The David Pakman Show - 4/22/24: Poll shows RFK backfire, Trump criminal trial begins

Episode Date: April 22, 2024

-- On the Show: -- Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is absolutely destroyed in a hearing by Dr. Timothy Snyder, an actual expert on Russia, Eastern Europe, and more -- Kristi Noem, the Republican Governor of South Dakota, agrees there should be no abortion exceptions for rape or incest during an unhinged CNN interview -- A new poll finds that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s presidential candidacy may hurt Donald Trump more than it hurts President Joe Biden -- One Trump juror in his first criminal trial is getting a lot of attention as a potential guaranteed not guilty vote, but that doesn't account for everything we know about them -- Viral reports of Donald Trump smoking out his lawyers with "putrid" flatulence during his criminal trial are based on shaky sourcing at this time -- The man who set himself on fire outside Donald Trump's first criminal trial has died -- Concerns about Donald Trump's drug use rise as he continues to fall asleep daily in court -- Tucker Carlson tells Joe Rogan that Darwinian evolution by natural selection is fake and has been debunked -- Voicemail caller attacks David for leasing cars -- On the Bonus Show: Interest in a re-do of the 2020 Presidential election reaches a new low, the Supreme Court will decide whether politicians can criminalize homelessness, the Trump campaign launches an effort to "fight voter fraud," much more... 🌱 Ounce of Hope: Get a THC Seltzer for just $5 at https://ounceofhope.com 👍 Use code PAKMAN for 10% off the Füm Journey Pack at https://tryfum.com/PAKMAN 🖥️ Malwarebytes: Get 50% OFF with code PAKMAN at https://malwarebytes.com/pakman ⚠️ Try Ground News and get 40% OFF the Vantage plan at https://ground.news/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 -- 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

. Welcome, everybody. Hope you had a nice weekend and that you did something interesting or relaxing, depending on what your situation was this weekend. I want to start with it today with a great example of what happens when arrogant, egotistical ignorance goes barreling head on towards actual expertize. And it is not ugly for the side of ignorance. Many of you have written to me about Dr. Timothy Snyder, a professor expert on Eastern Europe, expert on the Holocaust and extremism and Russia's political warfare and an expert in so

many areas. He testified before a House committee a few days ago, and Marjorie Taylor Greene, indeed, was part of that questioning. And Marjorie Taylor Greene did this thing she'd like to. It's sort of like a drive by talking points, whereas your time is expiring. You say a bunch of stuff that's not true and you don't give the witness an opportunity to weigh in. And fortunately, fortunately, Democratic Congressman Maxwell Frost provided Dr. Snyder with an opportunity to address the comments made by Marjorie Taylor Greene about how we're supposedly funding Nazis in Ukraine. This is one of the big right wing talking points against funding for Ukraine.

And remember, by funding, we mean mostly old equipment that we give them, which then means that American military contractors get contracts for new equipment to replace the equipment we gave. And it keeps jobs here and money here. Not a defender of the military industrial complex, but understand what we mean when we say funding for Ukraine. Marjorie Taylor Greene and others talk about, oh, we're funding Nazis in Ukraine. Dr. Timothy Snyder here, an actual expert in this issue going right at her. And it is a beautiful thing to see. So when you want to talk about misinformation,

Mr. Snyder, you might actually look a little closer to American media if you don't like what they're saying. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. Mr. Chairman, does he have the opportunity to respond to the gentlelady? Sure. I didn't ask him a question. You asked multiple questions. I did not ask him a question. You certainly you said did you see the time is expired gentle lady's time's expired chair now recognizes mr frost from florida thank you mr chairman before i get into it it's interesting to hear my colleague just now talk about disavowing white supremacists when in 2022 you she spoke at an event led by white supremacists and white nationalist nick fuentes. And when asked about it, doubled down on it and said, we're going to focus on people, not labels. So get out of here with that damn hypocrisy.

And Dr. Snyder, I'm going to give you some time to respond. Go ahead. Here we go. First of all, I'd like to thank the representative from Georgia by making clear with her comments and with her person that any discussion of political warfare has to include Russia, Ukraine, and America. She's just demonstrated that point, I think, very powerfully. On the question of Nazis, I've written two books as a historian

about Nazis and the Holocaust. On the question of Ukrainian nationalism, I am the leading scholar of that subject in North America, and I've been writing about it for 20 years. If the chamber is interested in the degree of far-right participation in Ukrainian politics, you can be assured that no far-right party has ever crossed 3% in a Ukrainian election. So of course, there are bad people in every country, but by any comparative standard is a very small phenomenon. In Russia, on the other hand, the army includes openly Nazi formations, such as Udushik. The government itself is fascist in character, and it is carrying out a war which includes deportation of children by the tens of thousands, the open intention of destroying a state as well as mass torture.

So if we're looking for fascism and if there is anyone who is sincerely concerned about halting fascism or racism, you would wish to halt Russia. I don't know that Marjorie Taylor Greene is genuinely concerned with hurting Nazis and halting fascism. Marjorie Taylor Greene was worried about Jewish space lasers and Marjorie Taylor Greene went to a conference organized by white nationalist Nick Fuentes and on and on and on. She got destroyed here by an actual expert. But does she even realize it?

Do her followers even realize it? Do her followers even realize it? And remember that to a great degree, the MAGA right has become has taken this attitude where an expert like a historian, Dr. Timothy Snyder, it's his opinion against Marjorie Taylor Greene's. And sometimes Marjorie Taylor Greene may be right or no more if it's convenient. These, by the way, folks like Dr. Timothy Snyder, these are the sorts of experts I want to see informing members of Congress about history and about what's taking place. And as he points out, there is overt Nazism and fascism in Russia. And on the other hand, no far right party has ever gotten more than three percent in Ukraine. So funding Nazis, there are bad people in every country, as he says. But what are you talking about? And it doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter to Marjorie Taylor Greene, because for her it's about narrative and it's about story and political factions. And right now, the way the political factions are aligned, it's Trump, MAGA, Marjorie Taylor Greene types aligned with Putin against Ukraine. That's the way it is. And it's what they've chosen for themselves. We continue to get more of these extreme ideological right wingers on the record, taking what should be suicidal positions when it comes to women's rights, reproductive health and abortion. This is all coming in the wake of Arizona putting in force an 1864 abortion law that now is activated like yeast in a cooking recipe.

