The David Pakman Show - 2/10/23: Another Humiliating Probe, Bill to Expel George Santos

Episode Date: February 10, 2023

-- On the Show: -- Republicans are still talking about Hillary Clinton even though she has been out of politics since 2016 -- Representative Robert Garcia introduces a resolution to expel George Santos from Congress -- Donald Trump's campaign has been self-dealing to the tune of nearly $1 million -- Caller asks what makes people become conservatives or liberals -- Caller talks about Sarah Huckabee Sanders' State of the Union response -- Caller asks whether it's right to call anti-trans bills "genocide" -- Caller discusses Republicans throwing a bunch of stuff at the wall to see what sticks -- Caller confronts David about Pete Buttigieg -- Caller asks what Joe Biden should do for Black Americans -- Caller wants to know the best way to respond to right-wing nonsense -- David responds to emails and social media messages from the audience -- On the Bonus Show: The Friday Bonus Show with Producer Pat 🌳 Use code PAKMAN for 20% off HoldOn plant-based bags at https://holdonbags.com ⚠️ Use code PAKMAN for a free supply of BlueChew at https://go.bluechew.com/david-pakman 💻 Stay protected! Try Aura FREE for 2 weeks: https://aura.com/pakman 👩‍❤️‍👨 Try the Paired App FREE for 7 days and get 25% OFF at https://paired.com/pakman 🍯 Manukora Honey: Get 5 FREE honey sticks at https://manukora.com/pakman -- Become a Supporter: http://www.davidpakman.com/membership -- Subscribe on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/thedavidpakmanshow -- Subscribe to Pakman Live: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanlive -- Subscribe to Pakman Finance: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanfinance -- Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/davidpakmanshow -- Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow -- Leave us a message at The David Pakman Show Voicemail Line (219)-2DAVIDP

Speaker 1 Speaker 2 First big Republican hearings since taking control of the House about Twitter and how they backfired spectacularly and humiliatingly. I won't refresh that story for you. But we then saw the next hearings, the committee looking into the weaponization, the weaponization of government. It's hard to say it with a straight face. This is the Republican attempt, apparently, to bring up Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden,

which seems to be that's their hammer. So everything looks like a nail. This hearing started yesterday with two of the most electric speakers you can imagine, Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson. Maybe electric is a bit of an exaggeration. And in this first clip, they're talking about Hillary. I mean, it's 2023 and they're talking about Hillary. Here is Chuck Grassley, oversight of the FBI, very important weaponization of government, talking about how Hillary Hillary colluded with Russia in 2016, apparently to

defeat herself. This is so Russia wanted Trump to win and Hillary colluded with them, I guess, to help defeat herself. We all know now that it was the Democratic National Committee, along with the Clinton campaign, who colluded with the Russians. What they use a former spy. Right. Fusion GPS and law firm to create a fake dossier. This is what happens when you're given notes you don't understand and asked to read them. It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about. Chuck Grassley was not the only Republican senator who brought up Hillary Clinton. Here is Ron Johnson just on the vanguard of the political criticism space, also bringing up Hillary Clinton. My first investigation ultimately revealed the extensive editing of then FBI Director James Comey of his July 5th, 2016 statement that exonerated Secretary Clinton regarding her use of a private

email server for official. What's the deal with saying Clinton? I really don't get that anyway. So they Ron Johnson brings up Hillary as well. And then it really wouldn't be complete unless he also mentions Hunter Biden, which he did. Prior to the impeachment proceedings, Hunter Biden's obvious conflicts of interest in Ukraine became public and Senator Grassley and I began investigating. Yeah, the idea, by the way, it's beyond. This is sort of like this is like your dog investigating who knocked over the bin that contains the treats and ate the entire package of treats that your dog is not going to be a great investigator of that. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson investigating Hunter and Hillary does not seem like it's

going to get you to the bottom of anything. Now, speaking more seriously during her opening statement, delegate Stacey Plaskett, a Democrat who is on the committee, because remember, even though this is a Republican organized committee, Republicans want this committee. You have Democrats on these committees. She summed up the committee perfectly. Listen to what she had to say. Speaker 4 I'm deeply concerned about the use of this select subcommittee as a place to settle scores, showcase conspiracy theories, correct, and advance an extreme agenda. Yes. Risk undermining Americans faith in our democracy.

Correct. Some of today's witnesses would have us believe that the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are part of a deep state cabal. Right. One even wrote a book describing the FBI itself as a threat to democracy. The Department of Justice and the FBI do not always get it right. History is full of examples of these agencies getting it very, very wrong. We have colleagues in this Congress who have been subject to politically motivated, hateful, racist investigations by our government. Yeah. So she completely sums it up perfectly, which is this is another sham committee. It's not really meant to investigate. It is meant to prop up a narrative that they have already decided is the truth and to prop it up based on the preexisting conspiracy theories and wild claims that we've been hearing from these very same

people for two, four or even six years. So it is yet another joke and it doesn't seem like it's going to get any better anytime soon. We have some interesting news on the fight to remove George Anthony Devolder Santos from the House of Representatives. House Democrats have filed a resolution led by Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia to expel. Yes, to expel George Santos from the House of Representatives. It is the latest escalation, writes Axios, of Democrats efforts to publish punish Santos for the serial fabrications about his background. I have not been super familiar with Congressman Robert Garcia up until now.

