The Comedy Cellar: Live from the Table - Signal Scandal and the Darryl Cooper (@MartyrMade) Twitter Argument

Episode Date: March 27, 2025

The gang shoots the breeze about JD Vance's disloyalty in the Signal thread, and Noam laments his falling out with Darryl Cooper. Here are the Twitter threads referenced. https://x.com/noam_dworman/status/1903559854272155730 https://x.com/noam_dworman/status/1903940043426709736 https://x.com/noam_dworman/status/1904640072131240302 Video version: https://youtu.be/fARjR-1Lx_Q

This is Live from the Table, the official podcast of the world-famous Comedy Cellar. We are available wherever you get your podcasts. Available on demand on Sirius Satellite Radio. Available on YouTube for that multimedia experience. This is Dan Natterman, Comedy Cellar regular-ish. Here with Noam Dorman, the owner of the Comedy Cellar. I thought you were back, Dan. I heard Esty, she was all excited about your new set. Well, she was. I haven't new set. Well, she was. I haven't necessarily seen it manifested in the spots.

She's afraid the audience might not be there. Okay. No, she was very enthusiastic about you. What Noam was referring to is Esty happened to watch my set a couple of weeks ago. And, of course, I was a little bit nervous. But, in any case, it went well. and a lot of stuff she hadn't seen. So she complimented me.

Oh, no, she was over the moon. Well, anyway, so I guess I got two spots on Sunday, which is unusual for during the week. So maybe that was as a result of that. You have a very hard time taking a compliment. No, I understand that she complimented me, but I'm just, I don't know that it has manifested itself. Well, you just said you got two more spots on a Sunday. Yeah, so maybe it has.

I usually don't put in for Sunday, but I put in for Sunday and I got two, which is usually on a weekday I only get one. So maybe that might've been as a result. Sounds like that's like a 50% increase. Well, all right. And maybe it is. Or maybe Sunday they don't have a lot of people.

Again, I don't usually put in for Sunday. It's unusual. Unless there's a holiday the next day. Anyway, that's Periel Ashen Branch. He's with us as well. Periel is a comedian, author, and our producer. And we don't have a guest today because there was a mix-up. David Coffin was supposed to be joining us.

He's not here because he thought it was tomorrow, but it's today. So he's not here. So we're here. But we have stuff to talk about. We have a lot to talk about. I know Noam has some stuff to talk about in terms of his Twitter feuds. But before we do that, Noam, can I ask you a question about the new room,

the so-called McDonald's room? Yes. Just by way of review, Noam bought the McDonald's around the corner from the comedy cellar. He's converting it into a comedy theater, if you will. Yeah. And my question is as follows.

Will there be a hangout lounge type place there? No. There will not be. Okay. And the reason i bring that up is because you know the hang is very important a couple of weeks ago they were they were filming a movie here at the comedy cellar and so the olive tree cafe the restaurant above the showroom uh was was closed and it really really makes a difference in terms of the comics' enjoyment of the experience because we had no place to hang out. So I was hoping that perhaps there would be a hangout place. I guess there's no room for it.

It's a small room. But also, why would you want to move the hangout? Then you're just diluting it. You don't want half the people in one room and half the people in the other room. That's true too. You mean the hangout here at the Olive Tree? Yeah, you want the hang to be at the Olive Tree.

If you put in a cool space someplace else, then nobody's going to come here. That doesn't make any sense. Well, I guess. That's a good point, Mario. I guess. You know, it depends. I mean, sometimes there's not a lot of room here in any case.

Or a music night. Not everybody, you know, enjoys the music night because you can't talk. Well, that's a different thing. You're not going to open up a room around the corner and then everybody's going to go around the corner. Not everybody's going to go around. Some people will go around the corner. You'll have a choice. But anyway, that's irrelevant because there will be no hangout room around the corner. Some people will go around the corner. You'll have a choice. But anyway, that's irrelevant because there will be no hangout room at the new... And just one more question. Is it going to be tables or is it going to be theater style?

Tables, tables. Just comedy style. Okay, even in the balcony? Even in the balcony, yes. Okay. And that's hopefully will be opening sometime in 2025. Anyway, that's enough comedy seller business. Because I know Noam has much to discuss regarding his Twitter. We don't have much to discuss.

But through some sort of scheduling mishap, our guest, this is the second time this has happened to us in eight weeks or so. It is? Yeah. Drew Pavlo also didn't. That was 1,000 percent not my fault. I'm taking... What percentage is this one your fault?

A hundred percent. Really? Yeah, because I should have... You know that means everything. Yeah, it's my fault. I didn't catch... He screwed up the day and I didn't catch it. Well, it's okay.

I'd love to see those emails. I'm happy to show them to you. You know that I'm many things, but a liar is not one of them, right? I mean, you know that. Yes, I do know that. So I'm certainly— It's only a lie if you—

Believe it. Yeah, it's not a lie if you believe it, Perry. So let's go back to February 25th when I sent— We don't have to. I can see people switching their dials already. So what's your question, Dan? Well, that was my question regarding the new room. Right. What's your question now?

