The David Pakman Show - 9/15/23: State tries taking Trump off ballot, Chris Christie to confront Trump

Episode Date: September 15, 2023

-- On the Show: -- A Trump-appointed judge rules against Trump by requiring him and his lawyers to only review classified documents in a secure location -- A progressive group sues to kick Donald Trump off the ballot in Minnesota, citing the 14th Amendment's insurrection clause -- 2024 Republican presidential candidate Chris Christie says he plans to find and confront Donald Trump on the campaign trail -- Caller asks if the Biden impeachment inquiry will backfire on Republicans -- Caller wonders if Kevin McCarthy will lose the speakership over the Biden impeachment inquiry -- Caller discusses social democracy and capitalism -- Caller asks if Vivek Ramaswamy being Indian and Hindu will hurt his chances in the Republican primary -- Caller talks about the "Think Like a Detective" book sales -- Caller wonders why the left is generally against nuclear power -- The Friday Feedback segment -- On the Bonus Show: Trump confesses to crimes in Megyn Kelly interview, Alex Jones spending $93K a month despite claiming bankruptcy, GOP mad at Tuberville for blocking military promotions, and much more... 🔊 Babbel: Get 55% off your subscription at https://babbel.com/pakman 🩳 SHEATH Underwear: Code PAKMAN for 20% OFF at https://sheathunderwear.com/pakman -- Become a Supporter: http://www.davidpakman.com/membership -- Subscribe on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/thedavidpakmanshow -- Subscribe to Pakman Live: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanlive -- 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

. Trump appointed Judge Eileen Cannon down in the Florida federal case has ruled against Donald Trump in his criminal case. How should we interpret this? Some are saying this is proof that she can be trusted. Others saying this is a relatively obvious decision. She's doing this in order to stay on the case and to be in a position to later give Trump favorable rulings.

Well, let's see what's going on. Reuters reports Trump must review classified documents, case evidence in secure location, Judge says. Former US President Donald Trump and his lawyers may only review classified evidence in a secure place as he prepares for a criminal trial over his handling of secret documents. After he left office in twenty twenty one, A judge ruled Wednesday. Trump has been charged along with AIDS for illegally storing troves of classified documents in his residence and lying to investigators that we knew Trump was opposed to strict security protocols for the classified

evidence as inconvenient, saying he and his lawyer should be able to look at the evidence at his home in Mar-a-Lago. Wednesday's ruling by District Judge Eileen Cannon is a win for prosecutors who said it would be inappropriate for Trump to review classified documents at the very location where he is accused of illegally and haphazardly storing them. Think about that. What Trump wants is to review evidence in the case about him illegally having classified documents at Mar-a-Lago by reviewing those documents at Mar-a-Lago where he illegally had them to begin with. It's like, hey, we'd like to bring them back to Mar-a-Lago once again. The judge rightly denying that.

Now, there are some media outlets like the Daily Beast praising this as if it is some kind of major victory. Trumpy judge actually rules against Trump in Mar-a-Lago case for once. So here's my thought about this right now. The fact that Eileen Cannon ruled in this way in this particular narrow matter does not mean that our concerns about Judge Cannon's involvement in this case are over. It does mean that Trump and his attorneys are really asking for nonsense. And it comes down to this was such an obvious decision. And yet it still took her five weeks to make the decision. Some are very concerned about this,

because in fact, this is such an obviously ridiculous request. Let us review the evidence in question, which I had illegally at the place where I had it illegally. It's such an obvious decision for Judge Cannon that the fact that it took five weeks is actually more of a concern. And so the question mark now is what is the point of all this? And is the idea here that Eileen Cannon recognizes she doesn't want to get kicked off this case? She recognizes that there is scrutiny about what she's doing because she is a known Trump appointee. And so here she's not going to throw Trump a bone because it would be too obvious and egregious and brazen.

But she's going to save that for the future for something that potentially would be much more useful to Donald Trump. We don't really know the answer to that yet. Three important elements that Judge Cannon made clear in the protective order around the documents. Number one, the documents are secret. And if you even discuss the documents, I will potentially put you in jail. Will she act on it? That's a different story, but at least that's their number two. The documents belong to the government, period. That's it. It's not we have them now during the trial, but they are yours.

These are the government's documents. And then number three, they must be looked at in a certified skiff under supervision, not bringing them back to Mar-a-Lago. All eminently reasonable, arguably obvious decisions. But still, it is a decision made against Trump's requests and Trump's lawyers. Do we think this inspires some confidence in Judge Cannon or do we think she's biding her time before she can do something to really help Trump? I don't know the answer to that. Let me know what you think. Yet another state is suing to block the failed former President Donald Trump, the guy who's been impeached twice, indicted four times and found to be a civilly

liable rapist. That's the guy I'm talking about. Yet another state is suing to try to keep him off of the ballot in twenty twenty four. This is all on the basis of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which we've discussed now many times. I told you that there is a lawsuit in South Florida saying Trump incited an insurrection and provided aid and comfort to those who did. And thus he is ineligible to run for president. He is ineligible to hold public office in New Hampshire.

