The Reporter Who Brings Down Harvard Presidents ft. Aaron Sibarium
In prior decades, Aaron Sibarium would almost certainly have become a reporter at The New York Times and called himself a liberal. But attending Yale in the late 2010s pushed him in a very different direction, and he is now the premier investigative reporter on the American right. Aaron joins Charlie to talk about his scoops exposing anti-white discrimination in Covid treatment and in universities, and what the ideal response is to aggressive anti-Israel protests on college campuses. Watch every episode ad-free on members.charliekirk.com! Get new merch at charliekirkstore.com!Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Hey everybody, Charlie Kirk here live from the Bitcoin.com studio.
Aaron Sabarium from Washington Free Beacon.
Boy, this is a really illuminating conversation about DEI and medicine about how your anesthesiologists might not be qualified.
UCLA Medical and more.
Email us as always, Freedom at Charlie Kirk.com and subscribe to our podcast.
That's the Charlie Kirk Show podcast page.
And get involved as always with Turning Point USA at TPUSA.com.
That is TP USA.com.
Buckle up everybody here.
We go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit is love of this country.
He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are gonna fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
The Charlie Kirk Show is proudly sponsored by Preserve Gold, the leading gold and silver experts and the only precious metals company I recommend to my family, friends and viewers.
Hey, everybody, we have a very special conversation with you today.
A very smart person who honestly deserves some of those awards they keep giving out to those fake journalists.
It's Aaron Sabarian.
Aaron, great to see you and meet you.
Great to be here.
And I've been following your work for a while, and I want to go through some of your greatest hits, because I have them here.
Uh but first, I want to just kind of give you a chance to introduce yourself.
You're an investigative reporter with the Washington Free Beacon, and you went to Yale.
I did.
I did.
How did so you go to Yale and you don't end up at the New York Times?
Correct.
So I came into Yale, uh moderate Democrat, and then kind of went through a uh series of sort of incremental radicalizing moments that pushed me.
I don't know how far right they pushed me, but they definitely pushed me further and further right.
And by 2020, I certainly felt more comfortable within right-wing institutions than left-wing ones.
What what were those radicalizing events?
Yeah, so I mean there were really two at Yale.
The first is that um Yale has this thing called the Yopolitical Union, which is comprised of all these little kind of debating societies, political parties.
And I came in thinking, well, I'm a moderate Democrat, so I'll join the party of the left, right?
That's what good Democrats do.
But their first resolution of the term was resolved, abolish the police.
And this was in 2014, mind you.
So kind of a little before.
It was a yeah, I think it was before.
Yes, it was before Michael Brown.
So at the time I just thought, well, that's stupid.
No one's ever gonna take that seriously, right?
Whereas Or make it policy.
Yeah, exactly.
Whereas the uh whereas the uh conservative party, which is another one of them was debating, resolved that Socrates deserved to die.
And I remember seeing that and thinking, that's interesting, and I've never thought to ask that question.
These guys seem cool, I'm gonna hang out with them.
That's a much more thought-provoking question.
Exactly.
Much more so so right at the start, it just seemed like there was a sort of vibrancy to the conservative intellectual scene that was was lacking on the left.
And then the the second big radicalizing moment was um the there were all these protests in 2015 over cultural appropriation, Halloween costumes.
There was a there's a famous video in which uh uh at the time he was an administrator, he got encircled in the courtyard of one of the residential colleges at Yale and and basically accosted.
I mean, he wasn't he wasn't physically hurt, but he was surrounded by these jeering students who were saying, you haven't made this a safe space, you know, this is supposed to be a home, free speech doesn't matter, so on and so forth.
And then things just kind of spiraled out of control from there.
And I guess the maybe sort of two point fifth radicalizing moment is that during that time I was the opinion editor of the Yale Daily News, the campus paper, and so I had to sit there and feeled all of the op-eds from real I mean of all sides of the campus debate, but from the protesters.
And it's like I remember sitting next to a girl editing her piece that was literally arguing that demands for rational debate were a form of white supremacy designed to police the emotionality of women of color.
And in some ways, the creepiest part of all this is that this girl, I had had a I had a class with her.
She's not a dumb girl at all.
She's very it's like in terms Of just raw IQ, very smart, but she was saying this just absolute and I kind of had to sit there and pretend that I thought it was a valuable perspective and edit it and say, yes, yes, your voice matters and and edit it, make it better.
Um, seeing up close what the alleged best and brightest actually thought uh was pretty radicalizing.
Aaron Powell And now she's probably like a circuit court judge or something.
I yeah, I'm not sure exactly what she's doing now.
But uh I mean I know she went to law school, so that's you never know.
Yeah, or she's like an FBI agent or something.
But no, that's the that that that I think is an important thing to spend a little bit of time on is that this was not University of Wisconsin Madison, no offense to them.
But this is this is the pipeline for our nation's decision makers.
Right.
Right.
There was uh the the South Park episode that kind of made fun of you a little.
Yeah.
It was great.
No, it's it was great.
Well, but it was what I thought was funny, you know, that the the students in that episode, uh the fake students, you know, are are trying to defend abortion rights or whatever and say kind of normal liberal things.
Honestly, what they're saying in South Park, the kind of fake, you know, parodies of liberal students was a lot more reasonable than what the kids at Yale were actually saying in 2015, right?
It's not like they were saying, well, you know, women's right to choose, and who are you to decide when life began.
No, I mean this was full-on, you know, you cannot debate anything or disagree with any minority or you're racist.
I mean, and it really the sort of Fox News caricature was in fact accurate.
I mean, it there really was no daylight between how I think kind of conservative media portrayed those kids and how they were in behavior.
Has it gotten worse or better since 2014 at Yale?
Uh it probably I would assume that in 2020 it got pretty bad.
I think it kind of recovered a bit post-2015, then 2020 probably hit a nadir.
And then you know, now with Trump in office, I I expect that there is slightly more intellectual freedom in the classroom.
I do get the sense conservative kids on campus are a bit more involved.
Yeah, I think so.
I mean I would assume so.
I I will also tell you that the undergrad, as bad as that was, was never as crazy as Yale Law School, which went through a period of just absolute insanity, where from what my friends who attended it told me it really was like Sophia communism.
Trevor Burrus, Jr.
I know you're not a Yale historian, but I mean you do know the institution well.
I mean, William F. Buckley obviously wrote, you know, God Man in Yale, I think that was the title.
Yeah.
Um what where did what where for our audience that doesn't quite follow this but knows it's a problem.
Where did this come from?
Why is it that Yale would get to a place where you have to feel the nap-ed where someone says I I wrote I wrote down like that that basically I can't I should be able to dismiss or have a higher elevation of my opinion based solely on immutable characteristics.
Why has that been taken seriously at our nation's illegal.
Yeah, I mean, that's obvious.
I mean, we could have a uh an hour or two-hour conversation just about that question.