Well, now my question is, well, I was just going to move it over to you because you've been having a Twitter war. You've been very active on Twitter, or X, I guess they call it, but I still think Twitter is a better. First of all, can we talk about the Jeffrey Goldberg Trump team signal group chat? Insane. You'd have to review it for me because I'm not. Oh, Dan. You don't know what happened? Even I know what happened. What happened, Periel?

The Trump administration sent out a group chat text message about their plan. Can you, let me, just before we go there, can you say text message, not text message? Is it possible? Can you actually just say text message? You know how many seconds you add to everything, like combine all the extra trail of words adds up to, that's why we run out of time with guests sometimes. I'm sure that's why we run out of guests.

Repeat after me. Text message. Text message. Say it all again. The Trump administration sent a text message to a group chat about their plans to go to war and they

CC'd the editor of the Atlantic. about their plans to go to war and they. To war, yeah. CC'd the editor of The Atlantic. Whose name is? I don't remember. Jeffrey Goldberg. They didn't CC him. He was part of the group. By accident.

We presume by accident. Now, the thing that I find really ridiculous, except for everything, is that he went on this rampage about how irresponsible it was and what like a breach of security and maybe you know treason or whatever all this shit which he's not wrong but then he published it

which seems so egregious like if you actually cared about the security of the country why would you publish that no he didn't do anything wrong he first of all he didn't publish everything, as far as we know. And to the extent he did, it was only after the issue was moot, after the attack had taken place.

Oh, I didn't know that. Is that true? Yeah, of course it's true. Nobody's accusing him of divulging secrets. Okay. Okay, so there's this whole thing between Waltz, who's the national security advisor, andgseth and Vance and all these other people. I don't keep track of all the names of the administration like some people, like real journalists do.

But I think everybody's missing the point about this. First of all, in no particular order. Yes, they're probably not supposed to communicate on a Signal app. But I have a feeling, and we'll know soon enough, that a Signal app, which is an encrypted text messaging service, I bet you this is pretty secure, as secure as any other encrypted technology. I know that law enforcement can't get in on it. And, you know, people in administrations, they talk on the phone. You know, it's not like they don't communicate about things.

And we also know that in a bipartisan way, they become too casual about this stuff. Look, Hillary Clinton had a friggin' server set up in her closet that didn't even keep the Linux kernel up to date in terms of security measures, and they actually had some

technically classified material on that server. People argue about how serious, what level of classification, but it was irresponsible. So maybe they, in this chat, they said some things that were

secured, classified. Maybe they didn't. I don't know. Certainly, they shouldn't have been doing that, and in a bipartisan way, it's clear that keeping preventing federal cabinet members from becoming too casual about the demands and the importance of security. This is a problem, as it often is in many types of things where you just get complacent, right? So Trump, you know, needs to put his foot down about that. So that's that.

But that is not, I think, what Trump needs to be upset about because I've had my best employees, give them enough time, do horrible, horrible, make horrible, horrible mistakes. Catastrophic mistakes, you know? I had one employee almost burn the place down at a time when they were forbidden to be smoking in the premises. Actually, can I digress to a little story here? This is great. I had an employee, I was on my honeymoon at the time. I had an employee, let me start again.

I was on my honeymoon at the time and I got a call that there was a fire in the Fat White Pussycat. Pretty serious fire. The sprinklers came on and all that. I was on my honeymoon. The place didn't burn down, but it definitely was close to burning down. For a sprinkler system in a business to go off, it has to be a very, very hot situation

because these sprinklers, they ruin everything. They don't just go off easily. Sprinklers went off, put the fire out. So the fire department came and they traced it down. The fire department is amazing. Oh, my God. These forensics are amazing. They traced it down to a particular transformer on a computer that we had on the bar.

The power supply overheated and started this fire. on a computer that we had on the bar, the power supply overheated and started this fire. I said, wow. I said, I'd like to see that. So I asked Tony to get me the video of when the fire started. I wanted to see what happened. Can they tell you when it started? Yeah, we know exactly when everything.

So Tony gets the video, and what we see is the manager tosses a cigarette butt in the trash can. The trash can lights up on fire and almost burns down the whole thing. So the funny part about this story is that the fire department didn't know what the hell they were talking about. And you know what? They used this kind of stuff in evidence to put people in jail. We sent our forensic team out there and we traced it down. This is how the fire started. It was this transformer. It's all bullshit. It was

just a cigarette butt in the trash can. Wait, you literally saw somebody throw it? Yeah, we saw the whole thing. But how do you know that it was... And you saw the fire from... Yes, we saw the whole thing. But how do you know that it was, and you saw the fire? Yes, we saw the whole thing. It's not even like you saw him throw the butt.

The fire starts. He throws the butt. Didn't he see the fire start? No, he threw the butt on his way out the door. Everybody's leaving. They throw the butt. They leave. The trash can goes.

It had nothing to do with the computer. It's all, it's just, it's hilarious, right? So anyway, so I'll just say that. I bet you didn't think it was hilarious at the time. No, I didn't, but I didn't fire him. He was a good, I understood, like this is a terrible mistake. But who throws a cigarette butt in the garbage? I know, Pearl, that's my point.