There is a movement to look at doing the same thing and saying Trump can't be president again. And then now in Minnesota, Axios reports Trump faces 14th Amendment lawsuit in Minnesota. A liberal group has filed a lawsuit seeking to bar Trump from the ballot, citing the 14th Amendment stipulation on engaging in an insurrection. It's the second such lawsuit in less than a month as liberal groups and state election officials want to use that 14th Amendment to block Trump's bid. The lawsuit says, quote, He is disqualified from holding the presidency or any other office under the United States unless and until Congress provides him relief. The third section of the 14th Amendment says no one should hold office in the US if they

have, quote, engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the US or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. I believe it is obvious that Donald Trump did both of those things. But I really want to cut to the chase and the bottom line on these lawsuits because so many of you have emailed me with the exact same question, very astutely realizing, you know, David, if New Hampshire bans Trump from the ballot, if Minnesota bans Trump from the ballot, if Connecticut and New York and Massachusetts and Vermont and California, if they all ban Trump from the ballot, those

aren't states Trump was going to win anyway. Does it really do anything other than maybe firing up Trump voters in states that are more 50 50 swing states? And could this actually backfire by making voters in Arizona say, hey, you know what? I wasn't going to vote, but because they're blocking Trump and trying to decide for me instead of letting me decide, I'm going to go out and vote Trump in Arizona and maybe Arizona would have gone to Biden. But instead it goes to Trump.

I believe that is a very real risk. I there are sometimes conflicting beliefs that we have to hold simultaneously. On the one hand, it is obvious that Trump should not be eligible to hold public office again. He did incite an insurrection and he did provide aid and comfort to those who participated by saying he loves them. They're great. They're right to be there.

But it's time to go home that he might look at pardoning many of them. He did that. He violated the 14th Amendment. There is no question about it. At the same time, unless a bunch of red state and swing states would realistically consider barring Trump from running. This isn't going to change the outcome because these are for now, New Hampshire is more of a 50 50 state, although it's very few electoral votes. It's unlikely to make the difference right now. None of these lawsuits, even if they did succeed at keeping Trump off the ballot, would really change the electoral map and the fight for 270 electoral votes.

So I'm worried about that, but also think obviously Trump should not be allowed to run where the balance ultimately falls. certainly remains to be seen. Twenty twenty four Republican presidential candidate Chris Christie has a new idea. He is suggesting he is going to find and confront Trump on the campaign trail. If Trump won't debate and actually get on the stage and face questions and criticism from the former New Jersey governor, Chris Christie, who is the candidate most willing to criticize Trump on the campaign trail, if he won't do it, then maybe Chris Christie will go and find Donald Trump.

Here's Christie saying this the day before yesterday. Take a listen. We'll go find them. And how does that work? Watch me, Paul. You think I'm going to have a hard time finding Donald Trump? You think that over the course of the next couple of months, I'm not going to find them and confront them someplace? You've known me a long time. I was a prosecutor for seven years. It was my job to find people and confront them. So don't worry about it. I'll find them. You'll show up at an event and try to. I'm not going to tell you. I'll just make sure you're there, Paul. I'll make sure you're

there so you can cover it for all the good people in New Hampshire. Listen, this is a this is a damn good idea. I I am envisioning an incredible confrontation where Chris Christie just pops up and I don't even know what he says. I don't know what he does, but it sounds absolutely fascinating in practice. Would Chris Christie even be able to get close to Trump in such a scenario? I don't know the answer to that. Maybe even more importantly, in practice, would this really do anything for Chris Christie's campaign? I also don't know the answer to that. And that's an opportunity I also don't know the answer to that. And that's an opportunity to take a look at the latest polling data. This may come as a shock.

Trump is surging once again. Trump is now again above 56. He has not been above 56 since May 20th, May 25th. Trump is at the highest point in polling in months. Meanwhile, Ron DeSantis is down. Vivek Ramaswamy surge to seven has has diminished. Nikki Haley popped to six, but seems stuck there. Pence is stuck at five. And yet Chris Christie is stuck at three. So on a personal level, at an ideological level, do I want to see Trump have to react to what his opponents say to him in person? Of course, I would love to see that.

I think it would be absolutely fantastic. Do I think this is likely to happen? Chris Christie showing up and confronting Trump somewhere. I don't give it better than 50 50 odds. But maybe most importantly, at this point in time, can anything turn this around and make the 2024 Republican primary anything other than a Trump bloodbath? I don't know. Rachel Bitterkofer said to us, people start paying attention after Labor Day and especially November, December, January. We are after Labor Day and Trump's lead is only growing. So where is this going to go?

I am with every passing day that Trump's lead stays or increases. I am more and more skeptical that this is going anywhere other than Trump securing the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, maybe from jail, maybe from prison. Now, unlikely, but certainly from from the middle of running from one criminal trial to another. Give me your honest thought. Leave a comment. Send an email.

Does anyone have a shot other than Trump at that nomination? I want to hear from you. Make sure you're subscribed on YouTube. We've got a fantastic program for you today. We're actually going to record and archive this one rather than just deleting it the way we do with most of the shows. Speaker 1 It's the sticking, rubbing and chafing. It is not pleasant. That's why our sponsor, sheath underwear, has been a game changer for so many people. Sheath underwear is ergonomically designed with a pouch in the front. Keep everything comfortable and separate.