It is active now because of the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade. Thanks to the three Supreme Court justices that Donald Trump got to nominate because Hillary Clinton lost to him in 2016. It's important to remember that arc income. South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, who says, no, there shouldn't be exceptions for rape. There shouldn't be exceptions for incest when it comes to abortion, because then you are adding a second tragedy to a first tragedy. This is not a position that the vast majority of this country agrees with.

But Kristi Noem is sticking with it. Take a listen to this after what happened in Arizona when civil rights era law came back and is now the law of the land there, the former president, Donald Trump, said that that state law goes too far. The state, the law in your state is similar. It's an abortion ban, including areas where a woman is raped or in times of incest. So do you believe that this law in your state goes too far? Just as you said about Arizona, are you with him on that or do you think that he's wrong? Speaker 4 You know, it's interesting because the law in my state was passed decades before I ever became

governor. It was a trigger law that said when Roe v. Wade became overturned, that this would be the law that would go into place. So let me pause it right here. This is all. But so so she starts with I had nothing to do with the law. It was a trigger law. Law was in place before Roe v. Wade happened to be overturned during my governorship. But the law that was triggered in place had nothing to do with me.

So first she's distancing. But then because now MAGA Trump is always want to have it more ways, have it both ways. She then also says, well, yeah, but we don't want more tragedy. Speaker 4 So that may be a topic that will continue to be discussed in South Dakota. Our law today allows an exception to save the life of the mother. But the people in South Dakota will decide what their laws look like. Speaker 1 What do you think it should look like? Speaker 4 I can have an opinion and I can I can weigh forward and and I can look at the science and what we've learned about babies in the womb and believe that we should protect life.

But I think that our law today is what South Dakota wants and they'll continue to have that debate and I'll continue to follow through on my role, which is to make sure the will of the people is enforced. Do you think there should be exceptions for rape and incest, for example? And I think that every state's going to look different. What do you think? for rape and incest, for example. And I think that every state is going to look different. That's what's different, Dana, is that I've constantly looked and we rely in South Dakota on the fact that I'm pro-life and we have a law that says that there is an exception for the life of the mother. And I just don't believe a tragedy should perpetuate another tragedy. I believe in taking care of mothers that are in a crisis situation and that we do you. And what about when you force them to birth their rapist child and then you don't want larger child tax credits and you don't want to provide

government funded pre-K? What up until what point do you want to take care of people? Should be walking alongside them, giving them all the information and the best information they can make before they have to be put in a situation where an abortion is the only option that they have. So I'll continue to do that and love mothers and families through these situations, recognizing that that they are often challenging and scary. And many times they're feeling very alone. And in South Dakota, I hope that that's never our story.

The question, of course, is whether the Republican Party, to the extent that Kristi Noem is a representative of that party and there are people who disagree, does the Republican Party want to force women and girls to have their rapists child, including when the rapist may be a family member? And what Kristi Noem is saying is, yes, unless there is a question of the life of the mother, the mother's health, then the answer is yes, you should not have access to an abortion. Now she'll couch it in flowery language. But we don't want women to feel alone. They shouldn't be alone. OK, fine. They shouldn't be alone. Great. And it shouldn't ever get to the point where abortion is their only option.

All right. That it sounds great to me. It's it's better to have more options. That's what it means to be pro choice. You have options and abortion is one of those options. This is disgusting stuff. And every single one of them deserves to lose. I don't actually think Kristi herself is on the ballot in November, although she may be. I don't keep up with South Carolina politics.

I'm sorry, South Dakota politics, that is. But every single one of those who advocates for this and is on the ballot in November does deserve to lose. And we have to make it happen. It is really important to couch what I'm about to tell you with the disclaimer that this is just one new poll. But there is a new poll that finds that the candidacy of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for the presidency of the United States hurts Donald Trump more than it hurts Joe Biden. Now, this makes sense, but it is not the case that all of the polls suggest this. So let's start with what's new and then we'll go back to what we've already been talking about.

NBC News reports RFK candidacy hurts Trump more than Biden. NBC News poll finds the finding, which contrasts with a number of other national polls, comes amid concerted Democratic efforts to prevent Kennedy from harming Biden's campaign. And indeed, if you look at this race, you find that Trump leads Biden by two in a head to head matchup. But when you add the third party candidates, Biden is the one with a two point advantage. So essentially, this is one poll which finds a four point swing.

It goes from Trump plus two head to head to Biden plus two when you include Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Jill Stein, Cornel West, as well as those who who aren't sure it goes in Biden's favor. It is really critical to understand that not every single poll shows this. Some polls actually show the opposite and they show that the introduction of the third party candidates hurts Biden and helps Donald Trump. But the good news, if we want to find some definitive good news here, is that over time, the degree to which adding Robert F. Kennedy to the ballot hurts Biden is diminishing even in the polls where it does seem to hurt him.

So we'll look at a couple of other examples here. And what you find is, for example, in the recent Emerson College poll, Trump gains one point when you include third party candidates. There were polls two months ago where Trump was gaining four or five points where you introduced third party candidates. There were polls two months ago where Trump was gaining four or five points where you introduced third party candidates. So it still helps Trump in the Emerson poll to include third party candidates, but not by as much as it was several months ago. The Echelon Insights poll, the Echelon Insights poll helps Trump by two.

