, for example. We saw, I believe it was a Wall Street Journal poll today that showed that Democrats have a 77% enthusiasm rate versus I think it was a 67% for Republicans. So there is a gap right now between Democrats and Republicans. Hopefully that translates to actual votes, but, you know, it's anyone's guess. And Sage, I mean, talking of enthusiasm, Trump's put a lot of time and effort into doing a lot of these podcasts directly aimed at younger men.

they've got to turn out to reward that effort he's put in. Do you think they will, and do you think Trump will win? You know, it's interesting. I've been, I voted yesterday. I'm a recent resident. I just moved down to the free state of Florida, and I was blown away at the line for early voting, and it's obviously a Broward County,

and there's many options, and people were there for hours. And so I saw men, women, kids, handicapped, minority, you name it. Everybody was there. I do think they're going to turn out. And I will say this, real quick, Rogan is the biggest podcast in the world. It is a huge missed opportunity for them to put parameters on it. This is nothing to do with not campaigning in Texas or Pennsylvania or North Carolina.

That podcast goes global. It's short-sighted. I wonder what they're hiding by not having her do it. I wish she would. I've always wished from day one. I just want to hear her policies. It took a long time for us to get those, even on her website. So I think it's a missed opportunity.

I think Americans are seeing these missed opportunities, and I do think Donald Trump will win. Okay. Sage, Brian. Thank you both very much indeed. Appreciate it. Thanks, Pierce. Thank you. Thanks, Brian.

Well, this week, Dr. Eric Weinstein, the mathematician, many credit with founding the intellectual dark web, wrote a despairing post on X that summed up his feelings on America's Big Decision Day. It read, I'm failing this election. I try, but I simply failed. I cannot work within these concepts. My world, my country, my America is not on the ballot. Well, that post has been viewed over seven million times already, with many echoing his lament.

But many commentators have accused Dr. Weinstein are sitting on the fence of squandering. his significant influence at a critical moment for the country. And he joins me now. Eric, great to have you back on Uncensored. You decided in the end to say what you said. You saw the extraordinary reaction to that, good, bad and ugly. A lot of people saying you've been a bit cowardly here. What do you say to them? Well, I find that somewhat funny because standing up to one political party alone

is bad enough. Standing up to two just makes things worse. In general, to me, cowards lead mobs. They incite mobs, and they fight from within mods, mobs particularly behind the veil of anonymity. So it has nothing to do with that, and I also think that the post was widely misinterpreted. So let's clarify what you meant. So tell me what you really meant by that post.

Sure. Imagine that you have two restaurants, and that both of them are failing the health grade. One of them may be failing the health grade by much more than the other because it has problems with fecal matter and the food, let's say. You may say I can tolerate the risk of going to the one that's less dangerous, but you can't recommend the restaurants to somebody else because, quite frankly, they're both super dangerous. Now, in my opinion, the Democratic Party has become something completely un understandable, unrecognizable, and its leadership appears in my mind to be eating. evil, and that is my party. The Republican Party is far more chaotic, but both parties have chosen a strategy where

instead of courting common sense people, somewhat in the middle, although I don't think it's a linear spectrum anymore at all, they've decided to hang on to their extremes and pretend that they aren't there or not incredibly toxic and violent. And in part, you know, my frustration is that in order for me to recommend that, in order for me to recommend a party and I was hoping to recommend a ticket this election cycle. I don't think Kamala Harris and Tim Walts have given me any possibility of recommending them. So unless somebody can make that argument to me directly in the last few days, I just see it as an impossibility. I was very disappointed in some sense because I have three friends in the big six on the

Republican side, which would be RFK Jr., Tulsi, and J.D. Vance. And my feeling about about this is that we have a situation by which the Republican Party is just completely incautious. And if you see the reaction, just search on my name and the word Jew. You'll see exactly how much toxicity is hiding amongst the good people of MAGA. And too few of them, by the way, have the courage to stand up when somebody's being attacked. And so I think it's a bit rich that the cowards who privately message me and say, we support you don't say something in public when they're watching a mob descend on an individual. And quite honestly, I wasn't hoping to take on MAGA, but if that's what it takes to stand

up and say, you cannot brutalize people like this. And inciting mobs against individuals is what I thought you were accusing the Democrats of doing. And now you've stared into the abyss and it stares back. I mean, Chris Rufo said this is narcissism marked as idealism. It's absurd to expect politics to conform to one's individual preferences and idiosyncrasies. The essence of politics is decision under imperfect conditions. If you can't figure out how to rank Trump and Harris, you're just navel-gazing. Your response? Chris who?

