The David Pakman Show - 3/1/24: Dems declare Biden impeachment dead, Libertarian calls in AGAIN

Episode Date: March 1, 2024

-- On the Show: -- After the uncontroversial testimony from Hunter Biden, Congressional Democrats are declaring the Biden impeachment dead, but are Republicans really ready to let it go? -- A reporter casually destroys Republican Congressman James Comer's Biden crimes conspiracy during a press conference -- Caller discusses Lauren Boebert's dismal reelection chances -- Caller wonders why Trump supporters don't like Mitt Romney -- Caller asks what it would take to support a Trump pardon -- Caller asks who Kamala Harris's vice president would be if Biden steps down -- Libertarian caller returns to debate David -- The Friday Feedback segment 💪 Athletic Greens is offering FREE year-supply of Vitamin D at https://athleticgreens.com/pakman 💻 Stay protected! Try our sponsor Aura FREE for 2 weeks at https://aura.com/pakman 🖥️ UPLIFT Desk: Get 5% OFF with code PAKMAN5 at https://upliftdesk.com/pakman ☕ Trade Coffee: Code PAKMAN10 saves you $10 at https://drinktrade.com/pakman 🛡️ Incogni lets you control your personal data! Get 60% off their annual plan: http://incogni.com/pakman -- On the Bonus Show: The Friday Bonus Show with Producer Pat -- 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 -- 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

We start today with more follow up and repercussions to the not super explosive testimony of Hunter Biden on Capitol Hill on Wednesday. Yesterday, we went over a lot of the immediate reactions and I want to go over a couple of others. You know, Democrats came out of the Hunter Biden testimony behind closed doors and said the entire Biden impeachment is dead. I'm going to play a couple examples of that for you. But my question is, is the Biden impeachment really dead? Because Republicans actually seem to be doubling down and seem almost more committed to impeaching Biden now in the absence of any smoking gun

from Hunter Biden. So let's start with Jared Moskowitz, a Democratic congressman who says there's no more air in the impeachment balloon. The impeachment inquiry is over. But is it really? So it's a Florida who just left that room where the hearing is taking place. He is a member of the oversight committee. What can you tell us, Congressman, about what's been going on inside that room behind closed doors so far? No, thanks, Chris. Thanks for having me. I mean,

it is boring, Chris. I mean, we've not heard one new question, not one new shred of evidence. Everything I've heard, I've heard on Newsmax before, on social media, you know, some of the information relying on informants that have been indicted. Two of them, in fact, one Chinese foreign agent, the other taking Russian intelligence. So, you know, look, the air has been sucked out of their balloon. You know, I'm here, quite frankly, just to pay my respects, because this is clearly the death of the Joe Biden impeachment inquiry, the fake, frivolous faux investigation that they opened. You know, this this should be the last of it, because, you know, after four or five hours of this right now, there is no new evidence that Joe Biden had anything to do with Hunter Biden's business dealings. Listen, everything he says is accurate with regard to the facts. There was just nothing. We we've still heard nothing meaningful from the Hunter Biden testimony other than Republicans saying

there were some discrepancies between things Hunter said and other witnesses have said, which could be innocent differences of recollection or anything. The idea that discrepancies between witnesses in any way point to Joe Biden crimes. But I don't know that Moskowitz is right, that Republicans are ready to let this go. Here is another example. Democratic Congressman Dan Goldman also saying this is the nail in the coffin, but I don't know that it is. Let's go back to the oversight side. Dan Goldman. Sure. I'll be brief. I want to be very clear that first hour of this much anticipated testimony was the nail in the coffin to what is a complete bogus and sham impeachment inquiry. Not only were they unable to show any connection between Hunter Biden's business and President

Biden, but Hunter Biden gave very detailed and clear explanations as to what his arm's length business transactions were with private parties in foreign countries who are investors and business people, like many people would have. He went through a laundry list of board seats and jobs that he has had over his 30-year career after he left Yale Law School, and he withstood some inappropriate attacks even in the first hour. So it is not simply there's no connection to the president, which we've known all along and which was made clear again. But there is a very understandable, coherent business explanation for every single thing that they asked for. So obviously these Democrats are right. This thing should be over.

There is no air left in the balloon. There's no meat on the bone. We've you know, whatever analogy or metaphor you want to use. But is the impeachment inquiry really dead because Republicans do still control the House of Representatives? Or is it going to linger annoyingly like, you know, an STD that won't go away or something like that? Because Republicans seem committed to this thing, even in the face of embarrassment after embarrassment. And indeed, embarrassment is the next thing I want

to talk about. When James Comer, Republican member of Congress, chair of the Oversight and Accountability Committee in the House of Representatives, when James Comer came out of Hunter Biden's testimony on Wednesday, he was casually questioned by a reporter in the crowd, a reporter I've not been able to identify. But if anybody knows who's asking these questions, please let me know. And the reporter casually dismembers the conspiracy theory here, pointing out that even some of the money that moved that they are pointing to took place when Joe Biden was a private citizen,

which regardless of what the money was for. And by the way, they've also not tied the money to influence peddling, which also isn't a crime necessarily. But even if you satisfied all of those ifs, ands and buts, a lot of the timeline takes place when Joe Biden is neither president nor vice president. And James Comer doesn't really know how to react to that. What we've said over and over and over, Joe Biden took two hundred thousand dollars directly from AmeriCorps health. Do what he was a private citizen. The time of the two hundred thousand dollars. The four hundred the forty thousand dollars. So it's OK. So, so, so do you have a problem that Joe Biden's lied about that? Do you have a problem?