He has an unbelievable sense of timing. Listen to this interview in which he says, you know, Santos is a lot like me, Latino, gay, except he lies about everything. This is so funny as an openly gay person, as an immigrant, as a Latino. I look at Mr. Santos as someone who's actually very similar to me, except that he lies about everything. And so within our own LGBTQ community, there's like major disgust in what he's doing and his representation of our community. And so it's not acceptable for him to lie about every single part of his past,

including now getting classified information or access to it. So it's time that, honestly, the final straw was getting access, giving access, being given access, class of information. You've literally given some of this a fraud and a liar access to America's secrets. Yeah. So, of course, I agree completely with Robert Garcia. I would not. You know, a few of you emailed me after the story broke and said, David, this is such a waste of time. Republicans control the House of Representatives. There is just no way in hell that this goes anywhere.

You know, you're probably right. But it is true that there are some Republicans who are disgusted by George Santos and they've said it. If Mitt Romney were in the House of Representatives rather than the Senate, I am 100 percent sure that Romney would join Democrats in a vote to remove George Santos. So because the majority for Republicans is quite small, it is not completely out of the question that you find that Democrats find just enough Republicans to maybe get rid of George Santos. Do I think it's the most likely outcome? No. But is this worth doing and try to get a vote and try

to get Republicans on the record, get them to say, no, I vote for Santos to stay. I actually do think it's a good idea in this particular case. Now, I am not someone who as a blanket says symbolic votes in the House are either worth it or not worth it. Wastes of time or good uses of time. I don't have a generic umbrella view on that. I am balancing in my assessment. Is it really guaranteed to be symbolic only or is there actually a chance that you might pass it? What would we achieve by putting members on the record, by getting them to vote one way or another? You know, when we think back to that force the vote Medicare for all thing, we really knew the positions of basically every every member of Congress on that issue.

I actually don't know the positions of every member of the House on whether they would vote to keep or expel George Santos. And it actually is a close enough margin now that it that at least theoretically it could work. I think this is an interesting idea. Good for Robert Garcia. Good for Democrats. Let's see if we ultimately get a vote on it. If you were worried that since leaving office, Donald Trump was short on grifted donor money. I want to put to ease, put to rest those concerns.

Donald Trump has put nearly a million dollars of donor money into his own pockets since leaving office, since leaving office. This is based on a Huffington Post analysis of a new FEC filing. Donald Trump failed to spend much of the money he raised over the last two years to win Georgia Senate seats or fund the red wave in 2022. But he did manage rights SVD to pay for HuffPost. He did manage to put nearly a million dollars of his donors contributions right back into his own cash registers from the day he left office through the end of 2022. The coup attempting former president's various political committees spent nine hundred and five thousand dollars at his properties, according to that HuffPost analysis. You don't

need to even really look at the details. But when you do, you find one hundred thousand dollars in hotel spending here, four hundred thousand dollars in camp in hotel spending there, Trump Tower, rent offices, all of these different things. Now, the reality is that even this number of a million dollars doesn't fully represent the degree to which Donald Trump is funneling donor money back into his own pockets. There's actually a lot of different ways that this is done. One way, of course, is by raising donor money and then having campaign or PAC spending be spent at your own businesses. Another way is to pay off your own campaign debts even when you claim to be raising money for something different. There are so many different ways that

you can funnel money that is being donated for political reasons back back into your own pockets. You can also use your personal properties and have foreign dignitaries who visit you, as so many did and stayed at Trump's D.C. hotel in order to ingratiate themselves with you by staying at your hotel, which, of course, makes you money while you are president of the United States. There's all of these different ways that you can do it. What we know is that it is a grift and a scam all the way down. And if Republican voters want him to, he's going to do it again in twenty twenty four. We will stay on the finance story because it's really as big a story as any of the other stuff. The finance grift scam that Trump has now run for

six years is extraordinary, and he's getting away with it, at least for now. All of the clips I played here will be on our YouTube channel. Find it at YouTube dot com slash the David Pakman show. Make sure you're subscribed. Let's talk about plastic. 100 billion plastic bags are used and thrown away each year. Huge contributor to plastic waste. You might think there's no way around it. Think again. Our sponsor Hold On Bags makes trash bags and zip seal kitchen bags that are heavy duty, plant based and non toxic. So they break down in weeks rather than decades and they don't fill up our landfills or pollute our oceans. Hold on zip seal kitchen bags come in sandwich or gallon sizes for all of your needs. And because they are plant based, hold on trash bags and their zip seal kitchen bags are 100 percent home compostable. So what I do is I put my food garbage in a hold on bag, throw the whole thing

into the compost pile. It's fantastic. But even for everyday garbage, I'm putting in the dumpster. There is something really simple and easy I can do to make a difference just to save plastic, to shop plant based bags and replace single use plastics all over your home. Go to hold on bags The David Pakman Show is brought to you by the David Pakman Show, the podcast that you can One of our sponsors today is Blue Chew, a unique online service delivering the same active ingredients as Viagra and Cialis in a chewable form and at a fraction of the cost. And they're giving my audience an entire month supply for free. So if you think you could benefit from an extra boost of confidence, all you have to do is take a short quiz on their website. A licensed doctor approves your prescription. The medication comes straight to your home within days in a discreet package. No driving around to the doctor's office or the pharmacy. No waiting around.

