Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 10, 2023 - Candace Owens

59:09

Vivek Ramaswamy Answers Questions From Trump Supporters

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	All right, guys, the political tides are definitely shifting in America today.
	I think just a few short months ago, everybody thought that the presidential race was going to come down to Trump versus DeSantis on the Republican side.
	And out of nowhere, a person named Vivek Ramaswamy started climbing in the polls, and now people are starting to pay attention.
	You have people that are behind DeSantis that are critiquing him, people that are behind Trump that are critiquing him, or at least asking questions.
	I reached out to Vivek and I asked him to answer those questions, obviously, because I am very friendly with the Trump family, with the Trump base.
	And he was willing to come on and answer one of the biggest Trump influencers, Rogan O'Hanley.
	He goes online as the moniker DC Drano.
	Both of them will be joining me today for a very good conversation regarding both of their perspectives and what people are thinking right now in America.
	So you're not going to want to miss this discussion.
	session. That's today on Candace Owens.
	You guys probably know him better as his online moniker, DC Drano.
	He is draining the swamp.
	He has been for a while.
	He posts tons of memes.
	It's a great follow if you're not following him.
	Definitely follow DC Drano on Twitter and on Instagram.
	Vivek, it's so lovely to have you back.
	Obviously, everybody who's been following the show kind of knows where I stand.
	I invited multiple candidates on this show at the beginning.
	DeSantis and his team declined to come on or never answered us.
	I'm not sure what that was.
	Vivek, we had you on early.
	At that time, people just did not really think it was going to be a campaign,
	that people were very much talking about Trump versus DeSantis,
	and no one was kind of paying attention to Vivek.
	I have said a thousand times, I felt great after speaking to you.
	It was a very illuminating conversation.
	And beyond anything else, I think that we all in the control room said that was refreshing.
	That was the number one adjective that was used, is that we felt that it was a very refreshing conversation, which felt like it was above board.
	So I want to congratulate you on just first and foremost, just cracking.
	And now you're everywhere, cracking the conversation.
	People are starting to talk about you.
	And of course, necessarily with that comes a ton of hate.
	We're going to get into some of the questions that people have, and obviously you've been an open book.
	You've said, I will answer anything, and we are going to do a true accounting.
	First, I just want to ask you both.
	I think DeSantis' campaign has been a disaster.
	I am sure everybody had high hopes for his campaign.
	When it initially got started off, when it kicked off, it was this glorious start.
	We're kind of I actually had some technical difficulties on Twitter.
	But everyone was holding their breath for this big matchup between Trump and DeSantis.
	And I would imagine that even they are really let down by what's actually transpired since.
	I've given my opinion already to my audience about why I think that is.
	I'd like to hear from both of you.
	Rogan, let's start with you. What did the DeSantis team get wrong, if you agree with that assessment?
	I think it was failed from the start.
	And as a Florida resident, as someone...
	Who has been here for both his campaigns.
	It is a not well-kept secret that he is bad at campaigning.
	He just doesn't draw huge crowds.
	He's not the most personable.
	We love him as governor.
	Let me say that he's probably one of the best governors in American history in recent memory.
	However, he could not beat an agricultural commissioner named Adam Putnam back in 2018.
	He needed Trump's endorsement to do it.
	And then he almost lost, he barely snuck out a victory against Andrew Gillum, who's like a meth head, you know, cheat on his family, who was found passed out with drugs and an orgy.
	I mean, so he has not beat very impressive people until recently, and he did it only with the help of Trump.
	And now he's trying to take on Trump and in the worst possible time and in the worst possible way by effectively aligning Thank you so much.
	And I agree with that assessment 100%.
	Vivek, going to you, what do you think, if anything, again, that was my own assessment, that the Sanders campaign got wrong?
	Look, I think there's two things.
	I mean, one is I'm going to draw from my business experience here, Candice.
	One of the things you see in any startup and every campaign in some sense is a startup.