When you wear the sheath underwear, everything stays dry and cool. Instead of sticking together, you feel the air flowing. It's great. It's really something you have to try to understand. This has been my go to underwear for years, all year round, but especially when it's hot outside. The humidity is bonkers. They have plenty of different colors and styles, something for everybody and the sticking and

the readjusting experience underwear comfort like you have never felt before. Try she go to sheath underwear dot com slash Pacman and use the code Pacman for 20 percent off. That's S.H.E.A.T.H. Underwear dot com slash and use the code Pacman for 20 percent off. The info is in the podcast notes. OK, that seems like an error, so I'm going to redo it one more time. That's S.H.E.A.T.H.

Underwear dot com slash Pacman. Use the code Pacman for 20 percent off. The link is in the podcast notes. The David Pakman show continues to be supported by viewers and listeners who get a membership. You already know the right wing funds its media outlets and it's part of why they win. The left really should do the same. Doesn't have to be me, but if you like this show, you can get a membership at join Pacman dot com. You'll get the bonus show, the commercial free audio and video versions of the show, the David Pakman show at David Pakman dot com slash discord. It's been an insanely busy week from the standpoint of politics and happenings of all sorts. We will

start today with Stephen from Louisiana. Stephen from Louisiana, what's on your mind today? Hi, David, can you hear me? Yes, I can. Two things, David. Firstly, obviously, earlier this week. Speaker McCarthy initiated the inquiry for impeachment for President Biden. Yes. And typically – I know you've talked about it ad nauseum, as so has everybody else in news media. But typically, you have evidence, and then you bring the inquiry. And many right-wing lawmakers are arguing that in order to obtain any evidence, they need to initiate the inquiry. So it makes a lot of sense.

And by a lot, I mean none. But the question is, is do you think that this political stunt and all the virtue signaling and you know, what about ism? Do you think that this will hurt Republicans in 2024? I made the prediction earlier this week that this will hurt Kevin McCarthy in terms of his future general political aspirations. Whether it hurts Republicans in 2024 is going to depend on, number one, what comes of the inquiry and number two, how they spin it.

My prediction is they're not going to find you. Sometimes you have to just say, what's the simplest explanation? They've looked for years for this evidence against Joe Biden. They haven't been able to find it. What's the simplest explanation? The simplest explanation is the evidence doesn't exist because he didn't do the things they're accusing him of doing. If that is the case, then it will be a question of how do they spin it? Can they justify what they did? Not to the MAGA people that are bloodthirsty for an impeachment, but just like your average voter.

And if they can, well, then it'll mitigate the damage that it does. And if they can't, then there are likely to be voters that punish Republicans for having done that. On the other hand, obviously, if they find evidence against Joe Biden, move forward to impeachment, if the prevailing narrative becomes Biden did do the things he's accused of doing by Republicans currently without evidence, then it's not going to be damaging to them. But on the assumption that Biden simply didn't do these things, I believe the damage or not that it causes will depend on how Republicans spin that they just weren't able to find the evidence. Yeah, that makes sense.

That does. And so my second question, I'm not sure if you've seen it, but a piece written by David Ignatius earlier this week in The Washington Post opinion piece, he said that the Biden Harris ticket shouldn't run in 2024. Any thoughts on that? I saw that article opinion. President Biden should not run again in twenty twenty four. I mean, listen, there are two different questions here.

Question one is, do I understand why there is no Democratic primary? And the answer is, of course I do. There is never a primary Democratic or Republican when you have an incumbent president running for reelection because the party says this is our best shot at keeping someone from our party in the Oval Office. I don't like it. I would love for there to be a primary. I know why there isn't one. It's the same with Democrats and Republicans. Next question. Do I think it would be better for Democrats if Biden didn't run again and said I was a transitional candidate? we are now going to clear the stage and clear the path.

I care about outcomes. I don't want Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis or whoever from those lunatics to be president. So whatever will prevent that is what I am prioritizing. If Biden running is the best way to prevent that, then although I would like a next generation leader and someone to Biden's left, I say it's fine for Biden to run. If I became convinced that the best way to defeat Trump or DeSantis were by Biden stepping aside and letting someone younger, maybe Gavin Newsom, who knows, come forward, then I would support it.

I don't know because the polling has a lot of question marks around it. I don't know what's most likely to keep Trump out of power, but I would be fine with Biden saying, I'm stepping aside, let's have a primary, let's pick a new leader for the party. I'm totally fine with that ethically and morally and in principle. Speaker 4 Yeah, no, I feel the same way. I do appreciate you taking my call, David. All right. Steven from Louisiana, thank you so much for the call. Very much appreciate it.

Why don't we go next to Donovan from Texas? Donovan from Texas. Welcome to The David Pakman Show. Hello. Can you hear me? Yes, I can. Hello. You're on the air.

OK, OK. Hello? You're on the air. Democrats, Republicans to oust McCarthy from from the speakership because of all the drama that's been going on in the House lately. Yeah. You know, Matt Gaetz was on TV Tuesday night and he was talking about if McCarthy does this or that, I'll get him removed from the speakership or whatever. I just listen. Is it of course it's possible. Do I think that it's likely that there's going to be a concerted effort for mostly Democrats, plus a few Republicans to remove McCarthy from the speakership?

I really don't. I just don't see that as the likely. Event that will transpire between now and the November 2024 election. Of course, you're not wrong that mathematically, because the majority for Republicans is slim, it could happen. But I don't know. And to some degree, McCarthy, I think, is sealing his own political fate with the Biden impeachment inquiry and his general nonsense.