I mean, it's sort of my response. In other words, this is an individual who's been very successful arousing passions. And he's been very effective in being very aggressive. I think he is actually an excellent point that in many ways the Republicans have been too passive. And so in order to compensate for that flaccid aspect of Republicans rolling over in the past, he's decided to go red meat as to whether it's narcissism or navel gazing or cowardice or fence sitting or any of the other epithets, I was hoping he would dig a little bit deeper into his thresaurus. But it's offensive, and I'm just not going to get particularly exercised.

People have heard me ad nauseum about the problems with the Democratic Party. If I was to join MAGA, I would start criticizing MAGA in particular for blinding itself to the real problems of January 6th, just the way I point out that on the Democratic side, I don't believe it was a free and fair election in 2020 because of the interference through the tech companies. And a problem with the news media that I would call a rhizome. A rhizome is a, you know, like quaking aspen. You think you see a bunch of different trees, but it's actually one organism.

And all you're seeing is it breaking through the ground in different places. For some reason, the Democratic machine seems to control all sorts of different newspapers that basically engage in something, which I've called journal painting, which is campaigning while pretending that you have immunity under the guise of journalism. And journal painting is the scourge of these elections. So I've called the 2020 election not free and fair, and I've called the January 6th and the Georgia interference a serious question, and everyone I know who's chosen one side or the other will blind themselves to one of these two facts.

And that's, you know, I'm trying to get America back to my friends in the Republican Party. I understand that you understand that there are winners and losers. And that's how you think and that's how you talk. But it matters how you win. And if you don't believe me, try to think about how many people have a poster of Lance Armstrong on their wall. Right. That's a very good point. What you did came at a time when there's a lot of attention around some of the major newspapers in America from the Washington Post to the LA Times, USA Today, all deciding not to endorse anybody at this election,

which has caused fury with their journalists because historically they voted Democrat. And in a way, it's exposed the very liberal leanings of many of these newsrooms, that there's fury amongst journalists that they haven't once again said vote Democrat. But Jeff Bezos, who owns a Washington Post, said this. He said, most people believe the media is biased. Anyone who doesn't see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales in election. What presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias, a perception of non-independence,

ending them as a principled decision, and it's the right one. Obviously, it's a different circumstance to you and the pressure that you came under to endorse either side. But what did you make of Bezos's argument for not allowing the Washington Post to endorse? Mr. Bezos, you have far larger problems than the endorsement issue. You have a problem of journalism. May I just point out, you went after me because I was the supposed far-right podcast host who had J.D. Vance on his program. When I did that, I talked to him about something called the grandmother hypothesis, which is a scientific theory put forward by effectively George C. Williams and his students. You covered that, I think, in 2015, and you wrote in your paper, not you personally, but the journalist, since having children is what drives evolution, there's no good evolutionary reason for women to live past their ability to reproduce.

And instead, what you did is you took my far more careful statement talking about evolutionary females, and you tried to tar J.D. Vance with it as if we were both opting to insolving to incal. slave older women only for the care of the young. Quite honestly, what you have is you have a paper that is effectively lobbying for the right to be hypocritical. You're an anti-science organization. If you want me to explain to you how you violated journalistic ethics as by the Society Professional Journalist Code of Ethics, which has undergone many revisions, any version of

it, you're not bending over backwards to do objective journalism. You have a printed code of ethics. All you need to do is false. I applaud the fact that you are starting to bring the paper back to being an actual newspaper. But right now, what you have is an anti-scientific wing of the Democratic Party of the United States, and that's not a partisan position. That is my party. And I would previously have regarded the Washington Post as one of the three finest newspapers

in the United States of America. What's going on? You better fix it. You're rich enough to do it. Stop dragging your feet. And it's time to make reparations to the people that your paper. has wrong in but if you choose to start with me I would be delighted should newspapers of that stature endorse anyway I mean is Bezos I'm not