Notice how the goalposts just shifted. First Comer says this money is connected directly to Biden taking money for policy and influence peddling that's illegal and all this sort of stuff. The reporter says, you know, a lot of the money you're talking about moved when Biden was a private citizen. So now Comer goes, so you're OK with Biden lying about it? First of all, you need to prove Biden lied about it. I've still not seen evidence of that, but they've just moved the goal post to something completely different. Is the issue the money for policy or is the issue the lies they've they've proven neither? But they're moving the goalposts once again. The AmeriCorps helped put investors.

I'm asking you, what specific action did you take as a public official, an elected public official? Well, with the yeah, with the with the with the OK, calm down, calm down. It's OK. It's OK. All the angry liberals and watchers, they'll be all right. Calm down. Calm down is a classic move of someone who knows they've lost

on substance. Here is another example of reporters saying, I question what you're saying because you don't have any evidence for it. You have that either as the vice president or as president, Joe Biden uses political office in any way to benefit either Hunter or James Biden. We have evidence that Joe Biden used his political office in any way to benefit either Hunter or James Biden's chance. We have evidence that Joe Biden met with the Chinese officials. We've had several people already testify to that. How is AmeriCorps help? How is this Chinese business helped by the fact that- Okay, so let me ask you a question. You mentioned AmeriCorps Health. Does anyone in here question whether or not that was influenced?

Does anyone question that? No. There's no evidence that Joe Biden did anything. He got two hundred thousand dollars from it and the evidence that. So now they go back to the two hundred thousand dollars, which, again, the reporter already pointed out, that's money that moved. By the way, you've not proven what the money is for.

As far as we know, it was the repayment of a loan that Biden gave a family member that that's what's been said. But it took place when Biden was not even president or vice president of the United States. So I don't know how many times I have to say it. They've been looking into this for years and they have nothing. They have nothing other than there's some discrepancies in testimony. We have bank statements with things in them that we don't know what they are. But of course, that's also not evidence of criminality. This seems to be

very clearly going nowhere. The only question that remains now is, are the Republicans willing and ready to give it up and move on to something else? Or are they going to keep pushing this all the way through the election? Let me know what you think in the comments. I want to hear from you. Taking care of your health isn't always easy, but it really should be simple, simple. That's why for years now I've been drinking AG one every day. It's just one scoop mixed with water once a day. And it gives me the foundational nutritional elements I want for the whole day. Each serving of AG1 gives me what I want in terms

of vitamins, minerals and more. It's just a simple habit. I know that with AG one, I'm getting high quality nutrition. The ingredients are sourced for nutrient density and absorption. If you want to take ownership of your health, start with AG one, try AG one and get a free one year supply of vitamin D3 and K2 plus five free AG one travel packs with your first You may remember a few years ago, the show got hacked and several thousand dollars were stolen. We never got it back. But now I have a lot more peace of mind because we use aura. Our sponsor aura is the all in one tool to protect your online and financial accounts. Aura alerts you anytime your personal info is found on the dark web or in data breaches could be social security number logins, financial accounts. You will get very fast

alerts if a criminal does something like try to open up a bank account in your name, take out credit in your name. Aura will also monitor your bank accounts, your home and auto titles, which can help to guard against fraud. And aura even protects your phone by letting you block and screen spam calls and texts. Aura has parental controls for your kids devices to restrict apps, manage screen time, set focus time. You can try aura free for 14 days at aura. com slash Pacman. It only takes a few seconds to use the free trial to see if your username and passwords have been leaked online. That's a you are a dot com slash Pacman. The link is in the podcast notes.

The David Pakman show continues to be primarily supported by viewers and listeners like you. We have a membership program. It provides you with a full experience that removes commercials from The Daily Show, gives you access much earlier than everybody else to The Daily Show, and you get access to the bonus show, an extra program that we do every single day for our members. You can sign up at join Pacman dot com. It's a nice thing to do. You're signaling your support for independent media. It's a nice, you know, water cooler conversation. Do people still have water coolers? I don't know. You say, hey, I'm a member of the David Pakman show. And even though the normal rates are very cheap and affordable, you can use the coupon code save democracy 24 to save even more off of the cost of a membership.

Let's do as we often do on Friday. Let's go to discord and hear from some of our viewers and see what is on their minds. You can find our discord at David Pakman dot com slash discord. Let's try instead. Harry from Texas. Harry from Texas. Welcome to the David Pakman show. What is on your mind today? Hey, David, how's it going? It's going well. Perfect. Yeah, no, I was looking at the news and I don't know if you saw what was what just came out about a Lauren Boebert son. Yes, we reported on it earlier and it is quite a thing.

And as I said before, this is an adult who Lauren Boebert has spoken about publicly, who has been the subject of her stories about how her son made her a 36 year old grandmother. So we would not obviously be talking about it if we were talking about a minor or someone that was being deliberately kept out of the public eye. But that's not the case. I think it's fair game, Harry. And quite frankly, it's more proof that Lauren Boebert really doesn't know what's best for families and what leads to the best outcomes with kids. Oh, definitely. Yeah, no. And I think it's just just another event that's definitely not helping her. Her current run, which is going horribly right now.

Speaker 1 Yeah, I am optimistic that Lauren Bober is getting kicked out of Congress in November. That's my hope. And it would be a great thing. Speaker 1 Oh, definitely. But appreciate you taking the call, David. Speaker 1 All right. Harry from Texas.

Great to hear from you. Why don't we next go to. Oh, I don't know. How about Taylor from Utah? Taylor from Utah. Welcome to the program. David, can you hear me? Yes, I can. Taylor, I can hear you fine. I have to hold my phone up to my ear. OK. Longtime fan, I just have a quick question. I went to a Republican rally, unfortunately, just to see how horrendous it really was out there.