I think on some level, Democrats would be well suited to just let the guy keep going, because here's the thing. I don't think those few Republicans will join Democrats in removing McCarthy if it means a Democrat becomes speaker of the House, even though they don't have the majority. And so I think that it's not likely to actually come together. Speaker 4 well, or my thought was with Democrats joining, I'm backing like some very moderate Republican as well to. Just some moderates. Yeah, no, I get it. I mean, listen, it's completely possible.

My prediction is that it will not happen. That's the way I would. Yeah, well, I do agree with Democrats just letting McCarthy do this. But at some point, they there will be a point where they will have they will decide to to kick him out from from what he is doing, because there is a point where a line will be crossed. We will see. These are Republicans that often don't have any lines. So we'll see. But I appreciate it. Definitely. Thank you for I I appreciate for letting me on and wish a good day for you. All right.

Likewise, Donovan from Texas. Let's go to where do we go next? Oh, I don't know. It's so tough to say. What about Noah from Winnipeg? Noah, welcome to The David Pakman Show. What's on your mind today? Hi, David.

Can you hear me OK? Yes, I can. Wonderful. So a few days ago, you were talking about primary polling, and that reminded me of a thing that I'd heard about when the DNC decided to move, I think it was South Carolina ahead of Iowa and New Hampshire, that Iowa and New Hampshire might drop Biden from the ballot and that might lead to somebody like Robert Kennedy winning by default. Was that ever like a possibility or is it too far out to know by now so this is the idea that so which states because i don't think i saw it in the states you're talking about sorry if i'm mistaken my i think

it was new hampshire that okay perturbed by it that they they have like a state law that says their primary needs to be first. I don't know how that really interacts with the individual parties placing their primaries. But I remember hearing that if they don't go first, that they would, I don't know, do something different with their primary. And people were speculating that that might lead to Biden being dropped from the ballot. And I actually I this was discussed on Tuesday sort of indirectly between Sean Hannity and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during an interview on Fox News. But the context was Hannity wants RFK to run third party to punish Democrats because they're not treating him well.

Here's the thing. If Joe Biden. How can I say this? All of these different things and speculations and possibilities. If Joe Biden maintains that he wants to be reelected and he is alive, he's going to be the nominee. And so I think it's less interesting to think through these various possibilities than it is to really ask ourselves the question, what is the most likely way to prevent a Trump or DeSantis or some authoritarian lunatic presidency? That that's the primary goal, because that's really what it's coming down to.

And if it means Joe Biden willingly steps aside, as I said earlier, that's fine if it means what, whatever. But I think all of these scenarios that you're talking about, like it's not going to prevent Biden from being the nominee if that's what he wants. And so the focus really has to be denying Trump or DeSantis the presidency. It has to be our priority. Bernie said it. Many of us are saying it. Yeah, I don't doubt that the nomination is Biden's if he if he wants it. I just wasn't sure if like state parties might have the power to, I don't know, do something

on their own accord, I guess. You know, it's not clear to me that a state party has that power. If someone is legally able to be on the ballot, it's a it's a good question. I don't know the answer. It's a legal question and I'll investigate it. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you so much for the call. Noah from Winnipeg. Let's go next to Syed from London. Syed from London. Welcome to the David Pakman show. What is on your mind today? I'm curious. Oh, Syed, please don't be our first dropped call. And last chance for Syed from London.

Let's make it happen, please. All right, well, that is a shame. That is a shame. Why don't we go next to Tua from Milwaukee to a welcome back to the David Pakman show you've been on before, right? Yes, I have. How are you doing, David? Doing well.

OK, so I get to the question. So I just want to run something by you. What do you think about calling social capitalism like something like balanced capitalism? Because essentially you're just trying to figure out a way to balance between what. I believe what kind of industries have to have, as it should be and what it should be. Yeah, it's basically a branding question. I mean, it sounds like correct me if I'm wrong to you're basically talking about social democracy, right?

Well-regulated capitalism in the mode of northern Europe. And you're trying to think of what's the best name for it. Is that my understanding you correctly? Yeah, just just because now the writer has kind of given socialism such a negative connotation, you know, so I just yeah, maybe the right to lash every brand. I mean, I do think that it is useful when right wingers say, oh, social democracy, you're talking about communism and then we can go, no, no, no, no. We're talking about compassionate capitalism. We're talking about, you know, I don't know, inclusive capitalism or whatever.

I think that there is something to workshopping some name. I think that the downsides are, number one, if you get too much in the weeds of what you call something, you often separate from what it actually is. What is the thing? What is the policy set of ideas that we're talking about? But also when you do a rebrand of anything, there's this confusing period where people might not know what you're talking about. But also when you do a rebrand of anything, there's this confusing period where people might not know what you're referring to. So let's say that we were to call it compassionate capitalism. We have to say, yeah, you know, social democracy, also known as compassionate capitalism. You've got to do it for a long period of time until people understand that

it doesn't always catch on. I think the branding question is a good one, but it's not the only question. And I think selecting good candidates who can clearly express their policy platform and that it is a version of capitalism, it's well regulated capitalism. That's the most important thing. Good candidates who can explain policy. Speaker 4 OK, sounds good. Thank you, David. Speaker 1 All right. Two from Milwaukee. Great to hear from you. Let's go next to Menelik from Maryland. Menelik from Maryland.