	The ones that start with often too much money before they've defined their product market fit.
	That's what you define it in the business world before you actually understand what your product even is.
	But if you start with loads of money, One of the things you see in startups that fail time and again, especially in the last 10 years with venture capital pouring in, is that those businesses actually are the ones that don't make it versus the ones that actually start scrappy.
	Don't start with too much money, but start with a clear product or a clear vision or a clear message in the case of a political campaign.
	And so I think in some sense, any campaign that is overburdened with like tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars of super PAC dollars flowing in before they've figured out what they even want to stand for.
	This is Jeb Bush.
	This is Scott Walker.
	So in some sense, this is not new.
	We're just seeing An old and repeated pattern where the establishment pours in gobs of money to somebody who they think is going to be the person they want them to be when that person isn't yet even sure what their vision or message is.
	And so I think we saw that in 2015 and 2016.
	We see that again. We see it.
	It's analog in the business world all the time.
	And so that's basically what I think happened here.
	I share Rogan's view that I think Ron DeSantis actually is quite a good governor.
	I think that there are also a number of other great governors in this country who don't get enough credit.
	You know, we could think about Kristi Noem or Kim Reynolds or Brian Kemp in Georgia.
	Not all of them seek the attention in the same way, but I think Ron DeSantis is on the list of good governors in this country, and he deserves credit for that.
	I think when it comes to the US presidency, though, we need somebody who's not just an executor of a vision of somebody else's vision.
	We need somebody who's actually bringing an independent vision of who we are as Americans.
	What do we actually stand for?
	What does it mean to be a citizen of this nation?
	I think we need a nationalist in the White House.
	And I just don't think that Ron DeSantis has that national vision yet.
	Even though I view him more as a colleague than a competitor, I'm going to need him exactly where he is as an excellent governor, as somebody who executes and gets things done.
	And so that's why I'm not going to be attacking him.
	I'm going to compliment him on where he's good, but everybody has their strengths and weaknesses.
	I think he can continue to be a good governor of Florida and maybe even play other roles in this country.
	But that's my assessment.
	You know what? I definitely agree with you.
	And it's funny because what I've said is I felt that him launching his campaign was very much not a startup.
	It felt like it was very established.
	They were very established. And I said that his influencer orbit really hurt him.
	And when you look at what was so successful about Trump in 2015 is, and you'll hear the Trump family talk about this.
	You know, I'm good friends with them. They've been wonderful to me.
	They talk about how they didn't really know what they were doing.
	Yeah. You know, they were running from one place to the next place, and nobody took the campaign seriously.
	Everyone thought it was a joke. And they were learning as they went.
	And that really is what happens when you're at a startup.
	How do we adapt? What's going on today?
	And they didn't have a ton of people saying everyone thought it was honestly impossible.
	And in many ways, it made them have to get smarter and focus and hone in on their message more.
	So I think that is an accurate assessment, that it was way too establishment.
	And I definitely agree with you with saying that you don't believe that he is a nationalist.
	I certainly don't believe that either.
	We are days away from the Durban Accords, the greatest threat to the United States dollar global dominance in the past 80 years.
	On August 22nd, BRICS nations, that's Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, are expected to announce the launch of a new international super currency, fully backed by gold or other commodities.
	This is part of their long-term plan to supplant the US and the dollar as cornerstones of the global financial system.
	You can protect your IRA or 401k from the fallout from this landmark announcement by diversifying with gold from Birch Gold.
	Historically, gold has been a safe haven in times of high uncertainty, which it is right now.
	When currencies fail, gold is a safe haven.
	How much more times a dollar have?
	Protect your savings with gold.
	Birch Gold has an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau and thousands of happy customers.
	So text Candice to 989898 and get your free info kit on gold.
	If a central bank digital currency becomes a reality, it will be nice to have some gold to depend on.
	Again, text Candice to 989898.