I I will say what I observed was that it was not the majority of students who actually believed that.
Um but there was a kind of massive preference falsification.
So one of the What does that mean?
So people would just pretend to go along with it, right?
And would never pretend to believe it.
And and one very illustrative example is that as the opinion editor of the YDN, I also had to write sort of the the editorial that was the paper's position, and we would have meetings where we would decide what the paper's position should be.
And during the meeting where we were supposed to decide what to say about the protests, it became clear right away that if you spoke up and said, hey, I think this is going too far, what about free speech, you were gonna immediately be shouted down as a racist.
And so no one did, but I had people come up to me afterwards and say, after we had basically democratically quote unquote decided to vote vote to endorse the protests, a lot of people told me, look, I I didn't really agree with that.
I have issues with the protests, but I felt like I couldn't speak.
Yeah, I I remember one girl in particular literally said that almost verbatim to me.
Trevor Burrus, Jr.
So much of this is just third grade peer pressure that just gets elevated ton't be too surprising.
Aaron Powell And you mentioned the New York Times earlier.
I mean, some of these students without naming names did in fact go on to work at the New York Times.
Or the Washington Post.
Right.
Which is some of them.
Yes, right.
Which then like no names right now.
Right, right.
Which then, like five years later had its own kind of struggle sessions during George Floyd.
So yeah, I mean that's so talk more about that.
Again, I didn't I don't want to spend too much time on this, but what they do on the college campus doesn't stay there.
It metastasizes into the next institution.
Yes, yes.
It m metastasizes into media and medicine is another big one.
I mean it all of them really corporate America, but I think medicine is that is a story that that has not fully, I think, been been appreciated.
Just how I did a lot of reporting in the We have these stories, by the way.
Yeah.
So but keep going.
Yeah, so I had a lot of re did a lot of reporting in late 2021, early 2022 about the effort to ration COVID drugs based on race.
Right here.
It's one of your best, by the way, you deserve huge credit.
I remember we covered this for days.
Keep going.
Yeah.
And and so I I mean these ideas about kind of race-based redistribution that were inculcating in the academy did not stay confined to a critical race theory seminar at Harvard Law School.
I mean they became government policy in not just you know a city or or county, but in like multiple U.S. states um at least three New York, Utah, and Minnesota all had these race conscious triage schemes where basically the way it worked was that if you were not white, you automatically got two extra points added to your COVID risk score.
And two points was about the same weight they would give to things like obesity or diabetes.
And so if you held everything else equal the nonwite person was going to win every time and there was really very I mean there was not any serious scientific argument that, you know this was an exact way to quantify risk or that all non white people were really at you know that much more risk of developing serious COVID.
I mean this was all nonsense but they did it anyway.
And they only stopped after I reported on it and then people threatened to sue them.
Aaron Ross Powell Yeah I have the story I mean it's incredible.
So just to be clear that life-saving COVID drugs were given in a rationed way against white people to prefer black or Latino people or or as they say Latinx ethnicity.
Yep yep and I would I would note too that it it literally in some of these schemes just lumped in every single person who wasn't white which like even if you thought that maybe one particular racial group for some genetic reason was at a much higher risk of COVID and there could be some reason why we really should take that into account that's not what they were doing.
They were just saying well of these groups which in fact had very different rates of COVID mortality they're all not white so we'll just kind of create a category for nonwise and give them extra voice.
In your story in Minnesota health officials have devised their own ethical framework that prioritizes black 18 year olds over white 64 year olds for COVID drugs.
Now I think this was monoclonal antibodies if I'm not mistaken.
Yes.
Which actually was a very effective treatment.
Remember this was in January 2022 so we're about a year and a half into the whole thing.
And monoclonal antibodies were very promising immediate developments to kind of to help.
So this is not just some trivial thing.
But an 18-year-old black kid in downtown Minneapolis like an 18-year-old Somalian kid could get monoclonal antibodies easier than a 64 year old veteran that fought in Vietnam.
Yeah so holding constant all of their health conditions right that's true.
But of course the thing is that age was the biggest predictor of COVID mortality by far.
Yes but they're using race.
Yes, but they have racism.
So, I mean, I really want to dwell on this for a second.
How is this possible?
I mean, how did we as a country, thankfully, I want to get into that in a second, have we actually turned the page on it, but this parasitic ideology, what do you want to call it, woke mind virus, whatever, it went into medicine where we are less likely to give out life-saving drugs just because of some sort of oppression framework we're working from.
Yeah.
I mean, I think there's a lot of reasons why it became such a powerful force in medicine.
One of them is that the field of public health kind of...
from its inception was was based in sort of what you might call proto-woke premises, right?
because the whole idea behind public health, right, is that there are social forces that affect the spread of disease.
Now, of course, that's true and uncontroversial at a sufficient level of generality, but you can see how if that's your mindset to look for social forces that influence uh epidemiological patterns or influence the spread of disease, you're going to be more open to these kinds of DEI critical race theories that that prescribe rationing drugs based on race, right?
Um I think that's one reason.
Um then the other, and again, this is a little more speculative, but I I get the sense that to to become a doctor, you have to jump through all of these hoops and it it may select for a certain kind of person who's smart but perhaps also somewhat conformist and just as willing to kind of do whatever uh the check whatever boxes they're told to check.
Um and unlike, say, law, which has its own problems, but at least in law, you know, when doing legal training, there's some emphasis on getting the other side, debating.
There's nothing like that in medicine, so I just think medicine hasn't developed really any antibodies against wokesome.
How did you find this story?
Someone I think it might have been Carol Markowitz, the journalist, tweeted Yeah.
She tweeted about New York's, and I just thought, huh, I wonder if any other states are doing this.
And so I basically just started Googling.
This was before Chat GPT.
So I just started Googling, trying to find uh other examples.
And I found this is perhaps the most scandalous part.
This was all public.
I mean, they didn't even try to hide it.
Private student loan debt in America totals about 300 billion dollars.
About 45 billion of that is labeled as distressed.
Why refi refinances distress your defaulted private student loans that others will not touch.
They provide you with a custom loan payment based on your ability to pay.
Go to why refi.com, why refi does not care what your credit score is when the payment on your distress or defaulted private student loan is so big that you can't ever get ahead on your finances, why refi is surely your best option.
Go to Y Refi.com, and you can even skip a payment every six months of the 12 times without penalty.
Go to why refi.com, that is YREFY.com.
I guarantee you somebody in this audience has private student loan debt issues.
We'll get out of debt today at Y Refi.com.
Because of private student loan debt, so many Americans feel helpless and they've even lost hope.
Why ReFi gives you a light at the end of the tunnel?
So go to why refi.com.
Y ReFi offers a three-minute rate check without any credit impact.
Go to YREFY.com.
That's why ReFi.com.
So the CDC said high risk states that, quote, systemic health and social inequities have put minorities at increased risk.
So it's the it's the systemic racism is the reason why they're dying.