And they spent a lot of time attacking Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney. Can you explain why that is? Where was this rally? Utah, Jason Walton's rally in like Provo. He's a smaller candidate running for the Senate spot for Utah. Well, listen, is he a MAGA guy? Yes. Yeah. So that's why they're criticizing Romney and McConnell. But Romney and McConnell, according to MAGA, are seen as so-called rhinos, Republicans in name only. McConnell hasn't yet endorsed Trump, and that's angering some MAGA people.

Romney has straight up said Trump's a disaster. I'm not voting for the guy. He's a danger, et cetera. So MAGA Republicans are furious with McConnell and Romney right now. And it's not because McConnell and Romney are on the left now. They're just kind of, you know, McConnell is going to endorse Trump. Don't get me wrong. Romney hasn't. But that's the only thing. And they absolutely hate the guy. Mitt Romney seems like he's the last Republican with his head on his shoulders, really. Yeah. I mean, there's there's few of them. And again, head on his shoulders doesn't mean I agree with them on policy, but it just means they at least have some

connection to the basics of what it means to be a normal person in a society with other people, you know? Yeah. Yeah. Last thing you like the profile pic. Yeah, I see your profile picture on discord is me with extremely disheveled hair. I love it. I love it. I think it's a great picture. Speaker 2 I use it for a couple of things, but thank you for taking the call, David. Speaker 1 All right. Taylor from Utah. Great to hear from you. Why don't we go next to. Oh, I don't know. So tough to say. How about Rick from Philly? Rick from Philly. Welcome to the program. What's on your mind today? Speaker 2

Good morning, David. How are you doing? Well, Speaker 3 thank you for taking my call. I am a subscriber paid subscriber, but I paid through YouTube, but I don't get all the benefits. So I think I'm going to switch to your website. I'll just Speaker 1 switch to the website. That way YouTube doesn't take 30% and you get more benefits. Everybody wins, Rick, please. I definitely want to switch to that, get some of the other benefits. So my big question is, um, I'm more thinking about, um, that Trump is going to get convicted one way or another of some of these charges. You're already convicted of some of the other charges or at least found guilty.

I don't know if the difference under what conditions would you see that he may be pardoned or that you would want to see that he would be pardoned? I listen. These are good questions, Rick. The conditions. So if you ask me, when would I want to see anyone pardoned? This isn't just Trump. My answer is.

After the case is adjudicated, not before, after the case is adjudicated, if it is determined that justice was not done and the legal system was misapplied, then I would say we should consider a pardon right now. We haven't even had the trials. So like when Nikki Haley goes and says, I would pardon Trump, extraordinarily concerning now to the first part of your question, under what circumstances would we see Trump pardoned? Remember that presidents can only pardon for federal charges, so it would only be for the federal cases.

Nikki Haley has told us if she becomes president, she would pardon Trump. So like that's a scenario. I do not think Joe Biden would pardon Donald Trump. That's my belief. And that's also my hope. OK, I don't care if he goes to jail, but if he were to reveal like foreign influences, as an example, I would you know, I would think that pardoning would be part of the deal kind of deal. You're saying that there could be a deal made where Trump would would

make some revelations in exchange for a pardon. Exactly. So the reason that wouldn't really work is that you as part of the trial, they can't pardon him. I think what you're talking about is that he would get a deal not to be prosecuted or that he would get a plea deal that's super favorable. Prosecutors aren't able to pardon Trump, but they would be able to say, hey, if you reveal this, we will ask for no jail time or stuff like that. But that's not a. Yeah, that's a different thing.

Yeah. But knowing Trump, he's going to wait till the last minute till he's actually convicted. And then he's going to say, well, wait a minute. What if I say that, you know, this foreign government was trying to get information or like some of the documents? This is why I did this. And I think it'll be too late by then. Okay. Yeah. Well, thank you for taking my call, David. I appreciate it. All right. Rick from Philly. Great to hear from you. Why don't we go next to Justin from Brooklyn, who's also a website member. Justin, I appreciate that. Thanks so much and welcome to the program. Thank you, David. Can

you hear me? Yes, I can. Yeah, so I'm really looking forward to the back of everything going on in the next year. Hopefully we get a nerd, you know, left win in November because I really can't stand everybody optioning Trump. But anyway, I'm curious your thoughts on how the left approaches attacks from the right and that sort of thing. It feels like regardless of which already is in, has the administration for the four year term.

It sort of is always the right attacking the left in a certain sense. There's always more malicious attacks going that direction. So I'm curious, Gavin Newsom kind of has the stance that, you know, we have to be more forceful against that and start. Levying the same amount of weight towards the right. But I guess I'm just curious your thoughts on what you might see coming down the pipeline in terms of a change of tone. Well, I don't want the left to start stooping to the level of the right, for example, by hurling untrue allegations or things like that. You know,

one of the things the right does in their criticisms is they say these socialists, these Marxists, these people who hate America, all of those things are untrue. So I don't want to start stooping to their level in that way. What I think Gavin Newsom does really well is he will be super clear about what the things Republicans say actually mean. Right. So when they say we need to what we need to cut Medicare for whatever, you know, or whatever. What we're talking about is making it so that seniors don't have money for procedures that they need. That's what it means.