Who talks about war plans on a signal app? I'm just saying that people can make terrible mistakes and that's not the story. I'm getting to the story now. The story is in that signal conversation. J.D. Vance says, well, I don't know if the president's aware of these reasons why this is really not a good idea, but you know, all right, if he's going to do it,

you know, I'll pray for it's, if he's going to do it, uh, you know, I'll pray for it, pray for it to work, this kind of stuff. Now, this is absolutely unacceptable. If I have a manager, general manager, I say, listen, we're going to have this policy. We're going to implement whatever it is. And she then goes to the staff after the decision has been made and says, listen, Noam wants you to do this. I don't know if Noam's aware of these five reasons why it's a bad idea, but that's what you got to do. This completely undermines the organization. What you're saying is that the guy in charge is not aware of, you know, why he shouldn't be doing this. This is, it's either a completely naive guy who doesn't, you know, doesn't have the wisdom to be in that position.

I was going to say experience, but I knew this kind of thing when I was 21 years old, I would have known better. Or it's treacherous. And then if you follow it a step further. What he should have done is present it to Trump, saying here are some reasons. Yeah, if he feels this way, when you meet with the president, Mr. President, I want to call your attention

to these factors. And if the president says, yes, but on balance, I think it's the right thing to do, then you get behind it. And to the other 18 people, you say, this is what we're doing. This is the president. This is our decision.

Or you say, you know, Mr. President, I can't abide by this. I think this is not international. I might you say, you know, Mr. President, I can't abide by this. I think this is not a national. I might have to resign. OK, resign. You know, that's what you do. But what you don't do and then if you do agree to carry out the president's orders, even if you might privately think, then you implement them and you try to make them succeed. And you don't make something succeed by sowing doubt among the people whose job it is.

But then take it a step further. Now, let's say it screws up. Let's say actually Vance was right that this was a bad idea for some reason, whatever his reasons were. Now he's in position to say, I told you so. Now you can't have your general manager saying, I told you, like this is, so in my opinion,

I mean, could you just think about that? No, it's insane. So, you know, it will be different if in a total meeting with the president there, everyone said, what do you think?

Like when Biden told Obama in front of Gates and everybody else, I don't think we should go and get bin Laden. Excuse me. That was fine because that was a deliberation. But once the decision was made, everybody got on board. This was not a deliberation. This was, actually, let me find exactly what he said because there's one quote there, which is even – which is actually really bad, and I am missing it. Oh, this is where he says, I'm willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself.

Meaning like... He said this in the chat. Yeah, yeah. Keep these concerns to myself. You've already told 18 people. How do you keep it to yourself? It's so dishonest. Are there 18 people in that team? Yeah, you're not keeping it to yourself. You're actually... This is why... Listen, the guy's not stupid.

I think he's treacherous. I think he's treacherous. I think this is the lowest of the low. He's claiming I'm going to keep it to myself, but by doing that, you understand, he's actually not keeping it to himself. Of course not. What does he mean?

I keep it to myself. I'm not going to go public in the New York Times. What do you mean by keep it to yourself? I'm not going to tell the president, but your whole job What do you mean by keep it to yourself? I'm not going to tell the president. But your whole job is to give the president the benefit of your wisest counsel. There's no way out here for this guy. Then Hegseth went on the news and lied through his teeth. And then they try to claim that Goldberg is a nefarious actor. This is all awful because they look so stupid.

I mean, if they could get away with it in a Machiavellian way, you know, at least you could say they're competent, but they're incompetent in their attempts to be Machiavellian. But leaving that all aside, the one, and I don't think this is really what's being spoken about most of all, from a point of view of the president, from Trump's point of view, and I think Trump understands very well what it means, what I'm saying. I do not see how Trump can ever have confidence in J.D. Vance again. This guy is a bad seed. And who told you so?

Who told you so all along? I want to say I told you so. But, I mean, am I being too hard on him? No, absolutely not. You're completely right. What do you think, Dan? Oh, I didn't mean to cut you off. You know he's publicly humiliating.

Humiliating. Just short. But the only thing is... Not humiliating. Just humiliating. You impute nefarious motives. And that... Well, I would have to say...

You know, you always find yourself in this position because it's a backhanded kind of excuse to say, well, no, it wasn't a farce. He's just an idiot. Yeah, I think it's a good possibility. No, that's ridiculous. It is a possibility sometimes, but I don't think it's what was going on there because my 11-year-old does stuff like this. He knows what he's doing. He'll implicate his brother in a way that sounds like he's defending him or things like this. He knows what he's doing. He'll implicate his brother in a way that sounds like

he's defending him or things like this. He's not stupid. He knows what he's doing. Well, what would be the nefarious purpose of this? Well, that's a good question. I hadn't thought about this. That's the next logical question. Some people

just are toxic that way. And this is generally, like when it happens within my organization, and it's not an uncommon thing to, you know, I understand this dynamic. Their intention is not to screw up the place. It's driven by some sort of ego defect. The ability to look better to your peers, to...

Throw somebody under the bus. Yeah, it's something related to an insecurity or some way. It's some deep ego problem. It's a toxicity that some people, and we all know this, some people are toxic. And they prefer, and they create with them, wherever they go, toxicity. And I think Vance is toxic.

Well, what do you think? Has anybody else mentioned this particular? I haven't followed that closely. I can't believe I'm the only person. I tweeted it. Yeah. Can the president fire the vice president? No video.