No awkward conversations with your doctor. All of Blue Chew's tablets are made in the USA. The entire process is just a few clicks. Go to Blue Chew dot com. The link is in the podcast notes and they'll give you an entire month's supply for free when you use promo code Pacman. That's P.A.K. M.A.N. All you do is pay five dollars for shipping. The David Pakman show is made possible and funded directly by our audience. It is you. It is the people who listen. It is the people who watch. And I humbly, humbly, humbly ask that you get yourself a membership at join Pakman dot com. It's cheap. It's quick to get. It feels good. And it comes with great benefits, including access to the daily bonus show only for our members, commercial free audio and video streams of the show published

every day, hours before we make the show public invitations to member only town halls and also now a new member benefit access to a web based version of my soundboard. Oh, the bonus show where you want to make money. Yeah. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad. Get access to the soundboard as a new member benefit. People are loving it. Let's hear from some people in the audience. It is great to be back this week. We take calls on Fridays via discord at David Pakman dot com slash discord. Let's get right to it. Starting today with Ty from Iowa, Ty from Iowa. Welcome to the program. What's on your mind today? Ty from Iowa, please select the correct audio device so that we can hear you.

And then it is going to be a fantastic experience for us. And Ty from Iowa, unfortunately, struggling very, very much with technical difficulties. Let's go to Mike from Florida. Mike from Florida, please save us. Let's hope your audio device is configured correctly so that we can all hear you and we can get this going in a way that makes sense. Sir, welcome. David Pakman. Yes. Can you hear me? I can hear you fine. Wow. Pleasure to speak to you. Likewise. I guess I had a small observation. Sure. And if I had any sort sort of question it would be what is your perspective

on that when i'm done all right that makes sense to you sure so i kind of ask myself in general why does a person go towards being a conservative or being a liberal, like average person, they tend to gravitate towards one or the other or be an independent. But like. How can someone watch something like, say, Fox News or Newsmax and be drawn into that kind of. You know, honestly, I wasn't prepared for your question today. Well, this is a great topic.

I think I have a lot to say about this so that there's a couple different things going on here, Mike, if I may. We know that there are some differences in the brains of the average conservative and the average liberal. This doesn't mean that your brain determines which of the two you will be. But there are some studies that find that the fear centers of brains being larger predisposes one to be more likely to be on the political right than the political left. It's like maybe something to do with dopamine. Like you watch the person who is having some sort of freak out

on something, you know, some contrived social issue. And then you as the viewer are like, yeah, that's right. And you feel better. Speaker 1 Yeah, I don't even know the mechanism necessarily, but it seems that there's something that is a physiological thing. We also know that it's very environmental. People who were raised in blue states in left wing homes are are mostly likely to be on the left. And people who were raised in blue states in left wing homes are are mostly likely to be on the left. And people who were raised in in Republican homes in red states are more likely to end up being Republican.

So there's definitely an environmental component to it as well. The anomalous to that, you know, statistic was raised in a red home in purple. But Florida is arguably a pretty red state these days. Speaker 1 Yeah, none of these are hard and fast rules, but these are just predispositions. And then thirdly, and this is the really this is the tough one. I believe that those who do not receive education in media literacy and critical thinking are way more likely to fall for what Fox News and right wing media sells and are more likely to end up on the right.

Speaker 1 That was kind of like what I meant to get at, like Rachel Maddow was on the air before, but I was never like a super fan watcher every day, just taking whatever someone on the air before, but I was never like a super fan watcher every day, just taking whatever someone on the left says without a grain of salt. But it seems like the kind of person who would be predisposed to watching Hannity or Tucker just unobjectively soaks in what they say, you know, for, I don't know, maybe just like the willingness to accept what someone on TV is saying uncritically. That is something you can be educated out of 100 percent. Yeah. So, Mike, excellent question. Complicated topic.

But I hope I gave you some insights into it. No, wonderful speaking to you. Have a good day, David. All right. Mike from Florida. Great to hear from you. Remember, if you want to talk to me, your nickname in the waiting area needs to be name and location and it needs to at least be plausibly real. OK, so like it could be a city or a state or if you're in another

country, another country, let's go. So like nicknames and single words and jokes and this type of thing will be skipped over. Let's go to Tristan from Washington. Tristan from Washington. Welcome to the program. What is on your mind today? Tristan from Washington, I've invited you to join me on the program. You do need to accept it in order to be able to talk to me. Tristan, welcome. I. Bella, I hear me. Yes, you're cutting in and out, but we are connected, which is a good start. That's strange. I don't know what the issue is. Hi, it's good to speak to you again. I was just wondering, like, what is your

what is your view on the Republicans choosing Sarah Huckabee Sanders to make the response to the State of the Union last night? Couple thoughts, and that was on on Tuesday, of course. You know, Arkansas as a state is a disaster. And that's not me using ad hominem. It's just on education, on income, on crime, on health care. It's just a disastrous state. They have a lot of real problems. And Sarah Huckabee Sanders has wasted time as governor doing things like banning the teaching of critical race theory, which isn't actually

being taught. So she is, quite frankly, an embarrassment. But the reason Republicans may choose her is because they see her as the prototypical Republican going forward, which is she is definitely savvier and less cartoonish than people like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert. And she's potentially part of a generation that the Republican Party sees as being the types of folks that maybe in 10 years could be presidential candidates. So I think that that she was chosen because she is seen by Republican Party insiders as exactly the direction that Republicans should be going. Now, that's scary, but I think that that's how they see it. Yeah, no, I was going to I was going to ask you about why they didn't choose to somebody like