If we were to do that, maybe this isn't the best example. But so so my point is, what I think we need to do on the left is to speak with significantly more moral clarity about the consequences if these people get their way without stooping to their level in just lying and hurling on true allegations. I think Newsom is good at doing it. I think Pete Buttigieg is good at doing it, too. Yeah, I totally agree with you, and I'm not saying that we should match exactly what the right is doing, of course. But yeah, it's completely unproductive and progressive to continue doing that. We don't want fake news out there. So yes, I just I think I more so meant what you were talking about exactly how Gavin Newsom speaks very clearly. The Buttigieg is a good example as well. I think I just mean bringing the attention more to the fact that, you know, the border bill, for instance, you know, they wanted it and then all of a sudden they didn't.

And I think that that needs to be called out a lot more because. Yeah. And I would go even further, Justin, to that. I would say, look at the things that they want and then what the outcomes are. They want to get rid of Roe v. Wade. They finally do. Most people wanted Roe v. Wade and then they lose everything. So really, it was just a fundraising ploy. They say they want to do a border bill when they finally get on the verge of doing it. They say, actually, we don't want it because we want to keep talking about how we need a border bill and leave this as a problem for

Trump to fix. So it's just it's completely vapid and it needs to be exposed. And furthermore, even if that helped Trump to get elected. I think they'd be hard pressed to actually fix order in the way that they're talking about, amongst other issues, too, of course. So, yeah, that was the main thing on my mind this morning. And I hope you have a great rest of your day. All right. Justin from Brooklyn, thank you so much. And great to hear from you.

Why don't we go next to let's go to Clarence from Singapore, a website member. Clarence, welcome. Did you have a question today? Yeah. Hello. Yeah. Clarence, welcome. Happy Happy Lunar New Year to you. Thank you.

I forgot to mention. I appreciate that. Thank you. Happy Lunar New Year to you as well. And I apologize for the previous call and for the, you know, my perspective on the border. No apology needed. And I, to be, to be honest, that's really stupid of me. Oh boy. By the way. Well, we don't need, you don't need to beat yourself up, Clarence. Let's just get to whether you had a question today. Okay. Uh, will you invite Dylan Burns again as your co-host? Dylan Burns? Yes. Yes. The the the the war reporter who went to Ukraine. Yeah. Yeah. Are you saying are you saying as a guest host? I don't really have co-hosts. Yeah. As a guest host. Yes. I would love to have him on to be a guest host. Sure. Okay. Um, and would you invite Brandon Kevin out as a guest? I don't know who that is.

I don't know who that is. Who is that? You know, you know, Sam, you know, you know, St. Pancras Station, London. Speaker 2 Sorry, who who? Speaker 1 No, the Brandon Kavanaugh, he got, you know, he's a pianist. Speaker 1 Brendan Kavanaugh, the British pianist. OK, I just looked him up. Yeah. Speaker 2 Yeah, he got her. He got harassed by the Little Pinks, which is a.k.a. the Chinese Communist Party extremists for doing what, you know, and know the Chinese Communist Party extremists, a.k.a. the little pinks. Right. But why did they harass him?

Oh, they they they went to his live stream. He was playing piano and then somehow they then they were being filmed. They they thought they weren't being filmed on the live stream. Turns out they were they were being filmed because he was playing the piano on live stream on YouTube. Speaker 1 And then listen, Clarence, it sounds very interesting. I don't I'm going to look into that. I don't know that it's exactly for our show.

Yeah. Speaker 5 Yeah, I used to know that it's exactly for our show. Yeah. Speaker 4 Yeah, you should go and watch the video, by the way. You should go to what? Kevin, not a live stream. Speaker 1 Got it. Well, Clarence, let me research and I will follow up, OK? Speaker 4 OK, thanks. And by the way, thank you for calling you. Speaker 1 Thank you for calling Clarence. Thank you so much, Clarence from Singapore. We will no doubt hear from you again. Let's go next to Gerald from Miami. Gerald from Miami. Welcome to the program. What's on your mind today?

Gerald from Miami, please set your audio appropriately. And last chance for Gerald from Miami would be a real tragedy. And there goes Gerald from Miami. Let's go to Justin from Washington, D.C. Justin from Washington, D.C. Welcome to the program. What's on your mind? Hello. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes. Hold on. Um. One second. OK. Sorry, I was making fresh squeezed juice. I was not expecting to be called on. Well, here we are. Okay. Long time listener, huge fan.

Thank you. you mentioned like if you spoke about like foreign policy or the war uh in israel that your viewership would just fall off and um when i was uh looking like yeah i was looking through your videos and i was seeing um the viewership it's true it's true like, you get a lot of views on your interviews, on your, you know, domestic coverage. But you had a video the other day that was like, what would I do in the Israel-Gaza war? And it had like, almost, you know, no views in comparison to some of those videos. Yep. No, that's absolutely absolutely true um and okay a question um okay i all right what should i ask um uh oh did you hear what lula's uh the silva said uh president of brazil about israel and gaza the other week no i didn't. He he he compared it. He compared the war in Gaza to the Nazi Holocaust. Oh, yeah. I mean, if you didn't see it, then I won't ask your comments on it. But you should check it out. And I'd be curious to hear what you think about it.

All right. Yeah. I mean, I don't I'm not super interested in what he says in general, to be totally honest, but I will. I'll look into it. Um, Justin, from D.C., thank you so much for the call. We're going to move on as we have so many folks who are waiting and I'm sure we could we could do this all day. You know, let's go next to Chaim. Chaim, welcome to the program. Chaim from where?

Where is Chaim from? Chaim is from Omaha, Nebraska. Welcome to the program. What's going on? Chaim, you're on the program. And Chaim, you almost certainly have the wrong audio device selected. Please fix it if you can. And no, I am OK. Let's take a very quick break. If you're holding on to talk to me, just hold on another moment and we'll speak to many more people after this short break.