Dan, you might. Well, I don't know. You have to ask Chad PPT. You don't know that. You know that. Of course not. He's elected. He's an elected official.

So impeachment is the only thing. He's not going to impeach. What do you mean, though? What do you mean he's an elected official? You pick the vice president. You can pick whoever you want. He doesn't have to get elected, right? Well, he's on the ticket with the president. Fine, but

Trump, you don't have to go through any process. You can pick anybody you want. Yes, but in the end, he's elected. He's not a cabinet official. After Trump is elected, he doesn't then pick the vice president, he's elected. He's not he's not he's not a cabinet official. He's not he wasn't after Trump is elected. He doesn't then pick the vice president. Right. He's elected. The voters have sealed that. And that's that. That's OK. I like the podcast of your remedial civics. Well, a lot of people need that. I know. I mean, I didn't know offhand.

I guess it makes sense, you know, but it would make sense the other way, too. I mean, because the president did pick the vice president. Well, actually, you did know. You're just not remembering that. Initially, the vice president and the president were elected separately. Yes. And then that led to that weird thing where the vice president was of the opposing party with Aaron Burr or whatever. So there was an amendment passed to create the ticket system. All right. Let's move on.

Whoever had the second number of electoral votes was vice president. Yeah. You remember that, right, Dan? Yeah, I remember that. How come you're not asking me if I remember that? Because you obviously – do you remember that? No, I don't. You were smoking pot.

So then – okay. so that's that. Then what else? The Twitter war. You walked in here and you said you're going to get shot. Noam, if I could just, just a brief background. Noam has a friendship with this cat named

Daryl Cooper, a.k.a. Martyr Maid on X or Twitter, who is a, well, he presents himself as a historian. He's not credentialed. He doesn't have a PhD, but you don't have to. You don't have to. He's well-read, and he has a history podcast called Martyr Maid, I guess is the name of the podcast.

I don't know why he calls himself that, but it's a reference to some Greek thing. No, I think it's a reference to religion and Jesus being a martyr. I don't know for sure. Well, anyway... I mean, it's a theme it's a theme I really don't know. But I know it's a theme in many conflicts and I think he he

feels empathy for the martyrs, I think, in some way. Well, in any case, he has a popular history podcast. He was on Tucker Carlson, and that made a lot of noise because he basically said that Churchill was the number one villain of World War II. Just to be fair, he did preface it by saying he might be kind of hyperbolic, but then he went on to make the argument that Churchill was

at least a significant villain of the 20th century. That would not be hyperbole. He also said that Hitler was in, he said on Tucker that Hitler was installed by financiers and Zionists. He later disclaimed that and said there's no evidence for that. Did he say there's no evidence for that? Well, he tweeted something saying that he can't say with certainty.

Yeah, that's not the same thing as no evidence. I'm not sure what he said, but he disclaimed it somewhat. And he wouldn't debate with Andrew Roberts, who is the, I think, the preeminent Churchill historian in the world. And he was on Joe Rogan recently. And I guess he reiterated some of those talking points about Churchill. I gather I didn't see the interview, but. Look, I feel bad about this. I had a.

So Daryl first came on my radar. I think I heard him on through Dave Smith. And I listened to some of his fear and loathing in New Jerusalem. Is that what it's called? Yeah, I think that's the history of Zionism. Yeah, and I would actually recommend—I wouldn't recommend it as the only source on the conflict, but I would recommend that people who know about the conflict and are taking in various perspectives on it, yeah, that there is much in this very, very long.

I didn't, to be honest, I didn't listen to the whole thing, not because I was not interested. I often don't finish things. I would like to finish it. And it was a, to me, it was a, you know, kind of narrative, you know, an anti-Israeli, anti-Zionist version of the conflict. But it was filled with richness, richness in facts, richness in insight into psychological workings of people, like the way he described, like the, the, the Muslim honor culture and how that had to exist without, uh, the, um, organizations of judiciaries. And it was just very, a lot of very, very interesting stuff. He talked about, I just, one thing that comes to mind,

like how, uh, Prince Faisal, uh, brought a slave to the Paris Peace Conference after World War I, just like what I felt at the time – a kindred spirit in a way that he would answer direct questions. He didn't bullshit. He was – he didn't take things personally. As in a certain way, he's still not – even now that we're having our blowup, there's something about him that speaks to a person like me. There's some connection with him. This was much of the chagrin of many, many people that I know, influential people, upset with me. And I defended him more than once on Twitter,

even recently on the Rogan thing. I'm jumping around time when people were saying, because he misstated or... He said Hitler was born in Germany or something. Yeah, Hitler was born in Germany. Either he misstated or he was making a different point. And people were saying, you see, the historian doesn't even know that Hitler was born in Germany. I'm like, come on, that's ridiculous.