	Well, Vivek, what's happened necessarily now that people are looking at the polls and suddenly you're seeing Ramaswamy next to DeSantis, who they thought was going to be way up with Donald Trump.
	People are going, who is this guy?
	Who is Vivek? Where did he come from?
	And people are starting to hone in and wonder, ask some questions about you.
	And they're going through your book now.
	They're going through every statement you've ever made in the past.
	It's necessary. You're kind of going through this This historical autopsy of sorts.
	And one area that I think people had a lot of questions was regarding January 6th.
	There were some people that felt that you flip-flopped on your messaging when January 6th took place versus what you could be saying now.
	And Rogan, you were one of the people that felt this way.
	You said the messaging was switched. So I'll just let you ask him directly of what you felt he said and how you think his message has changed.
	Yeah, so I also was...
	Like many, surprised at Vivek's rise.
	And I saw at the Turning Point conference, people were cheering for him.
	And I'm like, who even is this guy?
	I've never seen a critical interview.
	And so I started to dig because, as people are pretty well aware, I'm a Trump supporter, have been since 2016.
	And the first thing that came across my mind is, why is this guy running against Trump as Trump is being indicted?
	And then I started to dig a little deeper on Twitter, and I came across some passages from your book.
	And I don't know which book it is.
	It's one of the two.
	But it talks about January 6th, and it says, it was a dark day for democracy.
	The loser of the last election refused to concede the race, claimed the election was stolen, Do you think that the 2020 election was fair?
	Do you think that Joe Biden got the most votes in American history?
	Or do you think 2020 was rigged?
	So I'll answer that.
	I think 2020 was rigged specifically by big tech.
	But I just want to say something at the outset, because this is the first time we're meeting, is that I've actually been a longtime fan of your tweets particularly.
	And I understand that I did a little bit come out of nowhere.
	I was in the business world.
	I had no public footprint at all until 2020 and then really 2021 when I stepped down from my job as a CEO. So I invite the scrutiny.
	Some of it's bad faith, but then I take someone like you and I understand your heart is actually in this for the country as opposed to some of the other trolls.
	And so that's why I'm engaging with this directly.
	So let me be really clear about something.
	I've written three books in the last 18 months.
	That passage has now been floating around Twitter.
	I'd encourage you to read the book or at least even the chapter that that came from.
	Those lines were tongue-in-cheek in part because those were the opening words of the chapter.
	It was a dark day for democracy.
	The winner refused to concede the election, raised hundreds of millions of dollars.
	Those exact words I'm referring to, of course, Stacey Abrams.
	That was literally the opening paragraph of that chapter.
	And it turned out that those words were literally borrowed from a description of somebody else criticizing Donald Trump that I then cut and pasted.
	So, look, I have detailed messaging on all of this, but you read that chapter and you read that book.
	It's easy for someone to airlift something out of Nation of Victims without reading the whole book.
	It was literally a satirical chapter that started with those words
	that someone had used against Donald Trump with Stacey Abrams as the punchline.
	And here's the thing about the books I've written.
	I wasn't writing them with any intention of running for president, right?
	And so, otherwise you'd read them and can this be misquoted?
	No, these are, if I may say so myself, I would say intellectual books.
	These are not candidate books, okay?
	These are books that were written in part of a career, three books in 20 months.
	Candace, and probably you, I don't know if you've written books as well,
	understand what it takes to write one.
	I've written three and they're not candidate books.
	Are deeply introspective books.
	So much so that actually even some of the things that I said in Woke Inc, I've moved a little bit from today.
	What did I say in that book and I stand by it today?
	Two things that I think are really important points.
	The 2020 election was stolen principally by big tech.
	The Google search algorithms that suppressed actual stories that you could have read on Donald Trump.
	Hunter Biden laptop story Suppressed on the eve of an election, there's definitive data showing that that actually would have changed the outcome of the election.