Did you know that even if you exercise once a day and then basically sit the rest of the day, you can still suffer the consequences of a sedentary lifestyle because physical inactivity throughout the workday can cause a whole host of different health issues. And that's one of the many reasons I use a standing desk at desk that can go up or down. It gets my creative energy flowing. I can walk around. I get circulation. I really don't want to go back to a regular desk. And the standing desks I've been using for years are from a company called Uplift Desk, which is why I asked them to become a sponsor. They let you customize

every little detail of your new desk, dozens of different types of wood to choose from. You can choose the size, the type of grommets, the color of the hardware. Do you want casters? So many ways to customize it and make it yours. Uplift Desk has been chosen as the New York Times I'm very particular about my coffee and our sponsor, Trade Coffee, helps you do more in 2024. If you're like me, coffee might be part of your routine, maybe a factor in your productivity. Check out trade as your destination for better coffee at home. Subscribe to trade and start the year with amazing coffee. You'll discover new favorites. You'll support more than fifty five local roasters across the country and you will upgrade your morning. And the best

part is you can personalize all of it from the type of coffee you get, how often you get it delivered. They have decaf if that's your preference. I recently got Orin's Columbian from New York. Sweet and inviting, full bodied notes of pine. I actually love pine. Who knew? Pine is great. Every time I get a new shipment from trade, the quality and the taste is top notch.

The convenience is it's just great. The coffee comes to my door instead of having to go find them. Whether you already know what you like or you're new to specialty coffee and want some help, trade just makes it easy to discover new coffees you will like. Show your loved ones how much you care with the gift of trade coffee for....com slash Pacman. Then use code Pacman 10 at checkout. That's Pacman 1 0 to get $10 off for Valentine's Day until February 14th. The info is in the podcast notes. Let's go back to discord and hear from a few more people at David Pacman dot com slash discord. That is the place to do it. Why don't we go here to. Oh, I don't know. What about Zach from Florida? Zach from Florida. Welcome to the program. What's on your mind today?

Zach from Florida, please unmute yourself. Zach from Florida, you have muted yourself. You must unmute yourself for me to be able to hear you. And there goes Zach from Florida. Let's go to TJ from Cincinnati. TJ from Cincinnati. Welcome to the program. What's on your mind today?

Speaker 5 Hey, David, can you hear me all right? Yes, I can. Speaker 6 Hey, I just have two questions. The first one probably be pretty short, and that is when do you plan on having your website fully updated and converted? You know, we're hoping that it'll happen in March. The the the website's based the new website's essentially done, except we need the making the seamless transition for all of the members with the new membership portal. We want to make 100 percent sure that that's right. And that's where we're getting held up. And we're just in the testing phase of that. So hopefully March. Yeah, great. Thanks

for the update. I'm patient. So I will be patiently waiting. Thanks. Good. My second question is in a hypothetical where Biden wins the election in November and is inaugurated in 2025. Say he is doing all right and then eventually falls ill and is unable to perform his duties as president and Kamala becomes the president. Yes. From my understanding, I believe that she is able to appoint a new vice president. And my question is, who do you think she should and would choose? And if it really matters? I don't know that I could tell you right now who it should be because it would really depend on the circumstances at the time. Thinking strategically in the scenario you're outlining,

Biden wins, has a second inauguration in January 2025, dies or has to resign for medical reasons or whatever. Kamala Harris becomes president. Who should then become VP? What I would love to see is the choice of someone who is really a contender to be the next generation of left leader in the United States. So the reason I can't tell you who that would be is we'd have to see. Imagine that it's 2027 when this happens. We'd have to see. And in that in that year, are people still talking about Gavin Newsom or not? What's Pete Buttigieg up to? What about? But my idea would be that whoever is being seriously thought of as a good contender to represent the left in twenty twenty eight, that person should be made VP. That would be my

strategic answer. Sure. Yeah, I agree. I think that Kamala, I don't see her running in 2028. You know, I don't think she's super popular among many left or right in general, maybe left, you know, but just as you suggested in the past clips and videos, you know, keep you to judge Gavin Newsom, you know, maybe the Senator, I'm sorry, the governor of Pennsylvania, Shapiro, you know, there's a lot of good options out there. And, you know, I just want to be looking forward to twenty twenty eight in that sense. And hopefully Biden can win the nomination in twenty twenty four. But yeah, that's all I had today. Thanks for taking my call. All right. TJ from Cincinnati, thank you so much for the call. I very much appreciate it. Why don't we go next to Henry from New Jersey? Henry from New Jersey, welcome to the program.

What's going on with you today? Hey, Henry. Yes, welcome. So actually, what I wanted to talk about was the Alabama IVF ruling. Yeah. And more specifically, how people on the right in online circles are reacting to it. And what I found really interesting is that there is a huge swath, maybe not huge, but at least seemingly 30 to 40 percent of people that are actually in support of the decision by the Supreme Court. And yet what you won't see is them criticizing Trump on Trump's now super pro IVF position. They will call each other murderers. They'll call each other, you know, evil. But but they will not make that same statement about Trump for the exact same thing. And it just blows my mind.