Yeah, and there was also this this guidance the FDA put out that said race could be a risk factor.
And it again, you know, in some sense, like yes, it's true that there were statistical correlations between race and COVID 19 mortality.
But is it factoring for all the other variables though?
Well, no, probably not.
And that's because I mean this is not a racist thing to say, but black Americans tend to be more overweight in the you know 40s or 50s, especially black women than their counterparts.
So that's that's just that's just because of statistical facts.
Yes, yes, and and there's also probably difference I mean, it's also class differences, right?
Like I think I mean, one thing that's interesting is actually one of the states of Utah later claimed that one of the reasons they abandoned the scheme is that it wasn't even working to get the drugs to minorities.
And reading between the lines, I well, right, and of course it that wouldn't make it okay, but I think the whole premise is so sinister.
Yes, yes, yes.
But it I would just point out that, you know, it it may well have been that the problem here was that, you know, the people they wanted to get the drugs to just weren't coming in the door.
And so all they really ended up doing was kind of erecting barriers for white people.
It didn't even do accomplish its desired goal.
Right.
Right.
Or 90%.
Right, right.
The 10% are like Polynesian.
I mean, they have like very small black population.
Yeah.
I mean, they're they're yeah.
And if your goal was to reach them, there probably were ways you could have done it, but sort of this crude scheme of racial preferences was not.
Well, so it's very interesting.
I mean, this is somewhat of like a really cruel and dark thought experiment.
Yeah.
You could imagine a philosophy professor or a morality ethics professor saying, what if I had a life-saving drug?
How should we distribute it to the population?
You know what I mean?
Yeah, yeah.
That's kind of what was on display.
And he's like, let's have a discussion about it today.
Yeah.
And you see how that is actually put in practice.
Right.
And it was this fact sheet from what is so trovamab.
That's one of the monoclonal languages.
Okay, got it.
Yeah.
Okay, got it.
So you report this, which is just obviously like a ridiculous violation of the Civil Rights Act.
Yeah.
Right, which has its problems, but and then they back off.
And the Minnesota and Utah Health.
Utah, that's a red state.
Yeah.
It it it's it's really amazing how even in red states this stuff uh has has spread very far.
You see this in universities too, where people have this idea that the DEI programs are much worse at Ivy League schools than they are at, you know, public schools in red states.
That is not true.
Um there's a great uh another journalist named John Saylor who's done really good FOIA work um FOIN just all of these red state universities, and they put things in writing like, you know, we don't want to hire a white man.
I mean, that's how explicit it is.
And that's that's at in red states.
So it's yes, it it really any kind of this is a bit of an overgeneralization, but but generally institutions that are not directly subject to the levers of electoral power, or that um state governments have kind of taken a hands-off approach to that it got its hooks in to all of them, right?
Is that what what is it about wokism?
I hate that term because it's overused.
That it just has to keep on infecting.
Has to keep on spreading.
Like you guys control enough already.
Control Hollywood, you control the schools, you control the music, you control you control the NFL, but you also have to control our monoclonal antibody distribution.
Right.
It's like it's almost a it's like an Islamic um.
You know, the the umah in Islamic theology is like the all-covering of God.
It's like wokism must cover all society.
Right.
Well, I mean, one thing about wokism is that it doesn't really acknowledge kind of a the distinction between the public and private sphere, right?
You hear people say everything is political, right?
And so all the institutions of civil society are are seen as sites of political contestation.
Um I think that's a big part of it.
Look, uh another this is changing now, but for a while when civil rights law was exclusively really used by the left as kind of a uh uh tool of social engineering, uh that was another thing, right?
There were there were legal pressures that I think helped uh accelerate and reinforce the woke takeover.
I don't want to reduce it all to that.
But like, you know, hostile environment complaints, right, do create incentives for corporations to censor speech and to do these sorts of trainings that morph into DEI.
Um I do think that is changing now because there are new civil rights enforcers in town and they have adopted a very different interpretation of the civil rights laws.
And so we're seeing now that uh civil rights law does not necessarily have to lead to wokeness, but I think that until the right sort of seized the levers of the civil rights state and started using it very aggressively, it just the civil rights bureaucracies were all populated by progressives, and that was a big that was a big kind of bureaucratic mechanism that pushed it.
Yeah, I mean, and part of the the civil rights regime is built on disparate impact, which is can you comment on that?
Yes, I think that's a big problem.
So for for many years, you know, although quotas were officially outlawed, there was this concept called disparate impact, which was that if you do a kind of race-blind test, employment test, but it has a disparate impact, you know, more uh whites than blacks pass the test,
then the test, unless you can prove like beyond a reasonable doubt, basically, that it is sort of in essential, that it is de like you know, inextricably tied to the job qualifications, and that this is really the only way to assess people, unless you can prove that, which is very high bar, the test was basically unlawful, right?
And it was considered discriminatory.
And now that is starting to be changed because uh President Trump has issued an executive order uh revoking one of his most important liability.
Yeah, disp going after disparate impact.
It's possible that some of the Supreme Court cases that kind of solidified this concept will get overturned Depending on what the litigation is.
But yeah, I mean, for many years there was this this phrase called goals and timetables where the government would say, well, you know, you don't have to you don't have to adopt quotas.
You just have to have goals and a timetable for reaching them.
And, you know, if you don't, that could be evidence of unlawful discrimination.
We're not saying it is evidence, it just could be.
And so of course, in in practice, that means that you kind of do have to have at least some approximate racial balance which leads to some of these discriminatory policies.
Continuing on on the whole medical theme, you have another story that was published in May of last year, uh, which is a failed medical school, how racial preferences supposedly outlawed in California have persisted at UCLA.
Yes.
So this is kind of connecting.
This is a what happened at UCLA?
Aaron Powell Yeah.
So at UCLA, um to my knowledge, this is maybe the first time this has ever happened that multiple members of the admissions committee basically came to me and and told me anonymously about the affirmative action they were doing and provided various emails and even some internal data that kind of backed up that there was um a lot of racial preferences going on.
And the reason they came forward was that they just thought it was intrinsically unjust, but B, they were really worried because they were seeing medical students uh start to really fail basic tests of medical competence and show up to their clinical rotations not knowing anything.
Um not knowing anything.
That's what one of them told me almost verbatim.
And I and I would note that none of the whistleblowers I would say struck me as particularly conservative.
I mean, I don't think anyone involved in this story.
Or wearing MAGA hats or something.
No, no one who was worried about this was wearing a MAGA hat.
I'm sure they all voted for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris or almost all of them did, right?
But they were worried because they just saw kids showing up and they couldn't, you know, name basic arteries and stuff, and they were not the catholic.
Right, right.
And they were failing um these things called the the shelf exams, which you take after each clinical rotation.
There were some cohorts where like uh 50% of the kids would fail.
And that that had never happened before.
It would there was a huge spike in the failure rate on these exams.