When you add the third party candidates, When you look at the latest New York Times Siena poll, you find that it has no effect with or without the third party candidates. It's Trump plus one. So one poll now says RFK hurts Trump. Most of the other polls suggest that it's either flat or maybe helps Trump a tiny bit. But the important takeaways are, number one, it should be the case if people actually understood the role and the positioning of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s presidential race. It should be the case that when you add Kennedy, it hurts Trump. And what I mean by that is that RF Kennedy Jr. at this point financially is being boosted almost exclusively by right wing voices funded by major right wingers who don't like what it is that Trump is bringing to the table. And understandably so

much of the rhetoric against the deep state claiming to be anti establishment, but in a very particular and narrow way, this really mirrors Donald Trump. And functionally, even though Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is from a well-known Democratic family, the Kennedys, even though most of his life he has been what we would nominally describe as a Democrat. The reality is, if people understood what his candidacy represented, he should be siphoning off votes from Trump and not from Joe Biden. The problem seems to be partially the identification of Democratic politics with the Kennedy last name and partially a moment in time where you have a slice of historically Democratic voters, left leaning voters who are angry with Joe Biden for a number of different reasons, either over Israel, Gaza or for the failure to be as left as they believe that he should or could be. And so it does very much have the potential to hurt Joe Biden. What I hope continues to happen is that as left leaning, Democratic leaning voters realize

what's at stake here and that a vote for RFK Jr. is effectively a vote for Donald Trump. The degree to which RFK is pulling votes from Biden rather than Trump is going to slim, slim, slim, slim down and hopefully get us to the point where he does hurt Trump more than Joe Biden. That would be by November. We're in mid to late April. farm that ships CBD and psychoactive THC products to your door anywhere in the US. This is federally legal. THC, a THC Delta eight and nine. They have edibles.

And now you can check out the brand new drink from Ounce of Hope for twenty twenty four. The very high five milligram THC seltzer. It's the only 16 ounce THC seltzer on the market. It's only five bucks, a price no one can beat at their cannabis farm in Memphis. Ounce of Hope sustainably raises fish to feed local homeless people. I've always thought it's a really cool operation. Besides the delicious seltzer, they have gummies, chocolate, rice, crispy treats, caramels, topicals, oils, soft gels, you name it. Ounce of Hope grows, extracts and formulates all of these world class products in-house so that you can trust the safety and quality of every product that arrives at your door. So whether you're

looking for a little help sleeping at night, something for aches and pains, a way to unwind on the weekend, Ounce of Hope can help you out if you are over 21. And right now you can pick up their very high five milligram THC seltzers for five bucks each at ounce of hope dot com. No one can beat that price. And aside from their drinks, you'll get 20 percent off everything else when you use the code Pacman. That's ounce of hope dot com. Pick up one of their THC seltzers for just five bucks. Use the code Pacman to get 20 percent off everything else. The info is in the podcast notes. Breaking a deeply ingrained habit is one of the toughest things to do.

Our sponsor, Fume, can make it easier. Not everything in a bad habit is wrong. So instead of a drastic, uncomfortable change, remove the bad from the habit. And that's, quite frankly, what fume helps you do. Fume is an innovative, award winning device that delivers flavored air. That's it. There's no vapor. There's no nicotine, no electronics.

It's just delicious flavored air delivered by the cylindrical fume device that fits in the palm of your hand. It comes in tasty, refillable flavors like raspberry, lemon, orange, vanilla, grapefruit, crisp mint. The fume device goes in your pocket. You can carry it around. It has movable parts and magnets. So if you're fidgeting or want to, it's great for that. And it's just a useful thing to break bad habits. And it provides that perfectly satisfying hand to mouth mechanic that many people love. Don't judge fume until you've tried it. They have helped countless people make positive changes and you could be next. Head over to try fume dot com and use code Pacman to save 10 percent when you get the journey pack, which comes with the device and several

flavors to try. That's try FUM dot com slash Pacman. Use the code Pacman for 10 percent off the journey pack. The info is in the podcast notes. The David Pakman show is made possible by you. We are an audience supported program and we have something called membership, which provides great perks and also is the most direct way to support the work that we do. If you're hearing this message right now, you're not getting the full David Pakman show experience, which includes commercial free versions of the show, as well as an extra show every single day called The Bonus Show. I invite you to sign up at join Pakman dot com. You can also support the show by making sure you're subscribed on YouTube at YouTube dot

com slash the David Pakman show and check out David Pakman dot com slash book for my trilogy of children's books, including the most recent one. Think like a voter. What a perfect year for a book like Think Like a Voter. Many of you wrote to me over the weekend and you said, David, juror number two in Donald Trump's criminal trial is going to acquit Donald Trump. You have to see what's going on.

There is a juror who there is no way is going to actually hear the evidence in the Trump case and potentially even vote to convict. We've got to figure out what's going on. Well, let's talk about it. Indeed, we have seen jury selection completed in Donald Trump's first of four criminal trials. That trial starts today in New York City. Twelve jurors and six alternates have been chosen. And we know a little bit about the media diets of these jurors. And let me tell you what is a point of concern to many of you. I'm going to put up on the screen the answers for the jurors in terms of where do they get their news. There is one particular juror, juror number two. Of course,

we don't know these people's names and we shouldn't. And I understand wanting to be as anonymous as possible, given what they are up against here. Juror number two has been marked down as getting their news from Truth Social and from X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. If you look at every other juror, there are no other jurors who cited Truth Social and X as their sources of news. And indeed, on the juror questionnaire data that was published by The New York Times, it shows only Truth Social, the platform owned by Donald Trump and X, the platform now owned by Elon Musk and dramatically radicalized by his ownership. Those are the only two only two news sources for this individual.

And many of you are immediately saying we have to be very suspicious about this juror. Has this juror really been vetted for objectivity by the prosecution. How is it that this individual is on the jury? There is no way in hell that someone who has one of two news sources as the defendant's own platform as where they are getting their news. There's no way in hell that that individual is going to even potentially vote to convict Donald Trump. And those concerns are reasonable. Now, at the same time, we have a tweet from Ben Kochman. Ben Kochman has been covering Trump's criminal trial for The New York Post. Now, The New York Post, it's owned by News Corporation. It's part of the same conglomerate that owns Fox News.

So you can say, well, do we trust Ben Kochman? I don't believe he's lying about this. Ben Kochman says that the concern over this juror is misleading. He put out an excretion on X where he said, quote, This is highly misleading. Here is exactly what juror number two said because he's an investment banker. Quote, I read basically everything he said. Quote, I am on Twitter. I follow truth social posts from Trump on Twitter.