And they are quite literally in knots over this IVF thing. And there is so much confusion. First of all, a whole bunch of Republicans have said, no, you got to have access to IVF. So of those Republicans, when some of them say you've got to have access to IVF, they are disagreeing with the decision. There are other Republicans who say we have to keep access to IVF, who don't understand how the ruling restricts access to IVF by making IVF clinics terrified that they're going to go down for murder if they dispose of frozen embryos in the ways that they've done for decades. And so they don't even understand it. And then, of course, you have the people, as you're pointing out, like people like when they react to Trump's position, who say they

like the decision, Trump says the opposite. They also don't criticize Trump. And honestly, I don't know that these people have the slightest clue what's going on, Henry. I really I mean, it's they just seem genuinely clueless. Yeah. And the other thing is, those people tend to be pretty blatantly, you know, Christian nationalists, essentially people who want a theocracy. Many of them are, many of them are, but not all. Some of them are merely ignorant.

Yeah, that could be true. But yeah, thank you. I just, I just wanted to talk about that because I really love reading through these forums and places online where the right discusses things. And it's just like, there's no, there's no follow through on their positions that they seem to hold. Speaker 1 There really isn't. Honestly, half the time, I don't even think they realize they hold conflicting opinions at the same time. Speaker 4 Yeah, well, that's that's really all I want to talk about. Thank you so much for having me on. Speaker 1 All right. Thanks, Henry. There goes Henry from New Jersey. Great to hear from him.

Why don't we go next to Dan from California? Dan from California, welcome to the program. What's on your mind today? Hi, David. I called a few months ago and asked if I could post my calls to your show on my YouTube channel and you said no. But I was wondering if I did not post a video, if I only posted the audio of it, would that be OK? Dan, I think every time you call, you ask about that. And I don't know how interesting it is to post calls about whether you can post calls, but the rules

are the same for everybody, which is if you are transforming the content we post either by doing an analysis of it. And so you're playing the audio and video, but you're talking about it or you are posting a recording you make from your side of the calls. That's all fine. What you can't do is just upload our content unedited because that's just reposting. And that is not allowed. The algorithm will automatically, you know, remove that content or copyright claim. And I don't know what it does. I don't even manage it. So the rules remain the same for everybody on that. OK, I guess one other thing. Is it OK if I mentioned what my channel is before I get to my substantive question? You know what? Why don't we just get this isn't like to promote channels like if what did you have a question today? Let's go to the question directly rather than all the kind of, you know, sidebar. Speaker 1

OK, so in our last discussion, I was describing my Ayn Randian view that a social system should be voluntary and not coercive. And as part of your criticism of a voluntary system, you said that it would result in some people having priority and greater access to things that you think should be public services. And to that, I would say if by public services, you mean services that people should be forced to fund, I don't think there should be any public services. I think forcing people is wrong. I think that's anti-freedom. So I'm interested in is that what you meant by public services, forces, services people should be forced to provide. Public services can be anything from public transit to police, to the framework of law

around which contracts can be enforced. Here's the thing, Dan. The reason these conversations are so boring and pointless to me is that I am I am not planning on leaving society and in anything approximating and even remotely well-functioning society. You pay taxes and the taxes are used to fund a variety of public services. And I like that. I want to live in a society where such public services are provided. So this entire thing of, you know, the people are forced to provide services and the taxes

are slavery and everything. It's just not even interesting because I live in a real society that exists and I want to improve it as much as I can. And so talking with folks who I mean, I don't do you are you actively looking to move to such an Ayn Randian voluntarist society as you describe? Is that something you're actively looking for to move to from California? Speaker 4 No, I'm looking to live in the best place I can, which for me, I think right now is America. And I want all these services as well. But I don't think that means that we have to force people to provide them. I think it's immoral and wrong to do that. And what do you think when you

say when you say a public service that an individual is being forced to provide? Can you give me just an example? So I service that an individual is being forced to provide? Can you give me just an example? So I know, like generally what you're talking about? Well, I mean, it could be anything police, water, electricity. The issue is how it's funded, not what whether the service exists. I think all these services should exist, but I don't think people should be forced at gunpoint to provide these or to fund these services.

People are forced to hold on. The police officers are being forced at gunpoint to provide these or to fund these services. I think people are forced to hold on. The police officers are being forced at gunpoint to be officers. No, the funding of these services, you have to pay taxes or else you're going to be hauled off to jail. Right. People with guns are going to show up. So it's a coercive mechanism of funding these services that I want and that you also want. But what we differ over is whether it's appropriate to coerce people into providing them. I think it's not appropriate. Well, hold on a second. Hold on a second, Dan.

I mean, this is such I feel like I'm back in, you know, for freshman economics here because we're going back to this. But people are being forced to pay taxes to pay for police, which they may not want to do. You're you. You're choosing to work and live in a place that has taxes, right? Yes, but there's no right on the part of the people who are coercing you once you it's not just the choice to live somewhere, it's what they do after you're there. Like if you go to somewhere and you know that there are rapists around the streets and there's

a chance that you will get raped, yet you choose to go out at night and then you happen to get raped. That doesn't mean you chose to get raped. It doesn't convert that sexual. No, but what I'm saying is something different. If you live in California, you know, I honestly I'm shocked people still have these sorts of discussions because it just does nothing to improve society. But then if you live in California and you say, OK, I'm aware of the tax system here

and I'm going to live here and I'm going to work here and I am going to have to pay taxes and I might not like the way my taxes are used. And my recourse is to join with other people who don't like how my taxes are used and my recourse is to join with other people who don't like how my taxes are used and to vote for someone who will use my taxes in a different way. And if I don't like that, I can move or I can go completely off the grid and go back to a state of nature where I just, you know, become a hunter gatherer or, you know, it's just like we've gone over. This is one of those kind of extreme libertarian arguments that

does nothing for anyone. Well, I disagree. I mean, I think having these arguments is important and I think there's a lot of confusion surrounding them. So I think it's a worthwhile for the discussion to have the I mean, you can say about the the anti this antebellum South, you know, we had slavery. Yeah. Should we just step that? That's that's just part of society. Or should we know we didn't accept it? We went to war over it to end it because that's what the majority ultimately wanted to do.