Of course he knows Hitler was born in Austria. Everybody knows Hitler was born in Austria. Nobody knows that much about World War II and doesn't know this. So, you know and he's defended me at times I was the reason he had that famous tweet where he had the Nazis juxtaposed

to the The Last Supper at the Paris Olympics the trans version of The Last Supper do you remember that? yes and he said well the outcome I prefer this to that he preferred the Nazis and I wrote yes and he said well the the outcome uh the i prefer this to that he preferred the nazis yeah and and i wrote him and he took it down because of that and when somebody asked him why did he take it down i believe this is all about saying he says well you know no one

no one was right as he usually is so you know as i'm recounting these things it's painful for me because i think i think i've scuttled that relationship that I was happy to have that relationship. I like to have people that I disagree with, especially if I'm going to – and I like to be constantly sparring with the smartest of those people because this is a good knife sharpening process, right? And I liked him. I just, a little bit before this whole thing blew up, and it's my fault it blew up, it blew up, I emailed him and said, when are you coming to town? I really want to have, sit down and have a beer, and I want to talk to you about shit. There's so much going on, and I prefer, you know, in a certain way, to not be talking on the podcast.

I'm not, as you guys know, it upsets you. I'm not looking for clicks and all that stuff. I many times prefer just to sit in the olive tree with somebody, but I can't always do that. So, but you can invite them to the podcast, right? So, but anyway, so to go back to the, when the Tucker thing first happened, I didn't even, I just thought he was this guy on the Arab-Israeli conflict. And I didn't know there was this fascination about the Nazis and all that stuff.

I didn't know that his logo was painted by a vicious – like one of the most – I posted this on Twitter today. One of the most – actually, Tiana, do you have that video I sent to you today? Yes, I do. You can just, actually, you can play it. I was going to talk about something else, but I happened to have it. So, like, this is the guy who did Daryl's painting, the Martyr Made logo painting. Go ahead, play that, Tiana.

This is Anton LaVey, the founder of the Satanic Temple, formerly known as Howard St Anton LaVey, the founder of the Satanic Temple, formerly known as Hauer Seton LaVey, unapologetic Jewish Zionists who revered the protocols of the elders of Zion, who vigorously worked with Zionist extremist organizations to smuggle weaponry into Israel whilst committing... If you're listening and not watching this, as he's talking, there's all kinds of images of

Jewish things, Jewish logos, Jewish people, Jew, Jew, Jew. Go ahead, continue, Tiana. ...genocide onto innocent lives in Palestine. So much bloodshed, so much innocence raped and pillaged, all in the name of religious superiority over the Gentiles. Understand this man writing the satanic Bible and having the co-sign of this very demonic tone by Aesop Dayan, the son of Israel's defense prime minister Moshe Dayan, is not just a coincidence. Because there are two types of Satanism represented in the culture. First, we have the atheists LARPing and playing Dungeons

and Dragons. This demographic is controlled opposition used to make crusaders like you and I laughably step back in jest. But there's a deeper, more unknown satanic spirituality that normalizes antinatalism, duplicitous sexual abnormalities, communism for the uninitiated, pedophilia, and the sacrificing of God's non-chosen cattle and those practitioners worship at the altar of the synagogue of satan they lift their hands gallivanting towards the star rem fan with such sheer arrogance and entitlement just to mock good christian families further into humiliation in their own country look it's always good versus evil heaven and hell christ and lucifer and christianity against satanism and the true satanic temple my friends is not about red horns and a pitchfork that's what they want you to believe true satanism

is ideologically subverting the populace with perversion to sacrificially fund sin evil whilst at the same time by the way undermining the very identity of those said people because talmudic judaism is a stepping stone towards satanism so this guy first of all this this is arthur kwan lee he's he's an artist he's very good right he's very good he's a good looking dude he's like is a stepping stone towards Satanism. So this guy, first of all, this is Arthur Kwan Lee. He's an artist. He's very good, right? He's a very good broadcaster. He's a good looking dude.

He's like a Bond villain. But anyway, so this guy, what a coincidence. So this guy did Martyr Maid's logo. So when I first asked Daryl about this, he says, yeah, he did. But I didn't know his politics at the time. I don't know how he got into that Nazis. He's like, I met him a couple times

just in a kind of a matter of fact way you know, but I didn't like So he's a real guy, he met him because Tejano was saying he looks like he's an AI generator. No, no, no, he's an absolute real guy you can look him up, he's a good artist so

He's quite good looking, don't you think? Yeah, yeah He's very aerodynamic looking So anyway, so so, but then like just, I'm jumping around in time again. Just like, so that's what Daryl said, but just like last week, he tweeted something about this guy. He says, blah, blah, blah, by the great, and he uses the term, the great Arthur Kwan Lee. So I'm like, all right, Daryl, you know. I always feel a bit betrayed when I see an Asian anti-Semite. I thought we kind of had an understanding.

All right, let's not get all the things. So it was an Asian white supremacist. It's even more disconcerting. But Hitler wasn't probably a fan of the Asians a lot. So he's not an Aryan. He liked the Japanese. So this is like, you know, so anyway, I didn't know that Daryl had this sympathy for these people. So when the Tucker thing first happened, this accusation about the Zionists, and he used the phrase about the, well, he says prisoners ended up dead.