	I personally find that data, just like in terms of the raw numbers, even stronger than the data that's yet been presented on ballot fraud, though I think both existed.
	I've been very clear about where I stand on ballot fraud.
	Single-day voting, election day as holiday, has to be paper ballots, and by the way, government-issued ID matching the voter file.
	But I think what's more important to understand as well, and I talk about this in this book, is 2016 was actually even the other election that was stolen from Donald Trump, the election that he supposedly won, where he wasn't allowed to govern for those four years.
	And so the only thing I would say is there will be a lot of things that you and I may have slightly different points of view on.
	I think this will exist. But all I'll ask is I know you're an intellectual as well.
	You're a guy who cares about the country.
	Read the books, not some sort of screenshot from Twitter of a purposefully airlifted passage.
	And about January 6th, what Candace mentioned, and I saw this in one of your tweets too, and I just want to address this, Rogan, just so you're aware.
	Somebody floated a passage where I said what Trump did that day was reprehensible on January 6th.
	I said this shortly thereafter.
	And again, that's another airlift.
	Read what it was. That wasn't a tweet from me.
	That was a reply to somebody else's tweet in response to a Wall Street Journal piece
	that I wrote two days after January 6th, or in the days after January 6th.
	I wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal that said that censorship,
	systematic censorship in this country was the cause of January 6th,
	and in particular it was government using tech companies to silence speech.
	And I said that that would be a friendly parley compared to what's to come.
	Somebody then asked me, do you excuse what Donald Trump did on that day?
	And I wanted to be clear, and it's something I'm saying today too,
	is that no, I would not have handled January 6th And that's a fact, and maybe you and I can disagree on that.
	I said it, then I stand by it today.
	But just like I said in the days after January 6th, which caused multiple advisors to my company to resign, which caused me to face great personal cost in the seat that I was in as a biotech CEO, that's the same thing I'm saying today.
	And so that's a long way of saying we may still have our disagreements, But I'd love to have those disagreements with the full context of what I've said, rather than airlifting passages.
	I'm not accusing you of doing that, but that's what I've seen circulating a lot.
	And let's have real disagreements instead of fake ones.
	That's all I would say. So, Vivek, I'm just going to jump in here because I did not know, obviously, what you were going to say as an answer to that.
	And guilty as charged, when I saw the things being passed around, I actually thought maybe, yeah, maybe he actually did say this.
	And I will completely own the fact that I did not read it and I cannot defend, I cannot further offend it because, obviously, what you're saying in defense makes sense, that it was airlifted.
	Rogan, did you actually read the full chapter either or did you also see what was circulating?
	Okay, so what's funny about that, as a Trump supporter...
	It's not my main point.
	So let me preface by saying I respect Vivek for coming on and having this discussion, knowing that I'm a very vocal critic.
	My main point is that Vivek does not believe there was actual election fraud with the ballots, that he can watch something like 2,000 Mules.
	Did you see 2,000 Mules, Vivek?
	I've seen part of it, I have to admit.
	I highly recommend you go watch it because it's probably one of the most important documentaries
	in recent history that showed massive systemic election fraud across this country.
	And to me as a vocal supporter and just a voice for the MAGA base, I will say if you
	do not believe that there was election fraud beyond what big tech suppressed, that they
	are not muelling around hundreds of thousands, if not millions of ballots, that if at 3 a.m.
	in the Detroit TCF arena, they didn't drop off hundreds of thousands of ballots on video
	that the Gateway Pundit has exposed, that they were banned from Twitter, that there
	was no Republican supervisors, that we saw vote spikes in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania
	overnight in the dead of night, that they shut down Georgia for a water pipe break and
	then suddenly they pull out ballots under the table in Stark County.
	If you don't think that there is election fraud, in my opinion, that is disqualifying
	for anyone running in the GOP because this is not politics as normal.
	They are- Let me just say one thing to that about my view.
	The D10 is aggressive.
	They are coming after us.