Well, I don't think it's just the majority that matters, even if whether it's a minority or a majority that wants slavery, it's an unjust institution. I agree. Should be. I agree with that. I don't think I don't think I don't believe in mob rule. I don't think just because the majority wants something that it should go. Listen, Dan, you've been calling me for years with very similar questions.

What have you done other than call me to try to shift society to be the voluntarist society you desire? Well, I've called lots of people. I've debated Sam Seder a number of times. I've debated Luke Beasley, who's I think he's one of he's associated with your show. I mean, on my YouTube channel, if you're interested in what I've done, I'm not going to say what it is unless you tell me to. But I've done lots of discussions and debates with people trying to give people a

different way to look at things. So and I plan to continue doing more of that. All right. Dan from California. Very good. If folks are interested in this sort of discussion, they can let me know what I see from the audience whenever Ayn Rand types call in with this stuff about taxes are coerced and I don't want to do anything. I don't want to pay for anything unless I want to. I want to be voluntary. The reaction is like, hey, let's fix the society we have in reasonable ways rather than kind of live in these fantasy worlds that have never worked anywhere. But maybe I'm wrong. The audience will let me know. All right, everybody, let's go to a break. Appreciate everybody who called in and that I was not able to talk to. But we will do it again. Did you know there are hundreds of commercial

databases and people search sites that hold your personal information. And the number is growing every year. Anyone in the world, boss and X can use these people search sites to see your online activity, to find your home address, phone number, email address, license plate number, family members, financial info, even your political beliefs. Europe has certain laws that protect people against this. But it is a big problem in the United States. The FBI is even buying this data from these companies to get private information about Americans without search warrants. And the solution is our sponsor Incogni. It takes just moments to sign up.

Incogni will send takedown notices to all of the major data broker companies to get your information removed from their databases, which they are legally required to do. And Incogni will keep you updated every step of the way with live information about who's complied, where is Incogni still working on it. Incogni will even send follow ups and appeals on your behalf. Go to Let's get into Friday feedback this week. Just for kicks, let's call it the Friday feedback because we haven't for a while. And I know there's like one person in the audience who likes that. On Fridays, we will review emails, YouTube comments, Reddit posts. What else? Tick tock replies. Sometimes sometimes these are critical. Sometimes they are favorable. We start

today with one that is so positive. It's from sub from the subreddit. I honestly don't even know whether it's legitimate. Like there's it's almost so positive that it sounds like maybe this is a criticism, but I like it anyway. Johnny Motorcycle says David Pakman is a chad for not giving into transparent attempts at audience capture by reactionary trolls. Bravo, David. You tower above most of your peers in the months and years that follow this election cycle.

When people analyze the propaganda and influence campaigns that wrought havoc on left media, you'll be able to hold your head high knowing you weren't taken in. You personally watched over your subreddit, keeping it from falling into neglect, graft or outright bigotry. Many of your fellow left content creators cannot say the same. You allow a big tent of discussion, even allowing trolls that follow the rules to participate in their daily assault on Biden, Democrats, Jews, and you personally, rather than mass banning, you allow your community the chance to debate often heatedly the topic of the day.

Your commitment to free speech is unrivaled. Keep doing what you do. Your subscription count alone is evidence that pushing back against audience capture is a virtue and that personal integrity is a draw. I stand with you in this fight for the soul of our country. Express yourself in the comments, love or hate, mirth or madness. All are welcome here. What do you feel about Deepak? And the comments are riddled with vile and horrible attacks on me. So here's my approach with this. Number one, I only look at the sub

Reddit twice a week. In fact, I only look at social media twice a week. Now, uh, I used to check these platforms every day. I realized they weren't making the show any better. They were probably making it worse. They were making me react to the day to day of some, uh, a sliver of the audience who chooses to post. So first of all, I only even look at these platforms twice a week. I look at everything in reverse chronological order. So I couldn't tell you, you know, when five posts go up on the sub Reddit with anti-Semitic undertones for my views, either on the Israeli Palestinian conflict or circumcision, right? When there are five of those and then there are two positive ones and three about Biden, one is positive and two are negative or whatever. I don't know what's hot and what's being upvoted or

downloaded. I see it once in reverse chronological order and never again because I'm not letting that what's hot algorithm display the subreddit to me. And as far as who gets banned. Yeah. I mean, unless you are deliberately and regularly participating in bad faith and just ruining the subreddit, you're allowed to criticize me. You're allowed to criticize Biden. And there is a voting and commenting system that will decide how much attention those posts get. But not for me, because I just look at everything in reverse chronological order. So that's the subreddit. OK, Jeff Moore commented on YouTube. It really would not be out of line to have any candidate pass a medical screening before even running. It's a high stress job and on a low amount of sleep and errors can cost lives.