I do follow Michael Cohen, Mueller. She wrote and some more. So I am of two minds here. Number one, if it were true that there was a juror who only got their news from Truth Social and X, I would have a very difficult time believing that that's an individual who is potentially even going to vote to convict Donald Trump, whose own Web site is one of their only news sources. On the other hand, if it is true that this individual said because I'm an investment banker, I read everything and that's everything from what Trump posts to Truth Social to what

Michael Cohen says on Tick Tock and what the podcast left leaning podcast Mueller, she wrote says and others, that is potentially less of a concern. I mean, listen, how would I answer? I don't know that I would necessarily be an unbiased juror, but I would like to say I could simply go and listen to the evidence and apply the law. My answer would also be I'm looking at truth social and I'm looking and I would say it's because of my role as a podcast host. I'm looking at truth social and I'm looking at X and I'm looking at Michael Cohen and

I'm looking at truth social and I'm looking at X and I'm looking at Michael Cohen and I'm looking at all this stuff. So depending on your interpretation of this, it is either extraordinarily concerning or it's misleading how it has been reported. Now, I also want to make one other point here. Imagine that there is a Trumpy right leaning truth social light on the jury. I do also think it's important not to understate the effect that 11 other people on the jury who would potentially be confident in Trump's guilt. What I mean by this is imagine that as the trial goes forward, the evidence that's presented in the testimony that is elicited leaves 11 of the 12 jurors, everybody but truth social guy. OK, the other 11 are completely convinced of of Trump's guilt.

It is true that one individual saying not guilty, not guilty, not guilty could hang the jury and lead to a mistrial. That's true. But social pressure is also very, very powerful, very, very powerful. And going one versus 11 for days or weeks, if everybody else in the room insists we're not deadlocked, we believe we can keep deliberating and we believe that we can actually convince this individual. There's a lot of people for whom it would be very tough to just stay completely unmoved with regard to their not guilty perspective. So I think a lot of people for whom it would be very tough to just stay completely unmoved with regard to their not guilty perspective. So I think a lot of the reports about the obvious nature of this individual being determined to vote not guilty may be overblown.

We will learn as this goes forward whether that individual indeed comes to be at odds with the rest of the jury or with the evidence that's presented. There is I can't even believe we're doing this. There is a viral video and increasingly viral reports that Donald Trump is smoking out his lawyers with putrid flatulence farts. We're talking about here in court during his criminal trial. And I am here to tell you, this remains unproven. It's extraordinarily titillating and salacious. It could explain a bunch of different things that are going on. It might be the real gag order in court, for lack of a better term. But as far as I can tell, the only source we really have for these claims about Trump's farting is Ben Mizellus from Midas Touch. Now, I don't know, Ben. I have met I met Brett Mizellus when

I was in D.C. meeting with the vice president. I don't know anything about his sources. I'm going to this story has gone gigaviral. I'm going to play for you the origins of the story. And remember that this is it. And it's the sources that Ben names here. So let's listen to what the claims are. Returning to the court proceedings as well. Maggie Haberman reports that Donald Trump continued to fall asleep during the proceedings as well. And, you know, what I'm hearing from my sources as well is that, you know, and I'm hearing from credible sources who know what's going on in the courtroom. And what I'm hearing is, is that, to take it for what it's worth, but that Donald Trump is actually farting in the courtroom, and that it's very stinky around him. It's a putrid odor in the courtroom and that Trump's lawyers are like repulsed by the

scent and the smell. And I'm not just saying that to be like, oh, funny, funny. I'm actually, you know, we have good sources there. And I'm hearing it from actual credible people that as he's kind of falling asleep, he is actually passing gas and that his lawyers are really struggling with the smell. I love that line that the lawyers, this is really becoming a challenge for the lawyers in the courtroom. I think you'll actually start to hear more of that. But again, from real credible sources, now take it for what it's worth. They may be going off the record. I mean, on background and telling me that because of, you know, it's the Midas may be going off the record. I mean, on background and telling me that because of, you know, it's the Midas touch and they, you know, they think that we want to hear

that. So you could judge it how you want to judge it. Yeah. But real credible people who are there saying that it's putrid. It's absolutely putrid in the courtroom. OK, so importantly, you know, if you try to back this all up and figure out the sources, what you get to is just Ben mentioning he has sources. And if you look at Snopes, Snopes says that it remains unproven. There is no evidence at this time, certainly not from any source that can be named. And they say that this is unproven. Now, of course, it's totally plausible that Trump is flatulent in court. We don't really know. It's all pretty

suspect. What I will tell you is that as Donald Trump continues to sleep in court, there are questions about sedatives in the sense of how could he be so relaxed in such a setting other than being a total sociopath who thinks they can't touch him? How could he be so relaxed that he is falling asleep? And it's sort of like, you know, maybe it's that same sedation that's allowing flatulence to leak on uncontrolled. But we're going to get into the drug stuff a little bit later. But as of right now, I can't believe how many folks in the audience interested in the Trump flatulence story. It is unproven as of this time. And maybe today, as court gets going and initial testimony takes place, we'll see what the putridity is that a word of the putridity surrounding Trump remains.

So we'll take a very quick break. We will talk about the self-immolation outside of Trump's trial. I mean, it is wild what is going on. We will talk about a number of other things. So stay with us and make sure you're subscribed at YouTube dot com slash the David Pakman show. They're accidentally downloading a virus and it costs time, money, maybe your personal files. And what I've used for years to keep my devices safe from malware is malware bites. I've been using this for years and years before they ever became a sponsor. And it's because malware bites is just the standard. It gets great scores from the independent cybersecurity labs.