	I wanna just jump in here.
	I just wanna jump in here.
	And so first and foremost, I will say that I believe that there was election fraud.
	And I've made that statement over and over again.
	I do too, for example.
	I've tweeted that.
	Yeah.
	I mean, by the way, mail-in ballot fraud, 100% agree with Rogan on this point.
	I do wanna say let's not bifurcate here because it is relevant to say that there are quotations
	being passed around that are out of context.
	So I do want to own that and say to Vivek, thank you for explaining that.
	It is relevant that you are using something that was pertaining to Stacey Abrams.
	To move on to the discussion to talk about mail-in ballots is actually really important as well.
	So first off, Rogan, to ask you this question, and only because I've only found this out recently.
	Can I just say one thing? Yeah, yeah. Can I just say one thing quickly to clarify my view here?
	I... Based on everything I've seen, believe there was absolutely ballot fraud.
	Rogan, here's one of the things I'll say is, we all have our areas of expertise.
	Until I decided to enter the political arena, as opposed to criticizing stakeholder capitalism and the World Economic Forum agenda and central bank digital currencies and ESG, where my focus has been, this has not been an area where I've dived as deep.
	So what I will say is, yes, there's been ballot fraud.
	What I see that is damningly convincing, driven by data...
	Absolutely. I have seen enough data to know that the 2020 outcome of the election would have been different if the Hunter Biden laptop story had not been suppressed.
	If Google had not made an illegal campaign contribution of the largest scale in human history to the Biden campaign by suppressing and changing the way search algorithms works.
	So there, I'm actually definitively convinced that it changed the outcome of the election.
	I haven't said that it didn't in the case of the ballot fraud.
	I just said truthfully, and it's a fact now, and I'm very open to data to convince me of it.
	I haven't seen data of that scale on the election-changing outcome, and that's what I've said, and I'm open about that.
	But I just want to be clear always where my views are and where they aren't.
	And so that's, I think, a fair discussion for us to have.
	Which is fair. I mean, I've sat down with people and they've wanted me to say something.
	And I'd like to be honest, I don't know that confidently myself yet.
	So I don't want to say something because everybody else is saying it.
	But, Rogan, you've done a great job of sharing the Gateway Pundit stuff over the last couple of days.
	I really would recommend that you really dive into it because you are correct.
	Gateway Pundit did fantastic work. They were banned from Twitter.
	And it is something that I feel in my heart and my soul to be true, that there was massive mail-in ballot fraud.
	I do want to move on because we have a lot of other topics to talk about, and I think both of you guys are raising really good points here.
	The Bible is the root of wisdom, inspiration, and spiritual nourishment.
	The Hallow app empowers you to explore the Bible's profound teachings and effortlessly
	incorporate them into your daily life. A great place to start while you deepen your understanding
	of the Bible is to check out Father Mike Schmitz's Bible in a Year, available on the
	Hallow app for brief daily readings and reflections. Here you can dive into an extensive library of
	Bible reading plans, accompanied by insightful reflections and audio-guided meditations.
	Whether you're a seasoned Bible reader or just starting your journey,
	Hallow provides a platform for you to engage with scripture like never before.
	Studying the Bible's literary brilliance has influenced countless writers,
	poets, and artists throughout history.
	By studying the Bible, you'll gain a deeper appreciation for the power of storytelling, symbolism, and metaphor, enriching your understanding of literature across different genres.
	The Halo app also helps to connect you with a community of like-minded individuals, sharing experiences, insights, and encouragement along the path to spiritual growth.
	So download the app for free at halo.com slash candace for three months free.
	That's halo.com slash candace.
	We've got to talk about the TPP. We've got to talk about high-skilled immigrants.
	I think this is really important.
	I think I kind of understand where the messaging is getting mixed here.
	Vivek, correct me if I'm wrong, but you did state that you thought it was a mistake for us to have pulled out of the TPP. Actually, let me not think anything.