Marjorie Taylor Greene, because it just seemed it seemed like maybe maybe she is more cartoonish, but it seems like people like her and Lauren Boebert are more a little more relevant than Sarah Huckabee Sanders. I don't know the data of how many people have actually heard of Sarah Huckabee Sanders or what what she's done. But it makes sense to me. Listen, I think that Republican I think that the RNC realizes that people like Boebert and Green are widely seen as jokes to the greater country, whereas an Arkansas governor is sort of a different story. There's a that she seems slightly more serious. Yeah, yeah, that makes sense. And one other

question that I have, it's about, you know, term limits. You had brought this up on one of your recent bonus shows. I personally, as somebody on the left, I don't really see the benefit to imposing term limits on Congress. office, it just doesn't seem like it's it seems to me like things like campaign finance reform could be the most immediate concern. Speaker 1 Well, as I've said before, Tristan, we need I'm in favor of term limits, but term limits alone won't fix the problems we have. I believe we need term limits combined with campaign finance reform, combined with for presidential elections, going to a national popular vote, combined with going to some version of single transferable vote for all elections. That's a lot of stuff. But I do see term limits as one piece of reform that I

would like to see. Speaker 4 Yeah, no, I'm just against term limits altogether. I don't see them as being super valuable. I don't I'm actually even against term limits for president. Like I think that constitutional amendment was kind of ridiculous. Speaker 1 Wow. Well, listen, Tristan, while I disagree with you, I respect your right to have that opinion. What do you think of that? Speaker 3 Yes.

Being disagreeing without being disagreeable, I think, is the best way we can put it. Speaker 1 Kristen, thank you for the call. I appreciate it. Speaker 4 Thank you. All right. Very important topics being being broached today. Why don't we go next to Casey from Kansas? Casey from Kansas. Welcome to the program. Let's hope and pray for no technical issues. Casey, welcome. You're on. Oh, dear. Casey, the most likely problem is you've selected an audio device that's not valid on your computer. Hello, can you hear me now? I can hear you. Speaker 1 You can. Sorry, it took me a second. What's going on? Speaker 2 I had a question relating to something that's been asked in a few of the communities

I'm in recently. Speaker 1 OK. Speaker 2 Mainly the Vosch or Vouch community is Ian Vouch, of course. Yes, Ian Vouch. But would you consider the legislation and the rhetoric from the GOP targeting trans people to be a genocide in any sense of the word? You know, these these things are so fraught because you can you can contrive and fabricate some interpretation of so many things where you could match it up with a number of different words, like, for example, genocide speaking colloquially. And I know, Casey, you're not trying to gotcha me right. Just like speaking colloquially.

I don't think that those are the right words that I would apply to the anti-trans legislation. Now, can I like can I imagine how someone might make that connection? Can I propose to you how I would do it if I wanted to make that case? You tell me if this is what's being said. Casey. Hello. Hi. OK. Can you hear me, Casey? Yeah, a little bit. I was having a little bit of trouble. OK, yeah, I think I can hear you. If I had to make the case that anti trans legislation is genocide, I would say something like the following. Trans folks have a high rate of suicide attempting and suicidal ideation. And when you pass anti-trans bills that make it more difficult for them to avail themselves of the medical or other services that may help them, you increase the odds that they will attempt suicide. And thus, one could argue that those

bills are, in a sense, a genocide. Is that like roughly the way one would do it? Is that how you do it? But also just like the like, I don't know if you could use like the term legislative genocide or like, let's say like there is a recent bill that was proposed that would make it where you can't do like transitional health care even if you're 26 or under. Yeah. Which is not even 18. Like, would that be like genocide at all? Listen, I this is it doesn't seem to me that the word genocide is neither accurate in its spirit nor productive. But of course, I can see how somebody might make a semantic argument of that kind. It's not really the way I kind of think about these issues, I think, is where I would leave it. OK, do you at least think

it's like a dangerous warning sign, at least? Yes. And also like when when a governor requests a list of people who have transitioned, I think all those things are very dangerous warning sign at least. Yes. And also like when when a governor requests a list of people who have transitioned, I think all those things are very dangerous warning signs. OK, well, thank you, Casey from Kansas. Thank you very much. I appreciate the call. If you'd like to chat with me, make sure that your nickname in discord in the waiting area is your name and your location. Very, very important. Like, for example, Harris from Atlanta is going to be invited to be next on today. Harris from Atlanta. Welcome to the program. Hey, David, how are you? Good. How are you? I'm doing well. So my question is, how do you think that people are able to rationalize in their heads when they hear either a pundit or a politician say directly

contradicting things often in the same speech or broadcast or debate or whatever. What do you mean? So the two examples I kind of have, number one is with the Trump documents, where at the same time they were planted by the FBI to catch Trump and that we need to investigate that. But also Trump declassified the documents as president. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Said at the same time and expected to both be true. But they can't both be true. Yeah, this is this is a sort of throw a bunch of crap at the wall and see what sticks.

We see there are so many other good examples of this. Another one from the right is they say we've got to stop all these lazy immigrants from coming in and collecting welfare and they are taking our jobs with the hold on a second. Are they not working or are they working so much that there aren't jobs left for Americans? Which of the two things is it? Or another example was the January 6th. The January 6th attendees were both completely peaceful and it was actually Antifa being violent. Wait a second. So were they peaceful or was it Antifa being violent? Which of the two things was it? Yeah, I don't think it matters anymore because right wing voters haven't cared about hypocrisy and conflicts and double standards

for a very long time. So I just I just don't I do not think they care at all. Yeah, that I would definitely agree that is probably the case. Like, I think it's really that simple. I think the first time, like, obviously, it's been going on for a long time. This isn't a new issue, but like the first time where I like fully noticed it within a span where two statements were said in the span of about five seconds of each other. Whereas in the debate between Trump and Biden, where they were talking about Trump's taxes and he says at the, in the same statement that he pays millions and millions in taxes, but also the reason he was able to pay so little in taxes because of Biden's tax laws that passed in the Senate. Speaker 1 It's insane. It's completely nuts. So, yeah, I mean, listen, they're going to keep doing