I hope I'm pronouncing that correctly. Oh, hello. You're on the air. Hi. So I was wondering about Vivek and his minority status as a South Asian. And I was wondering how you think that this might affect his chances at the nomination in terms of the stereotypes that South Asians face. I'm going to be honest.

I don't think Vivek Ramaswamy has a shot at the nomination, regardless of being a of South Asian descent. I just don't think he's got a shot. Also, people wrote to me saying, are Republicans really going to vote for a Hindu? I think the answer is no, but not necessarily because of that. I just it seems to me and I could end up eating my hat. I might end up eating my microphone if I'm wrong. It seems to me that the vague surge is over and that he doesn't have a shot, period. And whether it's because he's from a South Asian family or because he's Hindu or because he's, you know, has wild ideas or seems manic on stage. I just don't think he'll be the nominee.

OK, do you think that his his status as a minority might shift Republican politics at all? Or do you think that this is just a. I really don't think that Vivek is going to do well enough that he's going to shift the Republican view on identity and on minority. No, I don't think he will have any any lasting impact on the Republican Party. OK, so more of like an Andrew Yang, maybe I figure maybe I've made that comparison before. There's an aspect. Obviously, Andrew Yang's policies made sense and he's not crazy, but no, the kind of like young tech bro,

nonwhite guy similarity is definitely one that I've pointed out before. Yeah, I think you're right about that. OK, yeah, thank you so much for taking my call. All right. My pleasure. Great to hear from Menelik in Maryland. We're going to take the quickest of quick breaks, but then we'll go right back to discord.

So if you are holding on to talk to me and you still want to talk to me, just hang on. to the David Pakman show at David Pakman dot com. entire archive of every episode dating back a really long time and plenty of other awesome membership perks. Go to join Pacman dot com. Join Pacman dot com. Let's go back to discord and talk to a few more people about the goings on of the week. Why don't we go next to I don't know. How about Nate from Rhode Island, who is a Web site member? Nate, thanks for being a member at join pacman dot com. If you unmute yourself, I'll be able to hear you. Curious what's on your mind today. Doing well. Yeah, just a couple of questions.

One, how are those new book sales going? New book sales or do you mean the children's book? Yes. Yeah. It's still, you know, we've not, it's kind of now maturing in terms of its placement in the marketplace. As crazy as that may be, we've not really done any promotion and we're selling about 80 to 110 books a day just based on the reputation of the book, which is insane. I mean, it's, I don't even know the total, but it's, you know, we've got to be getting close to 15000 copies sold. It's crazy. And you told me more than the eleven thousand seven hundred and eighty books. And we did indeed. We did indeed. And we're working on the sequel, which will be, I think, like a scientist. And I'll have more information about that soon.

Nate, are you still there? Wonderful. Yep. Wonderful. I have to pick up a couple of copies. Also, one more question. Have you seen the new one piece live action that everybody's been talking about? A one piece like a bathing suit? No, the one piece animated live action. Apparently, you know, good one piece like P.A.C.E. P.A.C.E. It's it's essentially a new live action that's really popular based off of a really popular anime series. I know nothing about it. I'll have to investigate. We'll have to do a full deep dive. All right. Well, take it easy, David. Have a good day. All right. Nate from Rhode Island. Appreciate the call. Why don't we go next to. Oh, I don't know.

How about Emerson from Kansas City? Emerson from Kansas City. Welcome to The David Pakman Show. What can I do for you today? I check. You're on the air. Emerson, you are live. Speaker 1 Oh boy. Hello.

Can you hear me? Speaker 2 Yes, I can. You were live on the air. Speaker 1 David, thanks for accepting my call. Hope you're doing well. I was just wondering, I'm a big, uh, clear power advocate. I was wondering your thoughts on nuclear power as a green alternative. And then more specifically, I'm like, what candidates do you think would be the best for

someone like me who is worried about nuclear power going forward? Well, listen, I don't know what you're the totality of your political views are. So I it's hard for me to recommend a candidate for you. Let's let's table that part for the moment. I have said before that there is a lot of misinformation about nuclear power. There are some on the left, my my my friends on the left who reflexively reject the idea of nuclear based on very old safety data about nuclear power, which, by the way, per energy generated nuclear power is not even even old nuclear power was not particularly unsafe when you consider the pollution effect of generating power from coal or gas. I mean, I've talked about this before,

but modern nuclear, if we were to build new nuclear capacity, the safety would simply not be a concern. Those concerns have really been dealt with. The issue for me with new nuclear is it takes a long time to come online and I don't want it to supplant making strides in other forms of energy. But I don't have a problem in principle with new nuclear. I just don't think it necessarily should be like the pillar on which the left bases its platform. Speaker 1

OK, that makes sense. Have you heard about the like the small modular reactors that NuScale has been developing? I think that that's going to be a technology that is going to make like manufacturing a lot more affordable and more quicker. It'll be able to get onto the grid a lot more quickly as well. Speaker 1 I've read a little bit about that. These are these are the ones that can do. I don't remember if it was like three or 400 megawatts per module or something like that. But yeah, I mean, I don't know that much about it. It's all interesting to me if there's some big thing about the small modular reactors that I'm missing that makes them terrible. I'm sure people will

write in. But I think all of this technology is interesting. I'm not a nuclear advocate, but I think the reflexive anti-nuclear instincts of some on the left are a bit overblown. OK, and then a final question. There's been about a dozen states or so that have lifted their nuclear construction ban pretty recently within the last year or so. I think that that's like a sign that the younger generation and more active voters are looking at nuclear and saying, why aren't we using this more often? And I want my state to be able to, you know, implement this technology. It strikes me as reasonable that that's why I don't know enough about it to say definitively. But let me research that a little more.