Truck drivers need them. Is it too much to ask for the leaders of the country to pass one? So here's the deal. Let's analogize to releasing your tax returns. It is not anywhere in the law that presidential candidates must release their tax returns. And what you end up with is a sort of moral hazard situation where the people whose tax returns we really want to see are the ones who just say, I'm not going to release them. Trump. Right. So similarly, because unless you change the Constitution to determine who is

eligible to be president, you can't really make it a requirement to pass a medical screening before even running. So what we would end up in the best case is a situation where most candidates agree this is important. Most candidates have no concerns about passing such a screening and most candidates do it. And someone like Trump, who probably would have a concern about such a such a screening, assuming it's not his personal doctor doing the screening, would just say, I'm not going to do that. It's not part of the law and you're not entitled to it. So I think it's a very interesting idea, Jeff. And especially when we have two roughly 80 year old candidates running, there's all sorts of different reasons

why we should say we should have more information rather than less about candidates. But making it an actual requirement, even for those that don't want to do it would be quite difficult. Tony Powder says, I'm honestly considering voting for Trump. I just can't vote for Biden again. He looks tired and confused. What I find strange about this is Trump also looks tired and confused. And Trump's an authoritarian lunatic, whereas Joe Biden is not. Oh, well, Joe Biden has slowed down with age and Trump has slowed down with age. Right. And Biden has completely reasonable people around him racking up accomplishment after accomplishment after accomplishment. He looks tired and confused. So you'll vote for the other guy who's tired and

confused and an authoritarian lunatic who has humiliated us on the world stage year after year after year doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Jeff says on my 10 40 tax form, where's the line where I entered the 22 million illegals as dependents? Ha ha ha. You know, when these these right wingers are so uncreative and so terrible at comedy and satire that when they get one joke that isn't obviously terrible, like it's a one out of 10 rather than a zero out of 10, they just repeat it. I've seen all of the

right wingers that I went to high school with posting this exact same joke. When you do your taxes this year, say you have 22 million illegals as dependents because you're paying for them. It's very stupid. It's not funny. It's sort of like when people put the I did that of Joe Biden pointing and saying I did that on the gas gas pumps. And now you don't see him anymore because gas prices have come down dramatically under Biden. It's not funny. You guys aren't funny. You can't do comedy. That's why every attempt at right wing comedy fails. Joe says if Nikki Haley told us the real reason why she's staying in, it would trigger Donnie so, so hard could possibly result in a 48 hour truth social bender. Yeah, I would love Nikki

Haley to just be up front and go, listen, I'm not winning a single state here. It's very clear that by a roughly 60 to 40 margin, the Republican Party is sticking with Trump. Now, 40 percent is not nothing, but it's not enough to win. Here's the problem. Trump's brain is turning to mayonnaise. He is almost 80 years old. Statistically, he is way more likely to die than a 70, 60, 50, 40 year old candidate or nominee. And he's got four criminal trials against him and maybe rotting in prison by the time of this election.

So I'm staying in for that reason. And it would wildly trigger Donald Trump. I don't know that it would be good campaigning necessarily for Nikki. She seems to need to keep up this kind of farce. But I would love to see Trump's reaction if she did say that. Tracy Blackburn says about Trump, he's so smart. He managed to take a $5 million judgment against him for defamation and turned it into an $84 million judgment against him by continuing to defame the same victim in front of a jury.

So smart. Yeah, not exactly a criminal genius, allegedly a criminal. That's for sure. We will have to see if he's convicted, but not exactly a criminal genius and one who sleeps not posted to the subreddit. Why is Trump keeping Alina Haba around writing Alina Haba? This is Trump's sort of legal spokesperson. Now she was his lawyer and then failed. Alina Haba is nearly

universally regarded as a massive failure after her defense of Trump in his defamation damages trial resulted in an eighty three million dollar judgment against him. Trump advertised that other attorneys for an appeal would be needed. So presumably she's been fired, presumably, but not really, because she's still working as Trump's legal spokeswoman making appearances on Fox News. Unlike the many other others Trump has vindictively fired or claimed to have fired for having failed him, this person has actually failed him quite badly. Why hasn't Trump jettisoned Haba like the hottest of potatoes?

Notably, she has said, I don't think I'd be on TV or sitting here if I didn't look the way I look. I think I caught attention. It obviously doesn't make sense to keep Habba around just based on her legal acumen. Is Trump this swayed by good looks? Is there more to their relationship than meets the eye? Could she have leverage on Trump or know too much to get kicked to the curb? Now, I think it's Trump just likes having her show up on TV and defend him. I think it's that simple. She's married. We have no reason to think there's an affair or anything like that. Anything's possible, but there's no reason to think that. And by the way, on the appeal stuff, in a sense,

she's been fired. It's also very common that when you appeal, you don't have the same lawyers appeal the case. They work. That's super common. That's actually a super common thing. The bigger question is, why did Alina Haba get hired by Trump in the first place? And it's probably I mean, listen, it certainly can't. You can't make the argument. It's her legal acumen.

So maybe it is that Trump was interested in the way she looked. I don't know. OK, Combo Nickel wrote on subreddit, we have to make them politically irrelevant, quoting me from last week. And they write the best phrasing of the current situation regarding Biden versus Trump that I've heard. This was a line from today's show. We cannot change their minds. They are immune to evidence. They are going to vote for Trump no matter what he does or says, no matter what arguments we make to the contrary, no matter how solid we have to unite behind imperfect Joe Biden or whoever the DNC sends in the unfortunate event of Biden's death.

We have to defeat as many of their radical leaders down ballot that we can as well. The only way to do that is to outvote them and cause them and their leaders to become politically irrelevant. That requires unity and teamwork, not petty squabbling and infighting. I'm presenting that without comment because I couldn't possibly say it better myself. We have a tremendous bonus show coming up for you today. Make sure you have access by being a member at join Pacman dot com. The bonus show where you want to make money. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad. Yeah, we make a little bit of money with the bonus show, but it is good fun for all. And that really angers Alex Jones.

You can sign up at join pacman dot com. You can use the coupon code. Save democracy 24. We'll see you then. Or I'll be back here with you on Monday.