it until there's consequences to doing it. And right now, their voters don't care, so they'll keep doing it. Speaker 5 Yeah, probably. Speaker 1 All right, my friend, thank you. There's Harris from Atlanta. All right, there goes Harris. Very, very powerful stuff. You might remember that a few years ago, the show got hacked and many thousands of dollars were stolen. We never got it back. It's a terrible feeling. It can happen to anyone. But a couple of years ago, we got aura, which really gives us significantly more peace of mind. And our sponsor aura is the app that protects you from scammers by alerting you anytime your info like email

passwords, social security number are found in data breaches or also automatically requests removal of your info from search engines. And it can reduce spam calls. Aura alerts you quickly about suspicious credit inquiries, like if someone tries to take a loan out in your name. And Aura's password manager makes it easy to keep your account secure to begin with. Aura also has parental controls for your kids' devices. You can restrict apps or manage screen time, set focus time, make sure they're doing homework instead of binging on YouTube. You can try or a free for 14 days at aura.com slash Pacman. Use the free trial to see if your email password are already out there. You may be surprised. That's a U R a.com slash Pacman to try or a free for 14 days. The link is in the podcast notes. Here's the perfect last minute Valentine's Day gift. One of our sponsors paired is the app that

offers you daily questions, games and guided conversations for couples designed by clinical psychologists. An independent study by Open University found couples who use paired for three months see an average 36 percent increase in the quality of their relationship. Every day paired sends you and your partner prompts designed to let you emotionally connect in a meaningful way. You don't see their answer until you've answered. And using paired just a few minutes a day lets you build a deeper knowledge of yourself and your partner, boost intimacy. There are hilarious moments as well. My girlfriend and I have been using it and it is really funny and interesting. So this Valentine's Day, give a gift that will last beyond the holiday. Go to

paired.com slash Pacman, get a seven day free trial and 25% off a subscription. Even the free trial makes an awesome gift. See if you like it. That's P.A.I.R.E.D. Dotcom slash Pacman. The link is in the podcast notes. Let's hear from a few more people, hopefully with functioning audio devices. We take calls on Fridays via discord at David Pacman dot com slash discord. We are going to try Ty from Connecticut. Ty, you know, because you're from Connecticut, I have a good feeling that our connection is going to work, work beautifully. Are you there? Can you talk to me today? OK, I can hear you, but it's almost like you're muttering so low that I don't know what you're

talking about. Sorry, I got I got a little bit of a deep voice. OK, that's now I can hear you perfectly. Yeah, I mean, we got to get this this stuff straight, man. What's what's up with your boy Pete Buttigieg? How come you think he's a favorable candidate in the wake of like the airline stuff, the railroad stuff. I'm not really a fan of his past. Like, where are you coming from from that? Speaker 1 All right, let's go through those. What what about his past are you not a fan of? Speaker 4 I think that the fact that he comes from like. And like with the corporate realm, with mckinsey stuff i think that um

i think that whole when he was mayor or whatever the whole like there's like two high-ranking like police administrators or something like that and like one was black one was white i don't remember the exact story but i think think they're saying like the white guy was saying racist stuff. The black guy had documented it or whatever. And like Pete ended up firing the black cop and there's a huge uproar or whatever. OK, I admit I'm not familiar with that particular story, but OK, so there's a so there's a couple of things. What about like the ports thing? What what about it was Pete Buttigieg's fault, I guess?

I don't think the. Like the manifest. Well, my understanding was, is that like the railroad workers, the the pilots. Were fatigued. Wait a second. What does this have to do with ports? What are you talking about? When you say ports, you mean airports? No, no, no. Speaker 1 We're fatigued. Speaker 1 Wait a second. What does this have to do with ports? What are you talking about?

Speaker 2 When you say ports, you mean airports? Speaker 1 No, no, no. You're talking about the shipping, right? The boats and I mentioned that I mentioned the airlines and oh, and trains, you said and railroad strike thing that Congress dismantled a little bit. I got to go. Listen, I'll just skip to the chase, OK? As I've said before, it's not that I think we're going to meet the workers.

It's not that I think Pete Buttigieg is the uber progressive. It's not that I think he has a perfect history. I've listed Pete Buttigieg along with others who I think are sort of a mold that would be an interesting way for Democrats to go in the next couple of election cycles. And what I mean by that is they are younger. They are really, really good in media and debate situations. They have a ruthlessness in terms of their dealing with Republicans that I think has been missing for a little bit, which I think would be good. And so it's not I've said before, it's not, oh, I think Pete Buttigieg is the God's gift

to progressive politics. It's I think that these are the types of folks. I like Jamie Raskin. I like John Ossoff, Katie Porter, Gavin Newsom. It's not Paul. Sorry. What are you talking about? Who do you think is God's gift to progressive politics right now? Honestly, right. I can't think of anybody right now. There's no one really that I'm fanboying over. I have to tell you. All right. Can I ask one more quick question? What do you think that

in this upcoming presidential election, the Democratic Party should be offering black Americans, black Americans specifically or just policy that. Sorry, Ty, we're talking over each other. I'm going to let you go and I'll just answer offline because I'm having I'm struggling to get a word in edgewise. I would like to see if Biden runs for reelection or if he doesn't and we see a Democratic, a different Democratic candidate. I want to see a tax reform plan that will actually both simplify the tax code, but will be abundantly clear that it is good for the middle class and it will directly touch tax the richest Americans. I would like to see a serious proposal on paid family paternity leave, paid paternity and maternity leave period. I would like to see something credible and serious on what is the next step on health care. So it doesn't have to be we're going from Obamacare to single payer

for everybody. I don't know that that would be credible. I don't know that it would pass, but I would like to see another maybe even do it as like a Medicaid expansion where we again raise the income level at which people will qualify, fold more people in. You know, I will outline what my my top wish list would be sometime closer to when the primaries really get going. All right. Let's speak to some other people. Why don't we go next to a Christian from Edmonton?