OK, thank you, David. All right. Thank you so much. Emerson from Kansas City. Nuclear always an interesting topic. Why don't we go next to Daniel from Melbourne? I don't know if that's Melbourne, Florida or oh, it's Australia. Daniel, welcome. And you're a website member as well. Thank you.

Oh, boy. And can you. Yes, I can. How beautiful. I was giving you a call because we currently go to the US. Oh, boy. Can you hear me? Yes, I can. Oh, beautiful. I was giving you a call because we're currently going into a referendum to change our constitution to give a voice to parliament for the Aboriginal communities.

And I was actually calling to ask you two things about that. One, is there any movements in America to do a similar thing with the Native Americans? And then two, what's the kind of what would be the social democratic stance on such a process like that? So I'm a little bit familiar with what you're referring to. This is the Australian indigenous voice referendum. Is that right? Yes. And if I understand it correctly, it's basically to enshrine specific representation in legislative bodies for Australia, Australia's Aboriginal community.

I mean, is that generally what it would do? Just so that they can have a representative in parliament so they can't make laws or change laws, but they can give an opinion to laws that are made in the parliament. So they can't make laws or change laws, but they can give an opinion to laws that are made in the parliament. Yeah. You know, we this has been talked about in the United States when it comes to the Native American community. And one of the big elements of like a stumbling block has been how do you do it? Do you do it based on the current Native American population? Well, maybe that's unfair because part of the reason the current Native American population is so low is because of prior killing of Native Americans. OK, well, do you do it per tribe? And the problem

there is that there are so many tribes, some with very small numbers of members, that it would basically be some insane number. So very often when I hear people who agree that there should be some specific representation and that's not everybody, but even when people agree, there's significant disagreement about the logistics. So I don't really know its prospects in the United States. I think it's a very interesting idea that there's been a counterpoint, which has been, listen, Native Americans already live in states. And so they

have representation locally. They can vote for senators and members of Congress and president and all these different things. The counter to that then becomes, well, sometimes they are. I don't even know if reservation is still the politically correct term, to be honest, but that's the term I recall. Some of them are within their own systems of government on reservations. And so actually they sort of are. It is almost like a state and therefore it does deserve representation. I'm not an expert in this issue, but I've heard interesting discussions about it.

Well, and I mean, I think you've highlighted a few of the points here because the the trend was trending towards a yes a few months ago, but as it gets closer and closer, it seems to be trending in the polls closer and closer to a no, much for the reasons you've listed there with questions about how the actual detail of it will be executed. Speaker 1 Right. I will be executed. Right. I will be interested to see what the outcome is. When is the vote? Actually, in the next couple of weeks, I think the next two or three weeks.

All right. Well, I will follow it closely. Beautiful. And one other question with your books, will you make a book that says how to think like a psychologist? Oh, that's you know, that's let me think about that one. I don't know if that's necessarily under the umbrella of critical thinking, but it's an interesting idea.

OK, but sort of a different type of thing. Thank you for your show. All right. Daniel from Melbourne, Australia. Very much appreciate the call. Why don't we go next to Joseph from Tulsa, Oklahoma? Welcome, Joseph. What's on your mind today? Joseph, please.

And last call for Joseph, you're on the program. Well, that's really too bad. We are not able to hear from Joseph. How about Carter from Washington? Carter, welcome to The David Pakman Show. Thanks for having me. What's on your mind today? I guess I just wanted to ask for some advice. I. And was kind of not educating myself as a younger person, And now I all of a sudden have a desire to kind of learn as much as I can. And I'm a bit, I'm skeptical on validity of sources with today's, you know, media. I wonder if you have any advice to kind of find legitimate and useful sources for information. Well, first, let me ask you this.

When you say you want to educate yourself on what topics you're saying, you just want to keep up with the news or you want to educate yourself about a particular topic? Yeah, like politics, economics, you know, mostly like just like the affairs of the world, stuff like that. So what I would encourage you to do is to build your knowledge base and your ability to think critically about these issues, not from news articles, but from reading books about these issues. And I, you know, I can't give you a full bibliography here. I have a bunch of recommendations on my website about books in all of these categories, which you can look at. But with something like economics, for example, great. You want to be informed about economics.

Reading news articles about what's going on economically in different countries is fine. And I would encourage you to use primary sources, Associated Press, Reuters, original reporting like New York Times and Washington Post rather than opinion stuff. But more important really would be to read the foundational books about a lot of these subjects. And if you were to Google, for example, or even if you go like if you go to chat GPT and you were to say, what basic books about economics should I read to understand the foundational principles? Let's see what what chat GPT would spit out. It suggests a combination of classic texts as well as introductory type books. Yeah, that's exactly what I would do. I would I would start there, do a search on Goodreads or chat

GPT or wherever the area that you're interested in. You need to build up your understanding of the concepts first rather than than going straight to the news articles, because you really need that foundational understanding. That makes sense. Thank you very much. All right. Carter from Washington. Great to hear from you.