But then if you look at the letter that he then quotes where they're complaining they don't have the food to feed all these quote-unquote prisoners, so it might be, Darrell used the word prisoner, it might be more humane just to find a fast-acting method of killing them all. That was a letter about the Jews. And then later in the letter it talked about, and if that doesn't work, maybe we could just sterilize them, we'll be rid of them in one generation. So this is what he was referring to, like, holy shit. And this all comes from

David Irving, who was a classic Holocaust denier, but I didn't even really know all the David Irving stuff. So then we had that blow up. I had Daryl on my podcast. He answered my questions about this, and I really was pretty hard on him. I can post the section. I was pretty hard on him, and He answered my questions about this, and I really was pretty hard on him. I can post

the section. I was pretty hard on him, and he answered my questions pretty forthrightly and in a disarming way. Although I wasn't satisfied with the answers, I didn't feel like—I even actually, to be honest, he let slip on my podcast that these arguments had come from David Irving. And there were defenders of him at the time was like, well, we can't jump to the conclusion he got it from that. I remember that. And I didn't clip it and put it out there at the time because I didn't want to, I don't know, I was gun shy.

It's like, you know, if someone picks up on it, that's fine. But I wasn't going to do that. So that was that. And then he went on Tucker. And then he went on Joe Rogan recently. And then I began to really get angry because on the Rogan episode, Rogan went on and on about how this is crazy. People are you're the most thorough and well-meaning historian. And people just set these things up as something you're not allowed to talk about.

And there's a concerted effort to ruin you and make sure that you never work again. And there was nothing. You know, I heard that Tucker interview and I can't believe it was controversial. And Daryl actually said, well, I can't absolve myself totally. And Rogan was like, no, no, no. And what they never mentioned

in this Rogan interview was that, no, he didn't get in trouble for trying to understand the psychology of the Germans in post-World War I, Treaty of Versailles, Germany, the victim maybe of, you know, very sophisticated propaganda, and, you know, to describe all the cultural currents such that someone might say, well, you know what? There for the grace of God goes I. Maybe if I was a German in Germany at that time,

I might have looked the other way also. That kind of inquiry does not offend me. It offends some people. It does not offend me at all. And it's related in some way to Hannah Arendt, you know, the banality of evil. Like, this is important stuff to talk about. Unless you want to say, no, the Germans were born evil. I remember saying to my grandmother. But you don't say all Germans.

She goes, no, they're evil. I'm like, no, grandma. We've had the same discussion about the Old South. You know, like, everybody in the Old South thought slavery was okay. If you had been in the Old South, would you have been the one dude that didn't think that way? Now, I don't want to let the Germans off the hook as much. I left the Old South off the hook

because these were their neighbors and this was the Germany of Schiller and Ode to Joy and Kellogg-Briand Treaty and Never Have War Again and, you know, they consider themselves at the height of modern

civilization and ethics, right? So it's quite a lot when your neighbors just start getting rounded up into ghettos and then disappearing. But nevertheless, it happened to people with the same 46 chromosomes that we all have.

And so that's what offended me. What offended me was they totally whitewashed the Tucker interview. He did not get in trouble for that. He got in trouble for saying that Churchill was installed by Zionist financiers that he owed money to and that World War II, the worst catastrophe in the history of planet Earth, was simply a product of pursuing Jewish interests. And he got this from David Irving. And then if you go, and he admitted he got it from David Irving. And if you go back to the David Irving longer, unabridged version of that argument, he says Churchill actually never

concerned himself with the Nazis until then. Until Churchill started getting money from these Jews, he didn't care about Nazi Germany. And I put this on my Twitter feed. And actually, once the Jews bought him, they had only one thing they bought. He had to turn his guns

towards Germany. So this is, and he admits this is where he got it from. And then he also admitted on his blog that he had discussed this with Tucker the night before. So, Tucker heard this argument, either for the first time or he already knew it, I don't know. And then you can hear Tucker asking once, twice,

three times the question, what was Churchill doing? Why did he do it? What motivated him? And then Daryl's like, shh. And Tucker says, that's the wriest smile I've ever seen. And then Daryl goes forth with this argument, all of which is to say that Tucker, this fucking creep, he wanted Daryl to make the argument that the war is behind, that the Jews were behind World War II, and by the way,

as we know, people of his ilk think, and the Jews are behind the Iraq War, and if you fast forward to more recently, the Jews are behind our support for Ukraine. So this is getting serious. So what do you make of Daryl's tweet saying, walking back that argument?

I have to reread it. He did, I did hold my fire on Daryl. So whatever he said, just like what he says about Arthur Kwan Lee, like he has a good way of diffusing it. The question is whether it's real or just damage control. And I got to my limit here where I began to think, you know what, I'm being... But does it even matter

what he really thinks? It's what he's putting out there. No, no, it does matter. It matters. It doesn't change everything. Of course it matters. But the harm is what he's putting out there, I think, more so than...

Well, okay. But in terms of my personal estimation of the man, it matters to me whether... Well, that, yeah. So, and then I began to look into the stuff he said on Rogan. And he says that when Hitler heard about Kristallnacht,

he called up Goebbels and said, what the hell are you doing? Cut this shit out right now. I said, I never heard that before. So then I went to look into David Irving and I found myself at the Richard Evans book called Lying About Hitler, which everybody should read. I posted an excerpt on my Twitter feed, and this actually is a total David Irving argument, but actually it's a David

Irving argument that came up in a court case where the judge found that David Irving was lying, was a Holocaust denier, was dishonest about his arguments, dishonest about his sources. You can read all about it. And I read this book called Lying About Hitler by Richard Evans. And I mean, I don't know. I mean, it's clear that by the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence, David Irving was guilty here of lying. And I might say, after reading that book, it might even be beyond a reasonable doubt. That is how devastating this book is to David Irving's argument. And I emailed That argument being that Hitler was

against Kristallnacht. Yeah, this is absolutely falsified. you can read, I've been reading the transcript. So then I emailed Daryl about it. Hopefully I don't get the timer wrong. And Daryl's like, well yeah, I'm sort of familiar with that. I'm not really sure. And then somebody brought And Daryl's like, well, yeah, I'm sort of familiar with that.