Christian, welcome to the program. What's on your mind today? David. Yes, sir. Yes. A tear streaming down my face right now. You're in tears now. I know it right now. First of all, I just wanted to address a critical issue from the big news a few weeks ago. I finished your physical over the weekend and I wanted to get right into the knit and gritty for you and all your valuable listeners. Yeah. You are currently six foot three inches tall and 239 pounds. Just like Trump. It's shocking. Yeah. Big, big, strong man. You also passed the Montreal cognitive IQ test like nobody else even knew was possible. Somehow the tiger nor the elephant stumped you. Yeah. OK. I also found that if you didn't go to

Starbucks when you were heading home from Montreal that last time, you could probably have lived to 600 years. Yeah, I do think I'm sorry for that. You know, I know you're kidding. I do think that that one Starbucks stop over the last 20 years probably did hurt me in some way. And in all seriousness, Christian, people know it's been 20 years since I went to Starbucks or Dunkin Donuts in the last year due to extenuating circumstances. I've gotten a coffee at both. It was terrible. It really is terrible.

And I'm trying to have an open mind. I'm not trying to be like a third wave coffee snob or anything like that. The Starbucks coffee was terrible and the Dunkin coffee was terrible. It was just horrifyingly bad coffee. I mean, that's the benefit of having your own home set up. You said the bar too high for everywhere you go. I know it. I know it. But anyway, is there anything else you had for me today? Yeah. I just want to say congrats on being a dad. It's it's great progress. My my boy is about two years old now and it's super cool. So I'm excited for you to see see your daughter. Yeah. The sleeping is getting much better. We're now she can push like for a 12 hour sleep, you know, and she's only she's not even she's eight months.

So I think that that bodes well for the future, hopefully anyway. Yeah, developmentally as well. That's going to be big, big steps that she's going to go through. So that's awesome to hear. All right. Well, thank you, Christian. I appreciate the clean bill of health. Thanks, David. All right. There is Christian from Edmonton. Why don't we go next

to Chris from Philly? Chris, welcome to the program. What is on your mind today? Chris from Philly, please accept my invitation, sir. And Chris, you're currently self-muted. Hello? Yeah, now you're on. Okay, I already had something to ask you, but to piggyback off the one thing the one guy said that I would like to see from Biden for the black community is to hold banks' feet to the fire

for the back hurting of redlining that they're doing. Absolutely. I agree with that. Oh, I got, I got customers coming in. So I got to hurry up. The other thing I wanted to say was Martin Taylor green on the home, home security. Yeah. I mean, what's the name? The home security problematic. Yeah. It's really problematic for the simple fact that she was sitting there chasing down Parkland shooter survivors. Yeah.

Speaker 1 I got customers coming in. Speaker 1 Chris, what kind of work do you do? What kind of customers are these? Speaker 2 I'm a manager at the bear distributor. Two of my employees called out today. So I'm working on myself. Speaker 1 At where? Where are you? Speaker 2 A bear distributor. Speaker 1 Oh, a beer. I thought you said at Berenstain Bears. And I was like, what are you talking about, Chris? A beer distributor. All right. Very good. Well, Chris, listen, I'll let you get to the customers, OK?

Hit you back later. Have a good one. All right. Text me later. All right. OK, man, a lot of crazy, crazy stuff going on today. Let's go to Ifti from Germany. Ifti from Germany, welcome to the program. What is on your mind today? Hello, can you hear me? Yes, I can. Excellent. You actually got a three in one, actually. I'm an Israeli doing a PhD about populism on Japan in Germany. So that's, I'm increasing your international cut of the pie today, I guess. Have you seen the fourth season of Fauda? I'm not a big fan of Fauda or some of those other things coming out of Israel. I know.

I also hate olives. I'm ruining everything for all Israelis, I guess. All right. I recommend it to you. It's a great season, Ifti, but go ahead. Okay. I'd like to actually make one small comment on one of your previous commentators because, first of all, I'm a big fan of you in general. Just to get out of the way. He spoke about Pete Buttigieg and why he's the electable, and I've noticed it's something that you've discussed a couple of times. I'm not a big fan of this whole argument that he's not progressive enough because I'm myself – I'm a social democrat and I'm you said, the means and package to win the presidency.

And out of those, at least in my view, if he is elected president, he will probably be the most progressive president in the history of the United States. I agree with that 100%. It reminds me a bit of the discussion about Elizabeth Warren during the last primaries, that after a couple of her statements, a lot of the people who are supporters of Bernie kind of criticize her for not being leftist enough. And she, I think ideologically, she's not to the right of Sanders

in terms of policy. And she is probably the most leftist senator in living memory, or most progressive in terms of social democracy. Well, there's Bernie. Yeah. But together with him, they're probably the most progressive. And if arguably the most progressive progressive senator in living memory is not progressive enough for you as a candidate, I think this is possibly a bigger problem. If you're making a very good point that this is a very good point, which is while on paper, Pete Buttigieg may not be the most progressive person in the world. If he were president, he would be the most progressive president in history. That's

very I I find it hard to argue against that. I think you're completely right. OK, about the main thing, I have two questions. I hope to get them through. One of them is more technical, and one of them I'm just interested in your opinion. Sure. I'm wondering about the deficit ceiling and the discussions about it. You have all these discussions on how catastrophic and apocalyptic it will be if the Republicans will not raise the debt ceiling. Yes.