Let's go to Sarah from Quebec. Sarah, welcome to The David Pakman Show. What's on your mind today? Hey, can you hear me all right? Yes, I can. Awesome. I was just listening to one of the last people you're speaking to, and towards the end, you just sort of mentioned that when you're talking about if you would write a book on how to

think like a psychologist and you said that you don't know if that would be critical thinking. And I was just curious to know kind of what your perspective is on that. And what about. Yeah, no, I have no I am. I am not an anti mental health treatment person. Ninety percent of my family works in mental health, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers. You have a bit of perspective on it.

Yeah. Yeah. It's more so that I think I think that books about psychology really should be written by experts in that particular field. And so my series is more about the sort of basic types of critical thinking and epistemology for being news consumers, for thinking about reporting and political issues, etc. It just seems like think like a psychologist is an extremely worthy topic, but that is separate from my forthcoming series of books and should really be written

by a psychologist or expert in that field. Interesting. So when you have this series going, do you think it would be worthwhile then to collaborate with experts in specific potentially that level of potentially? Yeah, I think that would be reasonable. I mean, listen, the series we're doing, we did think like a detective. We're doing think like a scientist. We we may be looking at think like an astronaut, which I think would be you know, we have all these different ones that have a particular umbrella. I think think like a psychologist is great, but maybe for a slightly older audience and maybe written by a psychologist.

Or even like there could be sort of a different level at different ages, and this is like, but I think that there is a huge lack of mental health education in youth, even just basic things like how to breathe, to regulate yourself in difficult moments. And you know, there there might be some value to that, even if it's slightly different. You know what, Sarah? You're convincing me that you're if it's slightly different. You know what, Sarah, you're convincing me. You're convincing me something like this. Nobody's here to regulate. I think that this is a great idea. I think a collaboration with a mental health professional is the way to do it.

We'll put it on the list. I think you're convincing me as we talk. All right. Well, if you ever need convincing on anything else, let me know. Things are OK. Are you in Quebec City? No, I'm in Montreal. Oh, OK. All right. Well, one of my favorite cities, as everybody knows. Is Montreal. Yes, absolutely.

Oh, what is your favorite thing about Montreal? I can't you know, there's so much I don't think I'd be able to name just one thing. I think that the diversity of the different styles of neighborhoods, fantastic quality of museums, variety and number of restaurants and the food scene, the people are great. I mean, it's just I think I've been probably 20, 25 times in my life. It's just a great, great place. Yeah, it's I think the food is the piece that I love that there's such diversity and get to experience such amazing food from so many places. Very much so. You know, there's a need to come out and try. There's a Vietnamese food stall at the Atwater Market. I can't recommend it more highly. I wonder which one

that is. Yeah, I have. There's a Vietnamese place that's nearby in St. Henry called Tran Tran Cantina, and it's the best on me I've ever had in my life. Speaker 1 There you go. I will have to add it to my list. Speaker 1 Perfect. All right. Well, have a good one. Speaker 1 OK, thanks, Sarah.

Sarah joining us from Montreal, Quebec. Many books forthcoming that I can promise you folks, if I have anything to say about it. Thank you for joining me. We're going to go to a break. We'll take more calls again. Everybody relax. We will take more calls again. If you value what we do at The David Pakman Show, remember to support us on Patreon.

Go to Patreon dot com slash David Pakman show where you can get access to behind the scenes videos, the Daily Bonus show, the commercial free daily show, where you can get access to behind the scenes videos, the daily bonus show, the commercial free daily show, as well as special discounts on merch, including hats, hoodies, mugs and T-shirts. You can support the show for as little as two dollars a month. Check it out at Patreon dot com slash David Pakman show. All right. It's time for Friday feedback. If you'd

like to have a message, question, comment or criticism featured on the show, you can always email info at David Pakman dot com. You can leave a YouTube comment. You can, I don't know, send a message on threads or maybe leave a Facebook comment or we really look at all of it. OK, anything could end up here. I want to first give you an example. We I don't know. We get like 100 of these a day a day. I never feature them, but I do think it's an interesting peek behind the curtain. We often will get these religious type messages that you can't possibly respond to in any

sensible way because it's just religious nonsense. OK, here is John, who says the following about Trump's indictments. The charges are a cursed. May they all be a cursed and faded away. But let Jesus Christ set Trump totally free. If Christ is going to nudge us in the last days in this way, none of us will enter the kingdom of God. God Almighty will judge you whether you receive Christ as your Lord and savior scripture.

He that confesses me publicly him, I will confess to my father on your day of judgment, but he that denies me publicly him, I will deny before my father on that day of judgment. May those who judge Donald Trump burn in where presumably burn in hell. OK. Meaningless. That is completely meaningless to an actual conversation about political happenings in the United States of America. There is nothing there of substance. You know, whether whether people confess to Jesus or not or whatever the case be. It has no place in civil government and it certainly has no role to play whatsoever in

this program. As far as the way we will talk about what is going on, what should be going on and what we hope is going on. All right. Let's go next to Mayor Singh, who says via Facebook, so many misleading narratives from the right wing media. They are coming for your guns. They are coming for your gas stoves. They want to take your pickup truck. They want to rebuild your home. They want to take away your meat and hamburgers.