	Why don't you explain your reasons for why that is?
	Yes, I don't want to be defensive and say the same thing.
	I think it was maybe pulled out of context.
	I also am a guy who speaks very freely, and so I will accept responsibility if I wasn't clear.
	But here is my actual view, okay?
	I am very serious about independence from China.
	That's, I think, the top foreign policy objective.
	We cannot be dependent on our enemy for our modern way of life.
	And as much as I would wish for us to immediately snap a finger and wave a magic wand to have all of those supply chains and all of those trade agreements immediately eviscerated and come back to the United States to be onshore, I just do not think that is going to happen but for a few years.
	I think it's going to take at least a minimum a few years to get there.
	And so in the meantime, if we're really serious about cutting the cord, if we're really serious about declaring independence, as I believe we must vis-a-vis China, then I think it will require trade agreements with Japan, South Korea, India, Vietnam, Australia, and otherwise.
	Let me be very clear about what I stand on what those should look like.
	And here, in quick conversations, I haven't been as clear.
	But I think, at best, those should be bilateral trade agreements.
	What happens with these multilateral trade agreements is you do get a lot of baggage around climate change.
	So if I have the choice between—if Trump was going to exit the TPP and were serious about getting independent of China, I think the best answer is to enter bilateral trade agreements on our own terms with each of them.
	Now, I think that I believe using the silver lining of Trump having exited the TPP to re-enter bilateral trade agreements— As we've done, by the way, we switched from NAFTA to the US-Mexico or the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the MCA, which actually does have the effect of bringing up wages in Mexico.
	So this shows that we can actually re-enter trade agreements, not just by severing them, but on fairer terms that do allow US companies to compete because wages have risen.
	In Mexico, post-NAFTA, now in the MCA. And I think we can at least borrow from those same principles with Japan, South Korea, and others, which don't play by the same set of rules but can, but I believe are a necessary part of a true and serious strategy to declare independence from China.
	And I am very serious about that.
	Brogan, what do you think about that?
	Well, I think he's effectively completely flip-flopping from what he said on the I'm not flip-flopping.
	I'm not flip-flopping, but I am being more precise.
	I am being more precise. Actually, I'll tell you who called me right afterwards is Mike Lee, a good friend in the Senate, etc.
	He said, listen up, I think that your point on China is correct, but you got to be more precise in talking about the importance of bilateral.
	And the way I was talking about it, again, this is a little bit airlifted.
	This was in the context of everywhere I've talked about this, declaring independence from China.
	Can I play the clip?
	It's 20 seconds. Absolutely.
	And I think you're going to cite my imprecision.
	Go for it. But I'm going to tell you exactly where I'm at.
	This is the Twitter space with Elon from a week and a half ago.
	By the way, a policy that I think is also really important that goes straight along with it is re-entering the Pacific trade relationships around the rest of the realm of the Pacific.
	The CPTPP. Around the rest of the realm.
	I think it's a little bit different than...
	You know, the course of action taken by Trump and exiting the TPP. I think that was actually a poor decision.
	So you're saying we should re-enter it and re-negotiate it?
	So Rogan, I actually, I'm glad you played it.
	When I said that goes right along with it, what is it?
	Declaring independence from China.
	It's my view, and I think Trump in a second term would, I hope, do this as well.
	TPP is in a deal with China, though.
	I know, exactly.
	China's not in the TPP. So my whole point is, we need to put ourselves in a position to declare economic independence from China.
	I think that is vital.
	I think that's one of the areas where I would do things differently than Trump.
	I do not believe that we can be economically dependent on our enemy for our modern way of life.
	In service of that, we need to re-enter trade relationships with others around the Pacific Rim to realistically make it a possibility that we can declare independence from China.
	That is further than Trump went on China in Term 1.
	Maybe he would go there in Term 2.
	That's where I would go in my Term 1.
	I think it would be a false promise to say that we could do that by onshoring to the United States immediately.