It's almost always the top choice from consumer tech publications. CNET, for example, just declared Malwarebytes the best malware removal service of twenty twenty four. Malwarebytes expertise and dedication to cybersecurity excellence just sets them apart from the other antivirus companies. They catch all kinds of threats that antiviruses often don't. You get comprehensive real time protection against a huge variety of online threats, and it will detect and remove existing malware already on your devices as well. And now you can get the identity theft protection bundle to protect your entire

family's personal information with live monitoring alerts, recovery assistance and up to a million The David Pakman Show David Pak s dot com slash Pacman to get half off your subscription. The link is in the podcast notes. A man set himself on fire just outside the courthouse where Donald Trump's first of four criminal trials is taking place. This was this took place while CNN was live from the courthouse. We'll get to that video in a moment. The individual has now died from his injuries, as is being reported here by the Associated Press.

A very sad situation. There were, of course, radical beliefs and conspiracy theories that were tracked down to this guy. And it also is very clearly indicative of mental illness. I said this after the guy that set himself on fire after related to Israel and Gaza. And some people in the audience were mad at me saying, no, there's a long history of self-immolation for political protests. OK, the guy seemed deeply, deeply, severely mentally ill and I would argue accomplished nothing for the cause. No one is even talking about it anymore other than me and passing now in contact in the context of another guy self-immolating. So I think all of

these incidents accomplish nothing and are indicative of pretty severe mental illness. Now, here is live coverage from CNN as this was going on. The reporter, Laura Coates, initially thinking it was a mass shooting that was taking place. It wasn't. Take a listen to this and just wild to see and hear this. Oh, what do you say? We also are seeing an active shooter. An active shooter is in the park outside the court. We have a man who is he has set fire to himself. A man has emblazoned himself outside of the courthouse just now. Our cameras are turning right now. A man has now lit himself on fire outside of the courthouse in Manhattan where we are waiting a history to be made. A full jury panel is gone. We are watching a man who was fully emblazoned in the front of the courthouse today. We

are watching multiple fires breaking out around his body and person. We have seen an arm that has been visible that has been engulfed in total flames. There is chaos that is happening. People are wondering right now if people are in danger. I'm looking across the courtyard. There is a that is happening. People are wondering right now if people are in danger. I'm looking across the court, across the courtyard. There is a man racing to his aid. There is codes coming off to try to put out the fire. We have members of security details. NYPD is rushing to the scene.

They are trying to come out. Officers are on the scene. A fire extinguisher is right now present being put on this man to try to put out. People are climbing over barricades to try to separate the public, to put out the flame on this man to try to put out people are climbing over barricades to try to separate the public to put out the flame on this man. So I think you get the gist of what was going on. And then ultimately we got updates from NYPD and quite quite a tragedy, quite frankly. So that the male that's involved in this incident, his name is going to be Maxwell as a real old.

Right. He's a male. He's born in 1987. His driver's license indicates that he's from St. Augustine, Florida. What we know from speaking to other witnesses and family members is that he arrived in New York sometime earlier in the week. We have his car being in St. Augustine, Florida on the 13th. So anywhere between the 13th and today, he arrived. We spoke to family members today. They were unaware that he was even in New York as a fire commissioner stated he's a Cornell burn center right now in likely condition. So the accelerant that was used, it appears to be some

kind of alcohol based substance that's used for cleaning. All right. We also did hear from the chief of police, Jeffrey Madry, about the incident place. We observe a male walk into the park. He walks to the center of the park. When he's in the park, he starts shuffling around his clothes. He's opens up a book bag from the book bag. He takes numerous pieces of papers, pamphlets out. He throws the pamphlets throughout the park and then he pulls out a

canister and pours some kind of liquid on himself. A liquid we believe is an accelerant and he lights himself on fire. The male, he takes a couple of steps while he's on fire and then eventually falls onto a police barrier and falls down to the ground. He's on fire. Another area in the park where some of the accelerant spilt is also on fire. Civilians, court officers, members of the police department, they run into the park. They make efforts to put him out. They use their coats. They use fire extinguishers. Eventually, FDNY responds. We're able to put the mail, extinguish the fire. And from that point, we remove able to uh put the mail extinguish the fire and from that point we remove him to a cornell burn unit where right now he's there in a critical condition now again ultimately

the individual did die ultimately the individual did die uh and here's another comment uh from this press conference related to the subject matter that may have motivated this incident. The pamphlets seem to be propaganda based, almost like a conspiracy theory type of pamphlet and information in regards to Ponzi schemes and the fact that some of our local educational institutes are front for the mob. So a little bit of a conspiracy theory going on here. Rocco, chief. Also, apparently the guy had previously tried to sue the Clinton Global Initiative for what he believed was some kind of scam they were running or something along those lines. So

quite an incident. We eventually got back to Laura Coats from CNN, who once things settled down and the individual was brought to the hospital, explained what it was like to see this happening in real time. They're following to get more information as well. But I just have to tell you, I have been a student of history for a long time. I cannot under or overstate the emotional response of watching a human being engulfed in flames and to watch his body be lifted into on a gurney. Here we are knowing that we're here to document history, but to know about what has just taken place. Boris, Jessica, what an emotional and unbelievably disturbing moment

here in Manhattan. Now, I have to tell you whether this was someone setting themselves ablaze in support of Trump or setting themselves ablaze in an opposition to Trump. Either way, don't do this. First of all, Trump doesn't care either way. Either way, you will make no impression on Trump, whether you're supporting him or not. Trump doesn't. Trump cares only about himself. And of course, secondly, say what people want to say about the history of self-immolation as a legitimate form of protest. It is hard to see these incidents, this one, the one that took place several weeks ago as as anything other than severe mental illness, which, by the way, if the point is to bring attention to X or Y, I also simply don't believe that it is working.

Let's talk a little bit about the continued sleeping of the failed former President Donald Trump in court. Concerns about drug use and sedatives are now coming up. But I have to tell you, I don't really buy it. It doesn't really make sense to me. And I'll tell you why in a moment. The reports are numerous. Daily Beast reporting Sleepy Don doses off in court again. Apparently, a high stakes trial just isn't enough to keep the former president awake. So the suspicion now is what if Trump is being sedated? Now, let's talk through why would you sedate Trump at his criminal trial? The reason to sedate him seems obvious. Trump's normal personality leads to outbursts.