Um and this all happened after a kind of new dean of admissions came in and really pushed uh the DEI very aggressively.
Um your reporting says up to half of UCLA medical students now fail basic tests of medical competition.
Yeah, it's not half of all UCLA medical students.
What it is is basically they're in each clinical rotation, you it's a little hard to explain, but basically, basically there were certain classes at UCLA, certain rotations where like half of the kids in that small cohort were failing.
And you know, and then you also see that the overall failure rate goes from like very low to something closer to like 20 or 25 percent.
So there's a change over time.
Um, you know, look, probably the average graduate of UCLA medical school is still very good, but there are far more people who are not up to snuff than there used to be, and that's really what those statistics are captured.
Well, what are the implications of this?
I mean, well, you know, the obvious one is well, you know, someone makes it through and then they take out your appendix and your kidney inside of your appendix.
Yeah, you know, that's the kind of nightmare.
That's the nightmare scenario.
I mean, I mean, the other thing that may happen is that some of the folks graduated, they they may be good enough to be very basic, kind of primary care doctors and and competent at sort of more basic fields of medicine, but they're not going to go into high-level research.
And the problem with that is part of how medicine advances and and what these schools are supposed to do is to be engines of medical innovation.
Um so if all of the schools um do this sort of heavy affirmative action, and fewer and fewer of the graduates are really uh qualified to do the kind of cutting-edge research that pushes the frontiers of medicine forward.
You know, you may not see it's not necessarily that the surgeons are gonna like kill you.
I mean, that might happen, but I think that's that's probably not really the main concern, at least in the immediate term.
The the deeper concern is that you just see this kind of slow and hard to quantify, but nonetheless very real decline in kind of the quality of academics.
I mean, but we all see it.
I mean, I've had friends in Cedar Sinai Hospital, and they might have graduates from the UCLA medical school.
Is the UCLA medical school good?
Is it considered to be competitive?
Aaron Powell It's considered very competitive, yes.
And so I've seen at Cedar Sinai.
Some of these nurses are kind of like space cadets at times.
I don't want to insult them.
You have to wonder, I mean, and I everybody knows this that the quality of hospital care has gone down the last 20 years.
It's just anecdotally.
Yeah, and and the other thing I would say to you that that there's another dynamic here, which is maybe only say 20% of the kids are really struggling and the rest are fine.
But because you don't want to flunk those bottom 20%, you have to make the classes easier for everyone to avoid the bottom 20% flunking out.
So the top kids don't get the same quality of education.
So they might still be good, but they won't be as good, right?
And so there's this kind of progressive mediocritization of the medical profession driven by this sort of bottom 20% dragging kids down.
Ingredients.
When I flip a container around and cannot pronounce nor recognize the ingredients, I put it back.
That's why you'll find balance of nature fruit and veggie supplements on a shelf in my home.
Every single ingredient is a fruit or veggie plucked from the soil.
No binders, no additives or artificial colors, no fillers.
Just whole fruits and veggies, gluten-free and vegan-friendly.
These harvested ingredients are freeze-dried into a fine powder using an advanced vacuum-cold process to better preserve nutritional value.
I can say with absolute confidence that I'm getting 31 ingredients from fruits and veggies every single day with balance of nature.
Imagine a platter with 31 different fruits and veggies on it every day.
Join me in taking balance of nature, use my discount code Charlie to get 35% off.
Free shipping plus a limited time, a free bottle of fiber and spice.
Go to Balance of Nature.com, use discount code Charlie.
So order online at Balance and Nature.com, use discount code Charlie.
You have 35% off plus a free bottle of fiber and spice.
So I I got I have to read this.
This is this is one of my favorite paragraphs.
I just saw this.
Led by Lucero, who you introduced earlier in the piece, uh she also serves, or I think it's she as the I think it's she, right?
As the vice chair of the equity, diversity, and inclusion of UCLA's anesthesiology department.
Yes.
So let me just understand this.
So the practice of administering general anesthesia, which is incredibly important.
People die way too much.
And thankfully we're one we're one of the leaders in the world.
What is the it says the admissions committee routinely gives black and Latino applicants a pass for subparametrics for people who served on it said while whites and Asians need perfect scores to be considered.
What is the like steel man that argument for me?
Why does an anesthesiology department need a DEI office?
I mean I mean at some point, I mean you're super smart.
You went to Yale, you're part of the debate club.
What is the argument for that?
We're trying to figure, you know, we need your body weight, we need to figure out how long, you know, the mixture of these very, very powerful chemicals.
The the argument you would hear is that somehow the white anesthesiologist will murder the black people.
And so if we don't correct the implicit biases, we won't really get the most qualified anesthesiologist.
Yeah, look, like it's it's it's silly.
So it's silly.
It's just it just collapses.
But this you you pointed on something.
So implicit bias, that would be their argument, probably.
Or their argument would be like, hey, a white anesthesiologist, they don't know the struggle of a black woman they're about to put under.
And so, you know, she needs someone that knows the struggle of being a black woman.
I'm sorry, you're administering drugs to go under surgery.
Don't you want the best?
Yeah.
I mean, but definitionally, don't you want you can die under general anesthesia.
Yeah.
It's very high stakes.
Yes, yes.
I mean, and and this has always been the the kind of canonical argument against racial preferences, right?
Well, do you you know, do you care if your surgeon is black or something?
But it's like in front of us, it's not a good idea.
I know, I know.
And you know, there's another detail in the story where she apparently, uh according to at least one or two people said that so when they do residency admissions, which is a different thing, that's for when they're actually admitting basically like trainee doctors who've already graduated medical school, they have a this sort of rank list of who they want to admit, and she advocated for bumping a white candidate down um many slots because she thought, well, we already have you know enough white people.
And uh I don't I think that ultimately was was reversed, but still, I mean she was explicitly saying we should, you know, move the rank of different candidates around based on race.
To do and these And the residents would be actually performing anesthesiology.
So Yeah, I just again of all the places have DEI office.
If you want to have the DEI office at the Department of Labor, I'm gonna fight that, but you can maybe make like a stronger anesthesiology.
Yeah, not where I would put it.
Not not where I would put a D that that's that's the if anything other than making sure the patient wakes up is the mission statement of an anesthesiology department, uh no good.
After a Native American applicant was rejected in 2021, Lucero chewed out the committee and made members sit through a two hour lecture on native history.
What is this all about?
So there was a struggle session administered by this DEI anesthesiologies are Yeah, I guess so.
Um I think I think that struggle session was was if I remember right, her sister.
Yeah, that's right.
I'm sorry.
Uh Native American history d delivered by her own sister.
Yeah.
So I Yeah, and again, you know, it's also th this is the other thing, uh it's just a time suck, too.
Like there's a reasonable.
I mean you know, I we haven't even gotten to what they did to their curriculum at UCLA, which was to make all the kids take a required structural racism and health equity class.