They want to take away your beers. Limit to two per week. What else? Well, there are obviously the really big ones, right? Post birth abortions was a classic. Trump actually one is a big one. The vaccines are killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people. Those are three just to name a few. But yes, very much so. It is lie after misleading narrative, after lie, after lie. Toma wrote in to say Vivek scares me. He has an annoying self-certitude of a rich libertarian making value judgments on how the rest of us should live our lives somewhat like Trump 2.0, but with more smugness. Yeah, there is something extraordinarily smug about Vivek Ramaswamy. Some people love it. I mean, there are people who love that smug attitude. I'm better than

everybody. I'm smarter than everybody. And I'm going to show it. And there are people who are responding to that and really, really like it. On the other hand, there are people who find him smug in a negative way or borderline manic in his presentation to each their own, I guess, is what what what we would say. Tim House wrote in and says, remember the days when Dan Quayle had his political career end for misspelling potato? Yeah. You know, it seems so quaint. I was thinking of Howard Dean, whose campaign for the Democratic primary essentially ended because he did that little rant where he said, we're going to Iowa and Washington and New Hampshire and we're going to take it all the way to the White House or whatever.

Some noise. And it basically ended his candidacy. Now, there are others who will say, well, you know, the polling was not it was on the decline. And so, OK, maybe, but it certainly didn't help. And it seems now. Anything you can get away with, explain it away, you can always go, well, the other side is trying to weaponize this against me. It seems almost impossible that you can really end your career in the way that used to be

the case. I don't know whether that's a good or bad thing. I can tell you for sure when it comes to the things people like DeSantis and Trump and others have done and their careers have not ended politically. Seems very much a problem. OK, user sinker on the subreddit says Biden needs to be removed as candidate writing. We need a new candidate ASAP. Biden is now losing in 60 percent of the polls. He has 21 percent approval among youth voters who saved us in the midterms. And no one with that approval has won the presidency. We are being slow walked. I cannot be convinced that Whitmer, Shapiro, Newsom or Waltz could couldn't wipe the floor

with Trump. Why on earth has he not stepped aside? Harris simply would need to be told it's not happening. We're in a boatload of trouble. The DNC is literally going to Hillary 2.0. So listen, a few different things. Panicking is not going to help anybody. That's number one. Secondly, I don't see Biden losing in 60 percent of the polls. I think the polls are, you know, relatively mixed bag, which is like 50 50. It's not that different than 60 percent, but it's very early. And I don't know that we can read too much into that terms of approval rating among youth voters. I haven't seen that poll. What I can tell you is the recent poll that Biden does terribly in was extremely skewed towards Republican voters. The methodology was trash. And listen, parties don't kick out incumbent

presidents and say we're going to nominate someone else. The way it works, you don't have to like it. But the way it works is that the nomination is for an incumbent president to say no, thank you to it is not for anyone else to take it from them. It's just the way it is. And whether Biden changes his mind about running remains to be seen. But this sort of panicked hyperbole based on faulty or misread polls is not the way I recommend going about politics.

User Shala Shashka. I think I'm pronouncing that correctly, says, has anyone made a soundboard of all the clips David uses? I just want to be able to hear Obama any time Obama. Yeah, listen, the soundboard is a member benefit. If you become a member at join Pacman dot com, you get access to a soundboard that contains a whole bunch of the clips I have on my soundboard. I did everything right and they indicted me.

Sure. Oh, the bonus show where you want to make money. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad. The United States will be the first nation to land an astronaut on NARS. I really like the NARS one. Yeah. So listen, we've we made the soundboard. It's a member benefit.

When you support us at join Pacman dot com, we give you access to the soundboard. It is a great thing. All right. An interesting post from the subreddit from user Aventasian, who says why I like David more than other progressive commentators. I like it already. OK, quote, Not sure if anyone agrees, but I feel like most other progressive hosts, such as Jesse Dollimore, Farron Cousins, Kyle Kalinsky, Sam Seder, always come across as too intense. Like,

I get stressed out when I listen to them, even if I agree with most of their views and like them as people. David has this chill vibe that manages to be interesting and engaging, but without being stressful to listen to. Well, I love the comment. I also am aware that right now there's a post on the sub Reddit, which I don't have here from someone who says, I don't have enough passion. I don't have enough energy. I'm not flipping out enough. I'm not intense enough. So I think the takeaway is the progressive media ecosystem is robust and there is hopefully something for everyone. More intensity, less intensity, etc. OK, and that's a great thing. We should all be glad that that's the case. All right. And lastly, we go to Facebook. Michael Larson said on Facebook, Cornell West needs to put his ego away and do what is best for the country, presumably meaning not run and maybe be a spoiler

helping Trump. Larry says, I definitely like Cornell West, but he has no chance due to be honest. He's just being a distraction. We don't need to lose one vote against Trump. And Pamela says Bernie is correct. Colonel West will not win a general and we have to make sure a democracy lives. For now, we vote blue to save America. So here's three people who generally agree. Cornel West can't win. The best he can do is not be a factor. The worst he can do is

push the next presidential election to Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis or whoever. And mathematically, I agree with that. I also support third party candidacies and believe to really get third party candidacies engaged and viable. We need to change campaign finance and we also need some kind of ranked choice or single transferable vote. Without that, I don't know if we will ever truly see the viability of third parties in the United States. It pains me to say it, but that's where we are. All right. Make sure you are a member. You can sign up at join Pacman dot com. This doesn't have to be it for the week. If you were a member, you could get the bonus show at join Pacman dot com. You can use the coupon code four years for indictments to save bigly.

We'll see you on the bonus show and back here on Monday.