To my understanding, it's more of a technical issue. And the Republicans, at the end of the day, they only have a very slim majority of four or five people. I have very, very low expectations of the Republicans. But to say that you would not find four to five Republicans out of all House Republicans who would not be willing to side with Democrats just to do the technical effect of raising the debt ceiling, it sounds very implausible to me. It sounds like more of a talking point than something that's realistic. I'm wondering if I'm missing something on the technical level there. You know, I don't know. I don't know if you would be able to find four or five.

I mean, it's really, it's a predictive question. It would be something we're just guessing about. I don't know who the four or five would be, but it's certainly possible that you're right. Okay. The last thing, again, I'm wondering about your opinion. As a person who's ideologically a social democrat for many years now, I'm wondering, how do you deal with talking points from your own sides that they don't really make that much sense?

And every rational person from your side that you're tackling with them would probably acknowledge that they don't make sense, but it's kind of a taboo to bring them up because it's against the cause of your side. I'm going to give you two examples. One of them, if you perhaps know a little bit about what's going on with the nursing strikes in the UK at the moment, that there are all those correct arguments that the nurses there had their wages eroded and that they're being overworked and all of those things which are completely supporting. But one of the talking points there, which is repeating, is that NAJ workers are forced to go to food banks. Yeah. And the median income of an NAJ worker in the UK, to my understanding, is about 40,000 a year.

40,000 pounds? For $40,000, it's about 32,000 to 34,000 pounds a year. Okay. And I mean, unless you're a single parent living in London, I don't really see how this kind of salary, which is far above the median or above the median wage in the UK, would mean that you will have to go to food banks. Now, if you are a single bread maker living in London, it's not really a systematic issue.

It's a specific problem with the wages in London for single parents. Another example is the debate about the minimum wage in the United States, which I'm always very confused about. You have these talking points going from, I think, 2008, about $15 minimum wage. And to me, even if you look at inflation over the last two years, or last year even, this should have changed dramatically. So this insistence of selling this talking point of $15 minimum wage, it doesn't really make any sense because it's not relying on anything like an index of living or some kind of system to keep wages

affordable other than selling the stocking point, which which so I got you, Ifti. I got it. Listen, these are the fine examples. I don't know enough about food stamps in the UK, food banks in the UK to be able to weigh in too much. I think on the minimum wage thing, it's a very fair point that the fifteen dollars that was talked about three years ago is a lot less money in purchasing power terms because of the inflation of the last three years. I completely agree. Let me devote some more thought to it. OK, OK. I appreciate it. There is ifty from Germany and that is going to do it for us today. We will take calls again on all of the important issues that the fine folks in the audience bring to me. I will speak to you soon. We'll take a

quick break and be right back. Are you tired of the same old off the shelf grocery store honey? Look no further than Manu Cora, our sponsor. The honey is made by bees that pollinate the native Manuka trees in the remote forests of New Zealand. It gives it a unique, dark, rich, delicious flavor that you won't find in any other honey. It is 100 percent raw. If you look at it side by side with regular boring honey, you can see the difference. I've got my honeys next to each other on the counter and it looks very different. Manu Cora is also responsible and sustainable. All Manu Cora honey is harvested using traditional methods so you can enjoy your creamy caramel

honey knowing that the production was easy on the bees and on the planet. It's a perfect natural sweetener. I've been adding it to my tea and my toast, but because of the amazing complex flavor, I find myself using it in things I didn't even put honey in before, like oatmeal and yogurt and smoothies. I have to admit, my girlfriend once caught me tasting Manuka honey right off the spoon because it's that good. It really stands out from everyday honey. So don't settle for the ordinary honey when you can enjoy the unique, delicious flavor of Manukora. Go to Manukora dot com slash Pacman and use the code Pacman for a free pack of honey sticks. Very nostalgic to when I was a kid with your order, a $15 value. Taste the difference for yourself. That's M-A-N-U-K-O-R-A

dot com slash Packman promo code Packman gets you a free pack of honey sticks. The link is in the podcast notes. Let's get into the mailbag. Boy, was it a special treat to get back from my week off and hear from so many people furious that I ever take time off and also from people who were glad I was gone now to the people who were glad I was gone. You know, you don't have to watch my content when I'm not on vacation. You can just not watch it. And that's totally allowed and acceptable. But let's get to some marginally more substantive stuff, starting, as we sometimes do, with an adversarial comment.

I don't run away from these. Stephen wrote in and said, you're a woke lefty, but your was the wrong. You're almost a requirement at this point. You're a woke lefty joke should be banned from social media for pushing the lies of the Democratic Party. You're paid by them the wrong you're again. And as we sometimes do, we respond simply with why are you apostrophe R.E.? I maintain my challenge. I have been accused of being paid for by the Democratic Party of globalists. I've been accused of being paid for by the Democratic Party, George Soros, Bill Gates, Big Pharma, whatever, for over a decade. And I still am waiting for anyone to present some evidence of that. And it's an open invitation info info at David Pakman dot com.