the criticisms you just outlined is Bezos right in the principle that the Post didn't historically used to endorse until I think several decades ago and then they began to endorse is it something a newspaper should do or is he right that instinctive if you want to avoid a suggestion of bias, you just shouldn't get into the endorsement business. Traditionally, there's a Chinese wall between the news division and the opinion and editorial pages of a paper. And if that Chinese wall is strong, then both of them give us some insight, because in fact the editors are sitting over the news, and this is their opportunity to say

we are biased by what we see and we wish to give normative judgments rather than merely descriptive judgments of the news as we see it. In the current era, there should be no endorsement. The most important thing is for news organizations to go back to being journalistic organizations. The reporters simply flagrantly violate the printed code of ethics, and this isn't difficult. It's just that everybody's been having a Bakhnal rather than following the rules of journalism. This has been an orgy of partisanship and journal painting, and we don't know what to do about it. And quite honestly, you're rich enough, clean it up. The big furori that blew up at the weekend, I was at the rally at Madison Square Garden,

the first one I've been to of Trump's, and it sparked garbage gate in all its guises and everything. Let's take a little mash-up look at the rally itself, and I'll come to you with a question. This is Donald Trump's house, brother. She's a fake, a fraud. She's a pretender. Her and her pimp handlers will destroy our country. I'm not going to do conspiracy, and I'm not going to do conspiracy. and I'm not not gonna do conspiracy.

But it's kind of funny that they tried everything else and now they're trying to kill them. They better not. I don't see no sticking Nazis in here. Homeless and veterans, Americans, Americans, sleeping on their own feces on a bench in Central Park. But the fucking illegals, they get whatever they want, don't they? the only thing I see in here are a bunch of hardworking men and women that are real Americans, brother.

Now, it was interesting to me, we'll get to garbage going in a moment, but Arnold Schwarzenegger seems to have gone on a similar kind of journey as you've done about questioning who he should be endorsing. Ultimately, he did come down, excuse me, but he came down on the side of Kamala Harris and he explained, we need to close the door on this chapter of American history. I know that former President Trump won't do that. He will divide. He will insult. He will find new ways to be more un-American than he already has been.

And we the people will get nothing but more anger. He said, I'll always be an American before I'm a Republican. That's why I'm voting for Kamala Harris and Tim Walts. What did you make of his explanation for why he would be voting against his historic party? And in relation to what we saw at Madison Square Garden, were you concerned about the rhetoric that came off the stage there or not? It's a bunch of different questions, so let me do my best. First of all, I can't possibly figure out how he imagines

that the Democratic Party can put the country back together again. My guess is that only Donald Trump can further divide it or put it back together. And if it's Kamala Harris, we're going to be waiting, probably a period of four years, given that she won no primaries, and her party has pulled off the mask as to how it chooses to operate. Donald Trump could further divide us, or he could choose to unite us. And in fact, if he decided to go with the super ticket idea and say, look, you don't have to vote for me, vote for any of the six, that's an ingenious political move.

It will change American politics forever, because it will give people the ability to see that he's put his own ego aside. He didn't choose to do that. I think that Donald Trump could, he has an ability to be very presidential when he likes, and he has an ability to be hell on wheels when he feels it's warranted. I think if you look at the second potential shooter of Donald Trump, you have to be really unwilling to consider conspiracies before you start worrying about what a single bullet could do to the entire country. It would be a tragic occurrence if it were to end the life of Donald Trump. But I'm not really sure people have an idea of what would happen in a heavily armed country

had that second shooter got off a shot that found its mark. I think we are teetering. We're on a time, I don't know what the right analysis. is we are in a very precarious situation. My decision to stay out in part is to take a hit during the election because there have to be voices for afterwards. If you recall, you know, you need people when tensions are high who have not gone partisan. And so I'm just going to take a bunch of lumps and say that right now we've had two, two and a half shooters towards Donald Trump. I worry that there is an amendment to the Constitution, maybe the 14th Section 3, that could provide for a