And in that class, I mean, they literally learned uh one of the readings said that fat phobia was medicine status quo and said that the concept of obesity enacts violence on fat people.
Basically said doctors just a treadmill is violence.
Right, shouldn't treat obesity as a health condition.
And this was in a required class for UCLA medical students.
And so one of the put some of the pushback I got on the piece about racial preferences was you don't understand.
They made these changes to their curriculum and they had a little less time in class, so maybe that's why the the performance went down, but it's not about the racial preferences.
Okay.
It's about the curriculum.
Well, what did they do to the curriculum?
They took time away from the hard sciences to teach them sort of progressive pseudoscience.
This is literally like mysticism.
That's not a good defense.
They shouldn't have done that either.
Again, I I we can make fun of it and we should.
God forbid Peeps, someone's gonna die because of this, and people die all the time under general anesthesia.
Again, anesthesiology one is someone's gone under anesthesiology a couple times, like it's no joke.
In the anesthesiology department where Lucero or Lucero helps rank applicants to the department's residency program, she's rebuffed calls to blind the race of candidates, telling colleagues in January 2020 email that despite California's ban on racial preferences, quote, we are not required to blind any information.
So this is a great case for Harmete Dylan to come swooping in from the US Office of Civil Rights, right?
And and I believe they're already looking into it uh yeah, I think it's HHS's Office of Civil Rights that's looking into it, but HHS has opened an investigation and there was also a lawsuit um from students for fair admissions, and that's the same group that uh did the Harvard lawsuit.
She said here's the Department of Act.
You're right, knocked down a white person and said, quote, uh white male me may be knocked down several spots because, quote, we have too many of his kind.
Right.
Not not uh not a comment.
Right.
Not a comment.
It's not Charlie Kurt.
No, yeah, not it's not a comment.
It's not a comment you could imagine being said about any other group.
Uh nor should it be said about any of the people.
Yeah, of course.
No, of course, of course, of course.
She told doctors who who is this person again?
I gotta reread this.
She's the the head of admissions at the school.
Delightful.
Yeah.
Is she still there?
Yeah, I believe so.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Oh, nice.
Uh she told doctors who voiced concern that they had no right to be at an opinion because they were not BIPOC.
For people listening on radio or podcasting, that is not a Star Wars character.
What what is BIPOC?
Uh it stands for black, indigenous, and other people of color.
People of color.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So you you let's say you're a 45-year-old, you know, for 45 year old, you've been there 45 years as a doctor, award-winning saved lives.
You don't have an opinion because you might be a white man.
That's according to the admissions.
The admissions directly.
Yeah.
That's what she's saying.
Yeah, the honestly, this is like real life horrifying if people have to get medical care in the UCLA system.
The focus on racial diversity has coincided with dramatic shift in racial and ethnic composition of medical school, where the number of Asian matriculants fell by almost a third by 2019-2022, according to public available data.
No other elite medical school in California saw a similar decline.
Yeah, I think that's true.
There maybe there was one that, you know, saw something kind of close.
But I think I think most of the I think it was really when I double checked the data, it was quite noticeable how much UCLA could be.
But so like I mean look I I I need to just voice this.
If we're also afraid of being called a racist, is it conceivable that just a again this says a third to half of the medical school, this is a professor that told you is incredibly unqualified.
Is it possible that just a super unqualified doctor is slipping through the cracks that's like a black woman and eventually she's gonna have to make life saving decisions.
Yeah.
But that's where we're heading like they we're all afraid to say anything because she might report you to the race Yeah I mean look and the way and I would say too you know the the the way also to avoid having a if there's a you know qualified black female doctor the way to avoid people questioning her qualifications and the way to avoid sort of placing her under this constant cloud of suspicion is to stop doing racial preferences that sort of rationalize the suspicion.
Right?
Like I I mean you know I feel bad for anyone who gets into UCLA who who really is very good totally agree.
You know gets everyone's always looking at them, right?
I mean if you're a super qualified black applicant now people are going to wonder you know and that that's not right.
So now going to the other coast you my friend have been like a ninja towards Harvard and I love it.
So let's start with let's start with this one because this one's a little bit more uh it's is older I think.
Yeah I am right.
Harvard president Claudine Gay hit with six new charges of plagiarism.
So you were one of the ones that to that took down Claudine Gay in addition to Elista Fonick and her wonderful performance.
How does a Harvard University president p plagiarize herself to the top yeah I mean so look what she did was clearly covered by Harvard's plagiarism policies which were written in a very exacting way.
I think I don't know you know what you were told growing up but I always had sort of the fear of God put into me when it came to plagiarism in high school and then and then in college they really would say just you know if it's more than a few words right that you know even if it's not verbatim but it's paraphrase that could be plagiarism and that's a very serious offense.
And so I would in college read over my papers and think, is it plagiarized?
You know, I have to make sure I'm changing enough of the language I have to be sure I'm putting it in my own words um everything cited.
And look you know uh of all the plagiarism scandals there have been hers was not the worst but she was probably in the it w not the worst in terms of the severity of the plagiarism but it was plagiarism.
It did violate Harvard's policies and she was the president of Harvard University, right?
And so subject I think presumably to kind of the highest possible standard for academic integrity.
And she oversaw an institution that then you have internal documents reveal pervasive because she's gone now reversal perva reveal pervasive pattern of racial discrimination at Harvard Law Review.
Yes.
What's going on here?
Yeah so uh some of the discrimination comes is in the selection of editors for the law review but the lion's share of it is in the selection of articles.
Which is important.
Right.
I mean those are you know the Harvard law review is influential it matters who's published there.
The law review articles really do shape the state of the law to some extent right you know how how important legal academia is can be debated but to the extent it matters this is a pretty powerful journal right it matters what they publish.
And they are not selecting articles just based on merit or subject matter diversity, but explicitly based on both the author's race um and in many cases the race of the authors cited in the footnotes.
No.
Yes.
And that was in fact part of their rubric for evaluating to get published in the Harvard law review you have to have like half of your authors be basically basically there's this initial That's that's our well and so here's the thing right and this this often is the case with any kind of regime of racial preferences it doesn't just happen at one kind of stage of decision making it happens at every stage.
So there's an initial kind of screen out process um where they're told to consider author diversity and that process which is done by just a few editors weeds out like eighty percent of submissions.
And then everything that remains is subject to this additional screen where the you know some editor reads it and kind of writes a short memo, and there's a there's a template that they're supposed to fill out about the pros and cons of each article, and one of the things they are supposed to look at, or at least they were as of uh a year ago, was uh the racial diversity of the sources cited.
Racial, gender, all kinds of diversity.
What what if you have a really good citation from a white man?
You're not you're at your quota?
That I yeah, I mean they they literally and they they would literally say things like they would literally say things like I'm very you know, I'm disappointed that the piece didn't have much uh uh diversity in terms of its sources cited.
That was a real negative, and they would give it a uh poor recommendation based in part on that lack of diversity.