I'm not really sure. And then somebody brought it up on Twitter. He's like, yeah, I know something about that David Irving trial, but I'm not really up on the details. And then just by coincidence, a few days earlier, Daryl had tweeted out a pile of books as his sources for the World War II. And there in the pile is Lying About Hitler by Richard Evans. I'm like, what the fuck? There is no way anybody read one chapter, 20 pages of that book, and they forgot, because it's the first thing covered in the book.

There's no way that somebody read that book and forgot the mound of evidence against this argument. The fact that there was a judicial verdict about it. There's just no way. And I lost my cool. I'm like, fuck it. This is no longer plausible to me. This guy knows 100%

these arguments. He knows 100% what the judge said in the David Irving Lipschitz trial. He knows exactly what's in the Richard Evans book. And the arguments are the same. What about Arthur Kwan Lee? Yeah, yeah, I didn't really know. What about David Irving?

Ah, yeah, yeah, I didn't really know. I'm fuzzy on this. This is, and I, so then I went deep on it, and I started exposing that and other things from his presentation, like the fact that after Churchill – I'm sorry. After Hitler was exposed to this book, Germany Must Perish, by Theodor Kaufman, which was a self-published book, which advocated that we – before World War II, advocated that we eradicate the German race and castrate them, whatever it is. That somehow this led, this was the reason that Hitler made the Jews wear yellow armbands. This is all, this is all disproven. He said that on Rogan? He said that in his podcast.

I started picking around. And I'm like, you know what? I'm a nice person and I'm a, you know what? I, I'm a nice person and, and I'm an, and I'm a person who can tolerate people I disagree with, but I can't ever, I, I'm not going to,

you can, it's insidious because you back yourself up, you back yourself up and you find yourself like bridge over the river. Why? If anybody's seen that movie where all of a sudden you're covering for the enemy, all of a sudden you've forgotten why you got into this to begin with. I got into this to fight for,

sounds corny, for truth. I want to defend my people. I want to defend them based on truth. I want to call them out when they're not true. I have vouched for this guy and now my

internal switch it went from like a toggle switch, it was on the left then it went to the middle, you know like a toggle switch has a middle position and it just imperceptibly it switched to on I'm like no, I can't anymore

I don't believe it anymore and so I started to ask him for his sources because I did some research about the ethics of historians. And absolutely, every, I posted this on my Twitter feed as well, every historian is supposed to leave a trail of their research.

So anyone can then go back and check it. And as I said, in every bar argument, when you have among idiots, you say something, say, what are you talking about? Say, Google it. I mean, how many times have we asked people to show their sources, just knuckleheads, right? Proving to each other, no, I didn't make this up.

This is real. Now, this guy is doing dozens of hours of history podcasts and I can't ask him, hey, where'd you get that? Can you back this up? It's the most basic thing in the world. I didn't attack him personally. I'm like, what about this? What about this?

Did you get this from David Irving? And then what happens is immediately his followers, I posted a video of this, descended on me. You saw the video, right, Dan? Yes. It was just Jew, what's it like to be a Jew? What is it like to be a Jew? What is it like to have to make a law,

to be a people that's so odious that they have to make a law against hating you? I mean, just Jew, Jew, Jew 1 after the most, a Nazi orgy descended on me, on this guy's feed. What you posted, how much more is there that you didn't post? You can go to the

thing yourself. But I posted a very high percentage of them, but almost every one referred to my Judaism. I don't think there was a single comment on his feed saying, criticizing my request for the sources, backing up his sources. Normally when you do something like that, people start researching and say,

no, here it is, Darryl found it here. Nobody was gainsaying my accusation that these don't come from any place but Holocaust deniers. It was just a fucking low-class, Nazi, bigoted attack. And Darryl didn't correct a single person.

Not one fucking thing. Now, I noticed on my feed, I didn't actually hear anybody attacking the goyim, nobody attacking the Gentiles, nobody saying like, you know, not that these things never happen, but I didn't detect, I didn't

see anybody saying anything racist on my feed. Perry, you're screwing up the mic. I didn't detect anybody being racist on my feed. And you guys know me well enough. If somebody – I say, don't do that. I would reprimand them. I would block them. I'm not going to have my feed turn into a string of 30 different racist comments about somebody who argued with me about something. That's all I did.

I argued with him about something. I didn't call him names. I didn't attack him. I argued with him about something. Is this David? Yes. Hey, hey, come on in. You're hearing the teller.