challenge saying that an insurrectionist, if January 6th was called that way, could not assume office. I'm not sure where we are. Where we are is extremely precarious. And as I said before on Chris Williamson's program, I'm not sure that Donald Trump will be allowed to become president. I definitely believe that if it's a landslide, he stands a far better chance. But I believe that the foreign policy machinery of the United States is sufficiently worried about what he would do in Ukraine, what he would do with NATO, how he would handle the attempted permanent alliances and agreements of the United States while in office, that it feels incredibly threatened. And I really do think that grown up responsible people need to pay far more attention to the second shooter

than the first. When you say Trump wouldn't be allowed to be president, what do you actually mean by that? I don't know. I'm trying to say that I think that there are elements who view potentially the release of information around Jeffrey Epstein, who view information around potentially the JFK assassination, who worry about covert operations in Ukraine becoming exposed or compromised. I think that there are a great number of things that are quiet that, that, you know, that are assumed to be respected by both political candidates. And I think what's happened is that you've got a populist who has signaled that he is not going to play by the rules of the permanent class in Washington, D.C. and beyond. And I believe that that is Donald Trump's best quality.

It is the thing for which he is most beloved. And I think it's the thing that he's the thing that within the Beltway he is most feared and hated for. And I just don't think people understand the depths to which certain operatives will go to potentially frustrate his campaign. And frustrate is a word that I choose to leave ambiguous. Another conservative commentator, Mike Sinovich, he said of your decision not to make a decision, said, or not to choose a party. He said, this is pathetic. Every word you write, he said, ooze's moral cowardice in a pivotal moment in American history. This is self-important horseshit best suited for the therapy.

chair. Do you have a response to that? I mean, that's the more visceral end of the rage that your decision seems to have enshrined in some conservative circles. You know, as somebody who stands up to mobs regularly, I'm not really worried about somebody trying to fit me with a pink tutu in front of the world. I know Mike, Mike's a very, very smart guy. I've found him a long time ago, even when he was radioactive. I think he's a guy who really believes in what he calls the guerrilla mindset, and the idea is that they're winners and losers. There are real men and there are pussies.

And so in that snap to grid universe, that's what I am. He knows better. Why he chose to do that in public, I have no idea. But I'm not going to go after Mike Cernovich in public right now. I'll just say this. Boy, the MAGA people are bad strategists. It's the idea of trying to figure out whether you can incite me to say a bunch of really negative things about MAGA right before an election or the idea that you want me to move out of the Democratic Party towards the Republicans where I'm far more important being a critic of my own party. These guys just don't seem to understand in some sense how to win properly, how to have allies.

And if you wanted to ask me to answer the question about Madison Square Garden, I'd be happy to. Yeah, yeah, please do. So I think that basically the left of center people don't understand the amount of love and positivity and hope and energy that that party has, which is not dead from the neck down. I think that there was a huge coming together of people, brown, blue, green, yellow, white, doesn't matter, Jews, Muslims, et cetera, et cetera. That said, I think it was very heavily. tilted towards red meat. It was very heavily tilted towards men over women. The edgy comic Tony Hinchcliff, I'm going to just stand up for him and say he's absolutely brilliant. I know I'm a little personally. In person, he's the nicest, sweetest human being. He was talking not

about humans as garbage. He was talking about a garbage problem on an island that has landfills. Nevertheless, very dangerous to do that kind of insult comedy in a Madison Square Garden. It was an attempt to tie it to the 1939 rally. I can promise you I've gone to Eric Clapton concerts at Madison Square Garden. Nobody made a comparison of Eric Clapton to Nazis. These people are fighting in just a horrific smear campaign where the Democratic Party's chief tool is personal destruction. And they're trying to destroy people who went and tar them with the brush of Nazis.

Now, that said, there are absolutely bigots, anti-Semites, really horrible people inside of MAGA, that MAGA will not clear out, just the way, I'll tell it to you this way. The Democratic Party will not clear out the people who were celebrating October 7th as an act of resistance by the great humanitarian sin war. And the Republicans will not clear out all of those people shouting at me that I should go back to Israel because what have Jews ever done for America? We're basically a fifth column in the United States. Check your nuclear weapons and see who made you the absolute strongest country as Americans. I'm sick to death of people being quiet. I'm talking not about the bad people in

MAGA. I'm talking about the really good people, the people I love, whose back I have in MAGA. You don't have my back. That's your problem. Your problem is that you contact me privately rather than publicly. And you know that this is dangerous talk. It's not just a question of, quote, those mean tweets. You've got that wrong. This is the precursor to really bad things happen. Look at what happened in Beulhu and Istanbul during the 50s. Look at what happened in Germany in the 30s. When you allow people to start talking recklessly like this, this is the appetizer. It's the prelude. It's the precursor to violence. And quite honestly, both of these parties should have thrown the bad apples out and competed for the middle and the moderates and the reasonable people.