I mean, you can we published uh over 2300 pages of documents of these internal memos so people can judge for themselves and you can just see what they said.
And in some cases, it's kind of an afterthought or they don't really take it into account, but there are quite a few cases where the editors explicitly penalize pieces for the diversity of the citations.
How did you find out about this one?
Um, I I I got a tip from someone who shall remain nameless that it was going on at the Harvard Law Review and then started doing some digging and managed to get my hands on a lot of these documents.
Um I generally like to do in my reporting is to publish as many primary source documents as possible.
Because often, right, the immediate response is oh, you're making it up or you're exaggerating.
And I just look you can you can look at the entire tranch of documents, right?
You know, you you judge for yourself.
And so the hard Harvard Law Review is an independent nonprofit and legally distinct from the university.
It operates out of a Harvard building.
It's tended by Harvard janitors and employs only Harvard students and editors.
It's also advised by administrators, professors at Harvard Law School, including the dean and some student editors, are on federal financial aid.
And so someone is planning to sue over this, is that right?
Yes.
So uh Jonathan Mitchell, who's the former solicitor general of Texas.
Uh bad guy to tick off.
Yeah, he's he's planning to sue.
Um, but they're also now sub under three different federal investigations um by the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Justice Department.
And obviously the the deal that the administration is trying to reach with Harvard could resolve those investigations.
We'll see.
I mean, I I don't know, but um until that deal happens, at least, you know, they are they are under multiple federal probes.
Hey everybody, Charlie Kirk here.
We are saving babies with pre-born.
There are 24,836 kindergartners starting school this month who wouldn't be alive today if it hadn't been for what pre-born did in 2019.
That's how many babies were saved that year because of the gift of ultrasounds from people like you.
When a woman considering abortions sees her baby on that ultrasound and hears the baby's heartbeat, it doubles the chance she'll choose life.
140 dollars gives mothers a free ultrasound and saves babies.
280 can save 10 babies, and just 28 bucks a month can save a baby a month for less than a dollar a day.
And a $15,000 gift will provide an ultrasound machine that will save babies' lives for years to come.
Whether you want to save one baby or five or hundreds, it's just a phone call or click away.
Join me now by saving babies.
It's 833 850-229.
I'm a donor to pre-born and you should be too.
Or click on the pre-born banner right now at Charliekirk.com.
That is the pre-born banner at Charlie Kirk.com.
Check it out right now.
Yeah, so what is your instinct?
Do you think this is just the tip of the iceberg at some of these elite schools?
I mean, it's there's so much worse stuff that's going on that we don't know about.
Yeah, I generally think that's right.
Now, again, it some of them are probably trying to course correct a little bit just because they're so scared of Trump, but I think that um I don't think this is particularly aberrational.
How much of it is put in writing may vary depending on the institution, but again, like I said earlier, there's there's uh red states, state schools.
You can find tons of this stuff in kind of every in every part of university decision making.
And your Reporting's so good.
I mean, this you got a Slack message in here.
That's like that's the best because that's really a window.
Yeah.
This is so good.
Four out of five people raised in this message.
So message I'm guessing this is a uh communique or they're debating who to publish.
Got it.
Like a forum or something.
Four out of five people raised in this message are white men, which I find concerning.
One editor wrote in Slack.
This is an editor of the law review.
What before I go any further, what does it take to become an editor of the law review?
Well, a few people get on just through the strength of their grades or this kind of competition they do, right?
If they're really, really strong students' writers.
Most people are chosen through the or about half of them are chosen through this sort of holistic review process that takes into account their grades, this kind of writing competition, and then also their personal statement and kind of DEI factors.
Says, quote, having read the article pretty thoroughly, I think a huge missing piece was that of how race fits into policing and misconduct.
Right.
So keep going.
Yeah, well, this is another important point, which is that they don't just screen the articles based on the race of the author or even the race of the sources cited.
They also look at just does the article talk enough about race and gender.
So my favorite one actually is they this is in another article I wrote about this.
They nixed, I think an article that was a feminist analysis of antitrust law.
That sounds as woke as it can get, right?
Feminist analysis of antitrust law.
Why did they nix it?
Well, because it advanced a binaristic conception of gender and didn't talk enough about the experiences of trans and non-binary people.
And they put this in writing, right?
I mean, and it's just a few of the things that we're talking about.
Of antitrust law.
Yes.
And it's and it's like this is just a good idea.
This is a fall of civilization.
By the way, why should we even take seriously a feminist analysis of antitrust law?
How about this?
Analysis of antitrust law.
It doesn't matter if you're not going to be able to do that.
Right, right, right.
Well now.
Yeah, I mean, feminist analysis of antitrust law is almost going to be like the conservative position in ten years.
You know, I was gonna say.
It's well said.
Um in a separate exchange, an editor implied that a piece should be subject to expedited review because the author was a minority.
This person of color author, the editor wrote in Slack, adding that the scholar had already had a publication offer from Northwestern.
We should send for review tonight if we want to move on this.
So you get elevated and fast tracked if you're a person of color.
Yes.
And in fact, in some of these memos, they explicitly say recommend publishing scholars because they say by being published in the Harvard Law Review, they will advance their career.
So they basically say we should publish so and so because by doing so we will advance the career of a young scholar of color.
That's part of their calculus when deciding who to publish.
I mean, it's just it's remarkable.
And the law review right has also adopted several policies, while not racially discriminatory, seem designed to ens ensure uh editors to the party line.
One resolution passed in 2023 called for quote indigenous inclusive citation practices.
You mentioned this.
So just so we're clear.
I don't know what that means.
Indigenous inclusive citation practices, so we need like more Iroquois Indians or something.
I mean, yeah, it ha to be fair to them, I think it has something to do with how you cite cases involving tribal law or native tricks.
I mean, you know, there might be something legitimate there, but they obviously package it in the most woke language.
They've lost all credibility.
Yeah, I know I mean, you might be right.
I'm not inclined to give them the benefit of the I don't I don't think they have the benefit of the doubt.
So I want to close uh with some time, and we have a little bit of time here because this you know, we're talking about the university, you're talking about your reporting, and President Trump is certainly clamping down on them.
And a lot of the activity happening on campuses that gets the headlines is this Jew hate stuff, the anti-Israel stuff.
And there's been a debate on the right of what should we do to respond to this campus activity.
And it's quite split, it's all over the map.
As you know, I resolutely reject all this Jew hate stuff, and I want to talk about that, you know.
But I think we'll actually more interestingly, let's make this a starting point.
There are some, not all, there are some in the Jewish community of whom I respect them greatly, but I fundamentally disagree.
They say now is the time for a Jewish civil rights, where we need kind of a new DEI style regime.
People like Jonathan Greenblatt, who I don't love, obviously or respect, He's kind of come out and said something similar.
What what what are you what are you thinking about this while balancing the disturbing rise of anti-Semitism with constitutionally protected speech?