If you have that evidence, please send it to me. Jason wrote in about the forthcoming children's book we are working on. Jason says, David, the word critical should appear nowhere in your children's book. If you use that word, your book will be banned in many places. I suggest using media literacy rather than critical thinking in these discussions, at least where the audience is likely to be media illiterate. I do agree that such value neutral terms as critical thinking and actually media literacy as well have become weaponized by the right who say, oh, media literacy, that's liberal indoctrination. It is true that the more media literate people are, the less likely they are to fall for these

right wing tropes and ideas. That is absolutely true. But that's because they're learning to think for themselves, not because they are being indoctrinated. And Jason is probably right. More info on the forthcoming book very, very soon. Lizzie wrote in, I ask, should I cover these bogus House covid hearings that Republicans are planning to have? Lizzie wrote in and said, no, please don't cover the hearings live. It totally legitimizes them. And there's so many people who come to your page. Also judging by some of the emails and voicemails, people seem to hate when you talk or comment over proceedings.

Anyway, I know. Can you imagine if what my show was is I take the C-SPAN feed of a hearing and I sit there like a piece of wood or clay or metal for the three hours and don't say a word like no, nobody's coming here for that. Go to C-SPAN if that's what you want. Lizzie, I appreciate you pointing out the absurdity of that. Who else wrote in? Jeremy wrote in about Trump anti-vaxxers and 2024. Jeremy says from Chicago. Hey, David, love your show. I have thoughts on Trump and anti-vaxxers. I believe Trump won't win the 2024 primaries if he is still in support of the covid vaccine. More and more of his ardent supporters hate the vaccine and the vaccinated, most recently silk from Diamond and Silk. Trump knows his base hates the vaccine and he needs to change his tune in order for him to have a chance at winning the 2024 presidency.

Let me know your thoughts. Yeah, I mean, listen, Jeremy, you're not wrong that it's a little hard. The mental gymnastics required for. Praise me for the great job I did developing the vaccine, which might be really bad for you, and you should have the freedom not to take and it should never be mandated. And it's a beautiful, lovely freedom thing for people not to get vaccinated that I got all three doses of speaking as Trump now or however many doses he's up to. But praise me for it. But don't get it. It is a really difficult place to be in. And the reason it's particularly difficult for Trump

is he doesn't have many accomplishments to speak of from his first term. I mean, he claims accomplishments. They're mostly lies. And so he needs stuff to to brag about. But the vaccine stuff is not seen as an accomplishment by many of his followers. I don't know what he's going to do, how he will position that in 24. But it'll be interesting to see. Alex wrote in about the double standards of the right and says, hey, David, wanted to point out Republicans were accusing Obama of lying about his childhood, where he was born, et cetera, despite no evidence of this. Meanwhile,

they are a OK with Santos, who has been caught in multiple lies of a somewhat similar nature. The right has so many double standards. Ironically, they have absolutely no standards for who they actually elect. With all due respect, Alex, Alex, you said it so perfectly. I couldn't possibly add anything to it. You are completely correct. Stephen wrote in about Michael Cohen's show, Mayakulpa, saying, I wanted to mention to you, Michael Cohen has repeated numerous times in his show that you go to different Trump rallies and events interviewing people to show the irony of their positions. I know you've highlighted some of these interviews in the past, but I'm fairly certain you're just quoting or replaying these from other sources that aren't

produced by your show directly. I thought you might want to correct them unless I'm mistaken. Yeah, it has been brought to my attention multiple times that Michael Cohen, who's a friend of the show, thinks I go to Trump rallies. It is true that I don't go to the Trump rallies, but we do have our correspondents and in particular Luke Beasley, who does go to the event. So we are generating original content at those rallies. But it is true that I'm not the guy who goes to them. If I have the opportunity to correct Michael, I will. Brian wrote in about socialism, socialism. Brian says, hello, David, I want to ask a question about the term socialism. As Paul Krugman once suggested in regards to Bernie, using the term socialism gives any opposition the leverage to compare one

to Stalin. I've heard you state on your show that there are no real socialists in government. And I tend to agree when I listen to your views on government, economy, health care. I think you're pretty reasonable. However, do you agree that left wing politicians and pundits and influencers should distance themselves from the term? I don't expect you to be responsible for others, but I think it's fair criticism to point out that people like Kyle Kalinske and Vouch turn people off of actual issues with their abstract understandings and glorification of socialism. OK, I don't know. I can't speak to Kyle and Vouch, Ian Vouch, however you know him.

The question here is, should people distance themselves from the term socialism? If you are really a socialist, then you should embrace the term because that's really what you are to the extent that the Democratic Party really doesn't have socialists in it in positions of power. I don't think anybody who isn't actually a socialist should embrace the term because it's both inaccurate and not advantageous. Now, I know that there's polling that says, well, young people are less negative about socialism than ever before. Young people specifically and less negative doesn't to me signal that it's a winner to say we are socialists when we are not. My general view is. In particular,

if you're not really a socialist, don't embrace the term. And this, I think, has been one of my biggest criticisms of the way Bernie ran his campaigns. Let's call ourselves what we are. I am a social Democrat. That's a regulated form of capitalism. And I will repeat it as many times as I need to repeat it in order to get that across. We have a fantastic bonus show for you today. Please sign up at join Pacman dot com. We do directly depend on the support of people who get memberships at join Pacman dot com. We do directly depend on the support of people who get memberships

at join Pacman dot com. I would love for you to be one of those people. We will see you on the bonus show and then back here next week.