And instead, they were pussies, and they clung to their extremists in order to win an election. And it's going to be up to those of us who have to stand up to both of these parties to put this country back together. And, you know, I'm not going to use my French on this podcast. But I'm sick to death of men with masculinity issues yelling coward at people who stand up to mobs. If you want to incite a mob or you want to hide within one or you want to hide behind anonymity, you've given us your calling card. Eric, you've said you're not going to endorse, but does that mean necessarily that you're not going to cast a vote? Could it be that you may vote privately without saying who you voted for? Absolutely.

Yeah, yeah. In other words, either party could have looked at itself and said, you know, what, we have a huge problem. And we're willing to look at ourselves in order to win the people who want a home. I don't want to be homeless. And by the way, Chris Rufo and Mike Sterners, they just don't get it. I can look past all sorts of things. The threshold for me endorsing a party means that that party isn't going to corrode me in order to keep my membership card, right?

In other words, I intend to talk about the problems of Georgia in January 6th and the fact that the election of 2020 was not free and fair. If you require me to blind myself to one set of those things, I can't join you and I can't recommend you to others. Now, does that mean that I'm not willing to take the risk when I go to the ballot box and cast a vote? No, I'm willing to do it. I have four choices. I can vote for Kamala Harris.

I can vote for Donald Trump and the super ticket. I can vote for a third party or a right-in candidate and thereby avoid the choice or I cannot vote at all. The only thing that I'm really thinking is not going to happen is I probably cannot find any way or path to voting for Kamala. Harris. But what I choose to do privately is not a question of wimping out. You also had the opportunity to win me over. What I said in the next tweet, which we haven't mentioned, is I'll work with anyone who wants to put the country back together. But if the idea is, you know, show us how tough you are, put on a maga hat, or show us, you know, that you're true blue and you'll sing from the blue hymnal. You've got to be kidding. Boy, do you have a wrong number. And Eric, finally, who do you

think is going to win this election? I think it's going to be Donald Trump, if it's counting it accurately. Yeah. I've got to say... The theory of... No, please finish. After you, sir. It's in part due to the theory of Timor Koran.

I have... I think in eight years, I have never seen a human being wearing a MAGA hat. And I've traveled all over the country. I don't know how that's possible. People hide their support for Donald Trump, because Donald Trump makes life hard. He makes it ugly. If you have, let's say, a male-female divide in your family or you have a family that is dependent on a blue employer or whatever, Donald Trump is quite honestly completely inconsiderate about the problems that he's causing inside of your world.

You know, he's just boorish and he's a brute. On the other hand, you can easily make the case, as Dave Rubin has said artfully, he said, you can't dream about a panther in a China shop. You're getting a bull whether you like it or not. If you want some of the China knocked over, all of it's going to get knocked over. Now, what my opinion is, is that you may want to risk a brute to break out of this incredible stranglehold that the Democratic Party rhizome, the journal painting, the academic institutions, all of these things that are supposedly neutral that always seem to go in one direction, they have to figure out how to break that stranglehold.

Now, what you're seeing is that these newspapers are choosing not to endorse because Kamala didn't win any primaries. And she's a horrible, horrible candidate. As a result of that, we don't know who's running the country. Biden's declining mental condition. If you'll check my old tweets, I've been talking about this for four years. What we have is we have a national mass delusion that, in some sense, the Democratic Party is playing by the rules when it isn't. And, you know, in this situation we're in unprecedented territory, the question is, do you want a brute who might actually be a greater danger or he might be the thing like, you know, radiation or chemotherapy that you need to kill the cancer if it doesn't kill you first? Eric Weiss team, as always, fascinating to get your perspective. I really appreciate it.

Pierce, thanks very much for having me on.