Yeah, I don't think it makes any sense to try to add Jews to the list of to kind of bring Jews under DEI's protective umbrella.
I think that's going to backfire um for lots of reasons.
I mean, one is just DEI's the worldview is bad on the merits and should be rejected, right?
Um and we don't want to reinforce its premises.
Um you know, I I also think there frankly is a dynamic where especially for people on the right, it's very important, I think, to be consistent about this stuff.
And when you're not and you're hypocritical, people see the hypocrisy.
And while I don't think that the hypocrisy is like the main or it's it's not it's not why anti-Semitism is rising, but it's not helping.
Like it's not helping, I guess I would say.
No, it does not help.
You're right.
And uh you know, look, the other thing I would say too is just this is not this is not effective.
I mean, this is not how you get rid of the problem.
The way you get rid of the problem is by admitting students who actually want to study um and are not scholar activists who are going to go out and take over public spaces and violate laws, right, instead of just going to class.
I mean, it's really an admissions problem.
It is, and it's an Islamist problem.
So the some people are saying, though, that hey, we need to some people in the government have alluded to this, not President Trump, but we need to make anti-Semitism like illegal, basically.
And I'm I'm paraphrasing, but you've seen that kind of yeah.
So that's that's not well, first of all, you can't make ideologies illegal because of the First Amendment.
But let me here's here's the the other comeback to this.
So I just reported this today.
We're recording in late August, right?
So Columbia law school just did this diversity training.
Yeah, tell us all about it.
Right.
And the diversity training was organized around a single vignette about anti-Semitism.
It was something silly where like someone complains that it's hard to schedule events around the Jewish holidays in the fall.
And that's scene framed as an example of maybe maybe not even anti-Semitism, but insensitivity, and they spend all this time talking about it.
Okay.
Yeah.
Whatever it's kind of a silly anti-Semitism.
It's not, it's not, it's it's also if for one, it it's it's not the kind of thing that actually upset Jewish students, right?
What upset Jewish students at Columbia was calls to kill them, which actually happens.
Yeah, well, I I mean the you know, Zionists deserve to die, right?
That's that's that's what actually was at issue, not you know, someone being a little insensitive about whether you organize an event on Young Shapura Sakot, right?
That that's not the problem.
But then the other key thing to see is that this training was facilitated by a diversity consultant who has written all sorts of ridiculous things, including that she never she even wrote a blog post, I think, saying that she doesn't ask if someone if she sees a man attempting to go into the women's restroom, she won't stop him or ask questions because she doesn't want to inadvertently commit a microaggression.
I mean, that's who Columbia decided to do uh tap for this training.
During the training, she explicitly accuses President Trump of committing a microaggression when he complimented the president of Liberia on his English.
She says that the terms crazy uncle and grandfathering can be offensive and up-and-coming lawyers should not say them.
I mean, it has all the kind of hallmarks of a stupid crazy DEI training.
It's just that the vignette they chose was about anti-Semitism, right?
So not only is it not addressing the real anti-Semitism problem on Columbia's campus, it's also reinforcing the crazy DEI stuff that Trump I think has rightly been against.
So yeah, I I I think it is there there is a role for the federal government to play in fighting anti-Semitism, you know, content neutral civil rights laws that just say that you can't uh, you know, deny Jewish students access to the street.
Well yeah, when you're trying to block classes, of course that's illegal, you know.
Pull the visas.
I mean, the whole thing is just ridiculous.
Yeah, there's all sorts of levers you can use, but you know, demanding additional anti-Semitism training, I I just I think that's gonna backfire.
Look, also, like has anyone ever enjoyed sitting through one of these trainings?
And does anyone ever come out of it thinking, I'm I'm so glad I had to do that.
No, everyone hates the trainings.
So why add Jews to that, right?
Because then the Jews are more kind of proximate to the resentment.
Just it's a it's it's I think it is very short-sighted.
Private student loan debt in America totals about 300 billion dollars.
About 45 billion of that is labeled as distressed.
Why ReFi refinances distress or defaulted private student loans that others will not touch.
They provide you with a custom loan payment based on your ability to pay.
Go to why refi.com.
Why ReFi does not care what your credit score is when the payment on your distress or defaulted private student loan is so big that you can't ever get ahead on your finances, why refi is surely your best option.
Go to Y Refi.com and you can even skip a payment every six months of the 12 times without penalty.
Go to why refi.com, that is why.com.
I guarantee you, somebody in this audience has private student loan debt issues.
We'll get out of debt today at Y Refi.com.
Because of private student loan debt, so many Americans feel helpless and they've even lost hope.
Why Refi gives you a light at the end of the tunnel?
So go to why refi.com.
Why ReFi offers a three-minute rate check without any credit impact.
Go to Y R E F Y dot com.
That's why Refi.com.
What why are we seeing a rise in Jew hate in this country?
Um again, another thing we could talk for hours about.
I think some of it is just the result of us getting more and more distance away from the Holocaust and this kind of uh basically phylosemitic consensus we had breaking down.
I also think, and I'm not an expert on this, but my understanding is that among evangelicals, uh I I think there used to be this kind of pre-millenarian, like uh idi eschatology in which there's sort of this idea that like it was important to support Israel because the end of days was imminent.
I should say I'm I am Jewish, so I don't know.
No, you're you just said it better than the other.
Yeah, I'm not an expert on this stuff.
You use it very, pre-trib, pre-millennial theology is.
But that, and I think a lot of people.
The state of Israel is fundamental to that.
Right.
And I think a lot of people, including frankly, many progressive Jews sort of held their noses at that and sneered at it and thought, well, that's you know, stupid, weird theology.
But you know, one of the benefits of that theology was that it meant that the predominantly Christian American right of cover was very yes, very pro-Israel.
And it's a good example of, you know, Chesterton's fence, the idea that you don't always want to tear things down when you don't quite understand the function they're serving in society, right?
I think that you kind of got rid of that theology and it maybe opened the door to some not good stuff.
And honestly, look, uh yeah, I mean, obviously the the war in Gaza has has increased the salience of the issue.
Um obviously just the internet allows all sorts of radical ideologies to spread.
Um yeah, you know, I have to say I I struggle with this because I just fundamentally have always thought that like hardcore anti-Semitism is just so sort of irrational and not rooted in reality that I mean it rots the brain.
Yeah, trying to even you're trying to explain the thought process of uh you know, the the the logic of something that is fundamentally irrational.
I mean, it is not logical, so it can be hard in some ways to provide a rational explanation.
But I will I will just say I will also say though, I do not think the main cause, frankly, is college students at Columbia.
I think they are more a symptom and a reflection than a cause.
I think the cause is much deeper kind of demographic and yeah, the Columbia problem's actually really simple.
Yeah.
It's actually we've imported a bunch of Muslim students that hate Jews and have a many of which hate the West.
And then you couple that with a bunch of secular people that are looking for meaning and they look at everything through in a pressure, oppression, oppressed dynamics.