It leads to complaining and gesticulating and saying things that sometimes he's admonished for when he reacts to things said by potential jurors or whatever. So I understand if I was defending Donald Trump in court, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to maybe hit him with a little Benzo here or there so that he's more relaxed. Now, if you're relaxed enough, if you have enough benzos in your system, then it starts to become very easy to fall asleep. And so I understand, generically speaking, why you would sedate Trump or particularly with his

personality. The unproven reports about putrid flatulence emanating from Trump throughout the trial becoming something that his lawyers are struggling with theoretically could coincide with Trump being sedated with downers. And circumstantially, we've been saying, you know, if my freedom was on the line, my life as a free man was on the line based on these trials, I am going to be in a state of high cortisol, high adrenaline, not a state in which I would even potentially fall asleep. So could it be Trump's egomaniacal narcissism?

They can't they can't touch me. I'm going to get nothing out of this. I'm going to get no no punishment. Is he so confident that he can relax and fall asleep? Is he so tired, famously sleeping only four hours a night that that's why he's falling asleep? We don't know. But here's the real reason why I very much question the suspicion that Donald Trump is

being sedated. And that explains the sleeping, which is the moment he steps out of court. And even upon arrival, he seems triggered and high energy. And for the most part, unless you're getting, you know, when when they gave me the I.V. midazolam before my appendectomy, in 10 seconds, I was completely sedated and saying, I don't know, cut me open, whatever. I don't care. But that's IV medication on the assumption that what Trump would be taking, if anything, would be taken orally. And based on the half life of these drugs and the fact that they often take 20, 30, 40 minutes to come on. It's hard to imagine that Trump would be perfectly hopped up and rearing to go upon arrival in

court sedated during the proceedings and then again, high energy and hopped up and adrenaline and stress coming through the moment he steps out of court to talk to the cameras. It just doesn't fit. So I don't know, ultimately, if we're going to truly get a definitive answer about the falling asleep, the flatulence, the drugs that I just don't know. I have no idea. But the behavior overall now, one week after jury selection started and with the trial getting going, the falling asleep, the reports of flatulence, the things that Trump is saying

afterwards and gesticulating even. And remember, remember last week there were even assertions there was reporting that Trump was admonished by the judge because he was visibly and angrily reacting to things that a juror was saying. That's not really the behavior of a sedated individual. And then suddenly he's asleep. So I don't know. I also got emails from people saying, David, this is actually typical of the cognitive decline when folks in cognitive decline, particularly when you start to talk about dementia, Alzheimer's, when they get overstimulated and the environment becomes stressful. Sometimes they sort of shut down and fall asleep because of that in environments where it shouldn't happen. And a lot of people emailing me and saying, you know, my my my grandpa, for example, when we would go out to eat and his

dementia started to become more advanced and noticeable, he would be having a good time, but then suddenly get so overstimulated he would shut down and just fall asleep at the lunch table. So listen, there is so much speculation. There is no doubt that Trump's behavior is bizarre. It's unusual for the circumstances. It doesn't really make sense in a lot of ways. But we're talking about a very strange and bizarre person. So we'll hopefully get an answer. You now know everything I know. You know, everything I've been thinking of. We'll find out more, maybe. And most interestingly, I'm curious about his behavior today in the first day of the trial, which is taking place as we are recording. So we'll follow

up on that tomorrow. Let's take a very quick break. And there are more things I want to talk about with you today. Today's sponsor, Ground News, is an app and website that quickly shows you how news is being covered across the political spectrum, adding context and making it easy to understand the polarizing events like the election season that we're in. If you're watching this on YouTube, Donald Trump and Joe Biden secured their party's nominations for a historic presidential rematch. So I'll be looking at Ground News's election page for minute to minute updates

on the issues that matter most and the blind spots in the left and right's election coverage. So, for example, check out the breakdown on why the GOP's Biden impeachment appears to be falling apart. Ground News found more than 20 articles published on this, but I can see it's a near total blind spot for people only following right leaning news. I wonder why. And looking over here, many of these articles come from reliable sources, with each giving me some new detail and reading their summary of this from each political viewpoint really just gets me up to speed in seconds on any issue. So make separating fact from noise easier this election by going to ground dot news slash Pacman. My viewers get 40 percent off their unlimited access vantage plan, making it just five dollars a month. That's ground dot

news slash Pacman for 40 percent off. The link is in the podcast notes. Last week, I interviewed a former Trump supporter, former Trump campaign worker who has realized he's has to vote for Joe Biden this time around. That's so much depends on Trump not becoming president. He must vote for Joe Biden this time around. And he said to us, Nathan did, that he used to go to Trump rallies. And one of the things that was stunning is that the people who now still go to Trump rallies could not be more different than Nathan, the former Trump voter who I interviewed last

week. And case in point, Donald Trump had a rally scheduled for this weekend in Wilmington, North Carolina. Now, the rally was ultimately canceled because of weather issues. It was an outdoor rally. And we'll get to that in a moment. But I'm going to hear now from some of the individuals still going to Trump rallies. And this will really let us compare and contrast the caliber of those Trump voters formerly who are capable of self-ref reflection and thinking to themselves, did I really do the right thing? Maybe it actually makes sense to do something different this

election. And those who are so bought into the cult that I believe they are completely beyond our reach. We start with a guy at the Trump rally in North Carolina who tells the interviewer from right side broadcasting that there is some reason why U.S. dollars are worthless. But Trump did something special. And there's some way this guy is going to be able to exchange his Trump dollars for gold when Trump is president. This is I mean, listen, this is not as severely mentally ill as the guy who set himself on fire outside the courtroom. Right. That we talked about earlier in the show. But this is pretty severe delusions. Take a listen to this.

Ukraine. Can you imagine if we had that money to help our own people? It's ridiculous. Those are Fed dollars. That's funny money. And Trump started he pushed along the quantum financial system. Right. You don't think it's tracking all that?