Oh, so David's here. Yeah, yeah. Come sit down. So that's where we're at now. And I invite everybody to go at the thing. Now, even through this, I'll say the last defense of Daryl, you'll see he's not comfortable being a nasty person. He's soft in his wording towards me,

hasn't blocked me. He blocked me, by the way. He made some arguments that I think were not convincing because I think the essence of truth is that he is taking these arguments unskeptically from Holocaust deniers, from people like David Irving and this guy, I can't remember this, another Holocaust denying Twitter who wrote these two essays about how the Morgenthau plan during the Second World War was a result and cribbed from Theodore Kaufman's book,

Germany Must Perish. This seems to be the basis of the argument that the book was passed around the Roosevelt administration. So I think that, listen, I hope I haven't hung an innocent man. I mean, it's been out there four or five days already. You know, you'd think that he would have come forward. What are you talking about, Noam? I didn't take this from David Irving. Here it is by this credible person. And I will, if I'm wrong, I will absolutely apologize if I'm wrong. And by the way, I also consulted even with some experts, people I know.

Well, I wrote some historians, and I consulted with some not professional historians, but people I know who really follow this stuff closely. I don't think you need to be a professional historian to know that if somebody says something, it's not inappropriate to say, okay, where are you getting that from? Right. No, but I'm saying I didn't go public with the accusation that this was coming from the worst of sketchy sources. I don't want to have egg on my face and I didn't want to slander somebody or libel somebody. Just because, you know, I don't make an accusation and then find out it was wrong and say, oh, sorry, oops,

like so many journalists do. And then the retraction is never seen, and he can't wipe that off. I didn't do it lightly. I did not do it lightly. I did it with absolute integrity and responsibility and if it turns out to be wrong it turns out to be wrong and I will apologize to Dow Cooper it might

I don't know you're constantly giving all of these people who are dancing around in this anti-Semitism all of these out let's separate the issues but even if it does turn out to be wrong on the facts what cannot what will not turn out to be wrong on the facts, what cannot, what I will not turn out to be wrong about is that he sat by when people attacked me

in an anti-Semitic orgy. That's right. Simply for asking him, what are your sources? That can't be undone. He did that. 100%. And when you do that, in some way, you show what you're about.

Now, audience capture this is a real thing it just reminds me of we talked about this podcast when Norman Finkelstein like 10 months ago he didn't want to appear on a dais with this guy Jackson Hinkle

do you remember this and because Jackson Hinkle was just too far for Norman Finkelstein. It reminded me to say one more thing about Daryl. Immediately on Finkelstein's Twitter feed, his father was like, a Jew is a Jew. We knew you were a Jew all along. What do you expect from a Jew? How did we ever not know

you were Jewish at heart all along? So like, that's can you imagine if Daryl, you know, were to this is what Daryl and Dave Smith and all of them know. This is what they risk. That's why I tweeted out this last scene in the last part of Mickey Mouse, Sorcerer's Apprentice, where Mickey creates the brooms. And then the brooms become – he becomes – he can't fight the smell. The smell gets turned on him. So these people, like they've created these armies, they're broomsticks, and now they can't control them.

That's what everybody was saying to Norman Finkelstein, that you're a Jew, a Jew is a Jew. Well, that's like that famous joke, right? I don't know. That an anti-Zionist Jew and a Zionist Jew walk into a bar and the bartender says, we don't serve Jews.

Exactly. It's not a very funny joke, but it makes a point. A lot of Jews think they can opt out of being Jewish. Suddenly they think they can opt out of being Jewish, they can opt out of anti-Semitism, they can opt out of anti-Zionism. But as I always like to say, when it comes down to it, the Hamas folks don't think you can opt out of it.

They're just going to... Put your head down and talk closer to the mic and let's introduce you. But I don't want to... Finish your thought. Finish your thought. No, I mean, I wrote a piece for the Jerusalem Post about this. I compared it because I'm also half African-American, so I compared it to house slaves and field slaves in

Antebellum South. During the pre-Civil War era, during the era of slavery, there was this idea that which had some credence, but that house slaves, because they toiled in the home, they often were lighter skinned because of miscegenation and rape, that they had an easier time than field slaves

who were out in the fields toiling and picking crops. And I wrote this piece for the Jerusalem Post. It was in response to one of these insane pro-Hamas Jews who spoke at the Venice Film Festival and used her, I think Sarah Freeland was her name, and she used her award speech to basically, you know, take down Israel. And I was like, these are like, you know,

the house slaves of the Jewish community. But at the end of the day, you know, during slavery, whether you were a house slave or a field slave, you were still a slave, you know? And these Jews don't seem to understand whether they're a house Jew or a field Jew or a were still a slave, you know? And these Jews don't seem to understand whether they're a house Jew or a field Jew or a court Jew or whatever. Like, they're still Jews.

And, you know, when Hamas comes and, you know, is about to kill you, they're going to say, you know, we thank you for your service, but they're still going to kill you. During the Holocaust, there weren't exceptions. There weren't, you know, gas chamber exceptions for like the Jews that the Nazis liked. Allegedly gas chamber.

Yeah, exactly. There was no like, you couldn't buy your way out of extermination because you were like the right kind of Jew. Like the folks who don't like us don't see any difference between any of us. We are all the same to them. Introduce us. That was David Kaufman. He joins us,

editor and columnist at the New York Post and a regular writer for the Telegraph, a spectator, airmail, and the Forward, and an adjunct fellow at the Tel Aviv Institute. That's me. Welcome, David.