The assumption that Israelis are are white and the Palestinians are brown.
Correct.
Which if you actually go to the region and look at people, it's like totally not true.
I was there last year and saw a one of the darkest skins.
We'll go meet a misrahi or something.
No, I'm at a I but you see you see even like Ethiopian Jews who are have some of the darkest skin you can ever you've ever seen who are wearing the full orthodox garb in Jerusalem.
Like it's it's it's a it's an amazing country, right?
But just the whole racial imaginary that we project onto that region, it's totally wrong.
Yeah.
So what are what would you say are one or two of the biggest lies about what's happening right now?
Again, we're taping this So we don't know things can change, but let's just say more broadly with Israel that you wish could be corrected that are just falsehoods that are spread that you kind of pound your table and you're like, I can't believe people believe this.
I mean the rate the race thing is is a big one in terms of the left, right?
That's that's a big issue on the left where they they project this they they try to basically project American racial categories onto a region that just totally rejects them and resists them.
Um I think on the right, you know, it on the left, people will just take they'll take something crazy from Israel out of context, like something really bad that one person said and and and say, oh,
you know, clearly Israel wants to do X, Y, Z. It's like, well, you know, if some obscure government minister says something nuts, right, like we don't, it's not fair to regardless of which party's in power, you know, it's not fair to conflate, right, you know, one crazy person in, you know, an obscure government position with the an entire political party or with the entire country, certainly, right?
Um I think that's that's a problem.
Um The other thing I would say too, though, is uh so much and I think this is more the fault of of the Americans who talk about it than it is Israelis, but there they're you know, they're to go back to the anti-Semitism training.
There's this this impulse to say, well, anti-Semitism, it's another ism, frame Jews as victims and kind of add Jews to the list of victim categories.
I just don't think that that's compelling.
No.
Right?
And I think it's self-defeating.
Yeah, and I think and I think Israel is actually like a very cool country.
And if they talk more about the coolness and the tech and the military, right, you know, one reason I think you do see some of the anti-Semitism percolating on the right in in some cases is that you know, if you think about how to reach like young men who are turning right.
Yeah.
Send to the television for a weekend.
Yeah, well, but no, yeah.
It probably probably would would make them more pro-Israel.
But also, right, you know, how not to reach them, you don't want to do this kind of hectoring school marm, like you have to be, you're you're a bigot for X, Y, or Z, just because people have been sort of trained understandably from all the DEI to react with suspicion to any kind of accusation of bigotry.
Again, there is real anti-Semitism, it's a problem, but you know, when you lecture people, I just don't think that's a good idea.
Yeah, and I think some and this is where I get some pushback.
I was just debating the other day privately with a very nice woman who you would know I'll tell you off camera.
And she was insistent that you can't if you are anti-Israel, you're anti-Semitic.
And I said, Well, what do you mean by anti-Israel?
And so, and she was getting to the place where like you must support the Netanyahu government, otherwise you're anti-Semitic.
I'm like, that's you're gonna lose people.
I mean, you know, there's a lot of there's a lot of people.
There's a lot of conservative American Jews who think the Netanyahu government mishandled the war and would prefer like Natali Bennett, who's actually to Netanyahu's right.
So I mean that's the other thing.
People don't it's a very complicated situation, right?
It is I think there needs to be a little bit of allowance there.
Yeah.
But like and here's another thing I would say, I don't know how I I have no idea how they would do this, but one thing I've been doing since since April is actually taking Krav Maga lessons.
Rav Maga is the martial art of the Israeli defense forces.
It's cool.
I think every young Jew should learn it.
Yeah, but but also just like young people, it's it's it's good exercise.
You feel like a badass after you do one of the moves correctly.
You're basically learning to be like a real-life action hero who can actually defend yourself and your loved ones from an aggressor.
And like I would just think again, if you're trying to reach, you know, young men who are tired of being scolded and and tired of gold rhetoric.
Right.
Don't just just talking too much about anti-Semitism.
Again, I'm not saying don't talk about it at all, but like if you want to make people just think Israel's cool, like talk about Krav Maga.
Talk about like the badass stuff that comes out of Israel.
Like, I feel like a lot of young guys, if they see think Israel and they think, oh, cool fighting system that teaches us how to, you know, defend ourselves against criminals, it's like, okay, that's that's the kind of message that like a y, you know, a young like 18, 20 year old guy is gonna like, right?
Yes.
And the and the more they understand Islam, the better Israel looks too.
They have no idea what it Israel is up against, right?
Which is these Islamic barbarian monsters.
Yeah.
Which which which everyone no one wants to say out loud.
Uh but so final thought on that though.
How would you say is a domestic prescription to quell and defeat this rise in Jew hate, which rots the brain and destroys the soul?
Yeah.
Um, I I generally go back to if you enforce the laws evenly and just hold everyone to the same standards.
I think you do you end up solving a lot of the problem.
You get rid of a lot of the protests that violated the content neutral rules.
You show that look, just everyone has to treat each other equally.
You model that kind of ethic of equality.
Um, I think just talking about again, dividing the world into a press or an oppressed, that's never going to end well for the Jews.
Um, so getting rid of DEI is good.
Uh that's very fundamental.
That's very important.
Um Yeah, I mean, that's basically what I would say.
Look, and the other thing I would say though, too, is just uh unfortunately, you know, anti-Semitism's always been with us.
It's not a rational force, and we no longer enjoy the kind of golden era where you could just take this very pro-Israel and and phylosemitic consensus for granted.
It's a new terrain.
Yeah, and you know, like probably not the worst thing for Jews to learn some self-defense.
I I unfortunately.
But how can people follow you, support you, look at your work?
Uh I'm on Twitter at Aaron Sebarium.
I write for the Washington Free Beacon.
Um important work.
Talk a little bit about that.
Oh, yeah, sure.
Um, so we we we're one of the few outlets on the right that's really dedicated almost exclusively to investigative reporting.
Yeah, I know.
That's what makes you guys different.
Um yeah, and and I think for for young people interested, uh It's the most important type of report.
Yes, I would say it there's also a temptation on the right in particular to want to go into opinion journalism, which we've sort of overindexed on.
Um guilty.
Yeah, no, look, I mean, I was I was that way as a college student.
I was like, ah, I want to, you know, be a New York Times columnist and and spout off my views.
The reality is that that it's not impossible to be influential as an opinion columnist, but it's very, very difficult.
I agree.
And it's much easier, you'll get much more bang for your buck if you go into investing.
So many unreported stories in this country.
And and to be honest, it does not, it's not all that hard.
It's not all that hard to do.
It takes a little work, but like you just you interview people, you get people to give you documents, and you just you report it accurately.
You don't have to editorialize, you let the facts speak for themselves.
Aaron, thank you for your time.
Incredible work.
If I was giving up Peel at surprises, you would have got one, especially for the monoclonal antibody story.