The good money, my fed dollars, they're good. Trump will honor that. We'll get it in gold. The rest of it, whatever went over, seize is gone. Right. This guy has good fed dollars, which Trump, when he returns to the throne. Oh, I'm sorry. The White House will honor an exchange for gold with this guy. But any other money that went overseas, which, by the way, it's mostly equipment that goes to Ukraine. I don't know how many times

these people have to be told it's mostly old equipment that's going to Ukraine and the money is staying here and going to American companies, which you think this guy would like. But anyway, that those dollars are going to be worthless. That's a pretty sick belief. How do you even potentially believe that that's going to happen? A number of young individuals, I will say, were interviewed at the Trump rally. They were asked, what do you love the most about Trump? That's always a risky question. With President Trump, what is it about him that you love so much? Like, why are you here today? Well, I like I like to hear when he talks because he ain't scared to say nothing. I like that about him. Yeah, you can say that again. Right. Trump's not scared to say things.

And famously, everybody else is really scared to say things like I'm scared to say things on my show. Joe Biden is very scared to say things. Nikki Haley was afraid to say things when her failed candidacy was still going on. That's a classic example of those meaningless comments where you really only get to the bottom of them. Listen, right side broadcasting is not going to get to the bottom of that comment. If you want to get to the if you want to expose this is the classic.

This would be like, you know, putty in the hands of a prepared interviewer, right? Yeah. Tell me who is afraid of saying certain things. Oh, maybe they'll name someone. And what is it that they are afraid to say that they actually believe this will break down? This will break down instantly under even the most basic, basic questioning. A woman was interviewed about Trump.

She seems extremely disoriented, extremely disoriented. Remember, these are the folks still willing to go to the Trump rallies. Last week, we interviewed a former Trump supporter who's figured out this is not the place where you want to be. This is not the guy you want to support. If I gave you anything, I'm just coming with my heart and my mind as far as, you know, our country, United States of America. Some girls said yesterday to me,

I don't want that stamp. It has a flag. Oh, I sat there and went, what girl? That's your country, right? She goes, well, I do love my country, but flowers are more happy right now. So that's where country kind of stands. Yeah, I got you. Well, and it pisses me off. Super clear. I mean, super, super clear. So listen, we've identified that when we hear from the former Trump supporters, they are often thoughtful. They are often able to reflect on themselves and their own actions. They're able to reexamine their beliefs. They're able to separate themselves from what the partisans around them are saying. They're not necessarily people we agree with on policy. In fact, mostly they're not.

But there is a substantively different mechanism at play when you compare those who can be deprogrammed and the cultists who in almost May of twenty twenty four after eight, nine years of this insanity are still showing up with their completely incoherent beliefs. Now a funny little note. Eventually Trump canceled the rally. All of these people waiting all day with the fetid porta potties out in the out in the elements.

And if Trump had rented an indoor venue, then they wouldn't have had this issue. But ultimately, Trump recorded a message from his airplane and it was a big letdown to everybody who was waiting for Trump to speak. Trump, your favorite president of all time, hopefully, as you can see, there's some very bad weather heading in and we're flying in in a few minutes. But they really would prefer that we not come in because it's a certain danger to all of this. Right. And we want to make sure that everybody is safe above all. As we know, Trump is deeply, deeply prioritizing people's safety in his entire life.

That's just the type of guy he is. And so they've asked us to ask people to. By the way, he tried to give Chris Christie covid, but OK, I'm sorry, Joe Biden, he gave Chris Christie COVID probably leave the site and seek shelter. And what we'll do is we'll make up for this very quickly at another time. Yeah, but we'll do it as quick as possible. I'm more devastated that this could happen. Yeah, but we want to keep everybody safe. It's the most important thing.

And we want everybody there to be 100 percent safe. There seems to be some thunder and lightning and it's a pretty big storm. So if you don't nothing a Sharpie couldn't fix right mind, I think we're going to have to just do a rain check. I'm so sad. I'm in North Carolina right now and waiting to go in. But they're saying the weather is really getting bad, really, really getting bad. So we have to rely on the weather service and some of the officials.

Funny how he didn't rely on the weather service nor the officials when it came to not being pleased with the path of a hurricane when he was president. With that, it's just like, no, that's wrong. Here's a Sharpie. Here's a new map. And I just want to thank you. I'm so sorry. Yeah, but we'll do it again. We'll do it bigger and better. And you have my you have my promise.

Same same location. Yeah. And thank you all very much. Thank you, everybody. God be with you. Thank you. There you go. So Trump canceling and, you know, maybe rent an actual enclosed venue, pay the bill for it instead of sticking your supporters all day with the porta potties in a field. Indoor plumbing. No one ever heard of indoor plumbing before the fake news media went woke. You know, that's for sure. Imagine standing around at a Trump rally all day only to hear a phone message minutes before Trump is supposed to be there saying, I'm not going.

The weather is no good. Truly a horrifying situation. Couldn't happen to nicer people. before Trump is supposed to be there saying, I'm not going. The weather's no good. Truly a horrifying situation. Couldn't happen to nicer people. Tucker Carlson confidently told podcaster Joe Rogan evolution has been debunked. Darwinian evolution by natural selection has been debunked. This is getting really bad. We have a couple of clips from this completely off the wall interview that Tucker Carlson did with Joe Rogan. We'll look at another one of them tomorrow. But today the topic is evolution. Let's listen to this. And there's so much stuff to go through here. I don't want to just play the whole clip and then give you a, you know, a wall of text.

Let's go through piece by piece all of the things Tucker says that are really just totally untrue. Cares about you. You're important to the people around you. If we don't think people are important, then what do we think is important? I guess that's what I'm saying. It's not necessarily that we don't think people are important, but if evolution is real and if there is this constant, I don't know. But it's it's it's visible. Like you can measure it in certain animals. You can measure adaptation. Yeah, but there's no evidence that. In fact, I think we've kind of given up on the idea of evolution.

The theory of evolution is articulated by Darwin. It's like kind of not true. OK. He says that Darwinian evolution is not true. Darwinian evolution has not been shown to be untrue. It's gotten more precise over time as we get new scientific evidence. Our knowledge of genetics has better defined how traits are inherited and selected. Modern evolutionary biology includes a whole bunch of different evidence, which we'll get

to. But Darwinian evolution has not been debunked. In what sense? Well, in the most basic sense, the idea that, you know, all life emerged from a single cell organism and over time and there would be a fossil record of that and there's not. There's not a fossil record of transitionary species like species that are adapting to its environment. There's tons of record of adaptation and you see it in your own life. I mean, I have a lot of dogs. I see adaptation and dogs, you know, through the shore litter to litter. But no, there's no evidence at all that none zero that, you know, people, you know, evolve

seamlessly from a single cell amoeba. No, there's not. Now the word seamlessly is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. So let's talk about a little and everything he's saying here is wrong. I mean, just everything is wrong. Modern evolutionary biology includes a whole bunch of different types of evidence. We have fossil records for a bunch of areas. We have genetic studies. All of it either confirms or extends Darwin's original ideas. And the concept of Darwinian evolution by natural selection is completely accepted in the scientific community. Now, he talks about, oh, there's we don't really have transitional species. We have

adaptation. And this is a classic from these folks. They love to say that we have no evidence of transitional species, meaning intermediate forms between every single set of species. And usually when someone like Tucker says this, people who don't think this stuff through, though, yeah, you know, we really don't like where is the halfway mark between the amoeba and the tadpole or where is the halfway mark between the monkey and homo sapiens? But this is the wrong. This is not the argument that science says exists. Transitional fossils have characteristics that bridge distinct groups.

So for example, you've got I hope I pronounced this correctly, Archaeopteryx, which shows traits from reptiles and birds. And in a sense, it is transitory or transitional between older reptiles and birds with a common ancestor. The fossil record has a bunch of examples of this. So like fish to tetrapod or whale mammal, not every transitional species has been discovered. Not every single link has been made. There may not be a record of every single transition, but all of the evidence we have supports the broader evolutionary transitions that Darwinian

evolution claims. And then Tucker gets to we have no proof at all. We have no seamless proof that goes from a single celled organism to Homo sapiens. It is true that the fossil record from the earliest single celled organisms is challenging because of the massive timescales and how fragile microscopic life is. But when you look at how universal DNA and RNA are in all living organisms, you get evidence of that common origin. And the molecular biology of even the simplest organisms shows shared genetic code, shared fundamental processes, and all of it points to a single common ancestor. Tucker is focusing on he doesn't believe we have all the evidence you could hypothetically have, but all the evidence we have points in the same direction.

And there is no evidence that has dispositive dispositively disproven any of this stuff. Let's listen to a little more. Not there's no chain in the fossil record of that at all. And that's why you don't actually hear people. You hear them make reference to evolution because the theory of adaptation is clearly obviously true. OK, but Darwin's theories totally. And that's why it's still a theory almost 200 years later. OK, so now that's just this is the when they don't understand the definition of theory in a scientific context, that's when you know it's really off the rails because there are two meanings to theory. There is what we mean by science, what we mean

in science by a theory, which is this is the accepted consensus, best explanation based on all of the data and the evaluation of multiple hypotheses. That's what we mean by theory. Now, if you show up to your local bar and you say to the guy who sidles up next to you, hey, I've got a theory about what the Fed is really up to. You want to hear it. That's a colloquial use of the term theory. And of course, Tucker is falling for like the lowest, lowest low on this theory. Just means it's an idea.

Now, in science, it means something else. No, no, we've not found that at all. And I can't even guess. I mean, I have my own theories on it, but they're not proven. And of course, his theories are just hypotheses. It's not that his theories are tantamount to the theory of evolution, but that's what he wants the viewers to think. What are your theories? God created people, you know, distinctly and animals. I mean, I think that's like I think what every person on Earth thought until the mid 19th century, actually. Right.

But it's not a new one. Isn't it so funny that people used to think other things until we got more information? Yeah, they they didn't have computers. They didn't have a general understanding that we have today of the process. So anyway, you guys get it. Total nonsense. You know, the the chain of evolution is not sequential. We're talking about a branching tree with common ancestors.

And I don't know. You would think that someone like Tucker, I mean, he's not stupid, but he also seems to be claiming to believe things that are quite dumb. You would think that he would know a lot of these things. So I don't know if he's just playing a character. I genuinely don't know. We have a voicemail number. That number is two one nine two.

David P. Here's someone who doesn't think it's smart for me to lease vehicles. David, you lease your cars. You're like selling fancy fine wines on your show and you've got like a billion sponsors and like a million viewers. You lease your car. David, what's the matter with you? Yeah. So listen, I don't think leasing is right for everybody. But for me, especially with electric vehicles where the technology is changing so quickly and the cars are losing value, the lease is a great thing for me. Zero dollars in maintenance the entire time. You know, you're going to spend zero time in the shop because the car is brand new.

Major tax advantage for business owners, because unlike with buying a vehicle where the process for taking a deduction is based on, well, is the car over under six thousand pounds and then there's limits on how much you can take in depreciation, all these different things. Leasing a car through a business is like renting a car on a business trip. It's fully deductible. Assuming you're doing it the right way. You always have the latest technology with electric vehicles. The technology is advancing so quickly. The prices are coming down quickly as well. I don't want to worry about depreciation when the next EVs come out, which has happened, by the way, during my current lease and my Tesla dumps in price. I don't want to deal with that and then having to figure out what do I

do with a dramatically depreciated vehicle? I want to be able to just turn it in, take my price. I don't want to deal with that and then having to figure out what do I do with a dramatically depreciated vehicle? I want to be able to just turn it in, take my car. I'll see you later. So without a doubt, it is cheaper to keep a car a really, really long time, drive it into the ground, although your maintenance and repairs are going to start increasing over time. For people in my situation and business owners like me. It is very, very common that leasing provides appealing advantages.

And the great thing about it is the caller doesn't have to do the same thing that I do. The caller can do whatever they want and I'll do whatever I want. We have a great bonus show coming up for you today. Sign up at join Pacman dot com. Don't miss it. And if you don't have access to the bonus show, I'll be back with a new program tomorrow.