	The math doesn't work.
	We need to reenter those other relationships.
	I believe that we would be best served if we can, and I think it will take a bull to do this, a bulldog.
	I will try my best to do it in six months to reenter those bilateral trade relationships.
	But I view our entire foreign policy through one prism.
	China is the top threat that we face.
	Not the USSR because it doesn't exist anymore.
	Not Russia, not anybody else, China.
	And our top weakness versus China, the reason we don't do a thing
	when they fly a spy balloon over the country or put a spy base in Cuba,
	is that we depend on them for our modern way of life.
	I think that Trump was the best we've had on this, but still nobody has gone to the full length
	of actual decoupling.
	And the reason why is we just don't have it in us here in the mainland in the U.S. to immediately onshore.
	And so that's why I've said that we need to ultimately be willing to reenter those bilateral trade relationships.
	And that's something that I will do as the next president.
	And we can still have a debate about that, but that's where I stand.
	Okay, so that's your answer to the TTP question.
	We can take that or leave it. This is more of a policy dispute of how you deal with China.
	You're agreeing that China is a problem.
	Rogan, you're disagreeing with how he wants to deal with China.
	You don't think that we should re-enter the TPP and renegotiate it on our own terms.
	I do want to keep going. There's a lot of...
	Other questions that we have.
	Let's keep going. Okay. Let's talk about the high-skilled immigrants.
	This was a big one, right?
	And actually, I have not seen the clip of you saying it, so I'm fully relying on Rogan here.
	But you allegedly said, Rogan, and please correct me if I'm wrong, Rogan, jump right in, that you think that we should have as much immigration as possible, no limit on immigration outside of- High-skilled.
	Making sure that they're high-skilled.
	Do you want to talk a little bit more about that?
	So, Rogan, I'm also happy to have you quote exactly what I said here because I want to make sure it's not misquoted or I can just tell you right now what my position is, whichever you prefer.
	Yep. I can also just tell you what my position is.
	That might be easier. I have the quote.
	I have the quote. So it's in a Breitbart article.
	It was somewhat recent.
	I mean, but it said, I actually fully agree with that.
	And one of the things where I think the Republican Party needs to define where we actually stand is There is an anti-legal immigration current among voters.
	I'm going to be on the debate stage in a month, and if anybody has any qualms with this, I think I'm going to have a real problem with that because merit-based immigration is one of the fixes to economic growth in this country.
	Effectively saying that we need more high-skilled immigrants to come in, take American jobs, more wages, to create more profits for capitalism.
	The latter part of that's not what I said, though, Logan.
	Rogan, I just want to be really fair.
	I think you mixed a quote with a lot of editorializing you added in the end.
	So I'm not reading the article, but just be fair and say what I actually said, because up to when you started going off on your own, that's consistent with views that I have, and then you started saying things that are entirely inconsistent with views that I have.
	So, Rogan, do you want to just read just the quotation of what they said?
	I think it's a little unfair. It's a little unfair, because I can tell you what my views are.
	I can tell you what my views are.
	There is an anti-legal immigration current, and then it says in brackets, mood among voters,
	dot, dot, dot.
	I'm going to be on the debate stage in a month, and if anybody has any qualms with this, I
	think I'm going to have a real problem with that because merit-based immigration is one
	of the fixes to economic growth in this country, end quote.
	Sure.
	So let me explain my position on immigration policy, if I may.
	Okay. I'll start with where we definitely agree, and then I'll go to where we may disagree, and we may not, actually, but let's find out.
	I believe the purpose of immigration policy, to state the obvious, right?
	Everybody should agree with this.
	It is so obvious, but I'm going to say it anyway.
	The purpose of our legal immigration policy should be to advance the interests of citizens in this country, to advance the interests of the homeland.
	That should be the purpose of any country's immigration policy, ours included.
	Because we vehemently probably agree on illegal immigration, I'm not going to spend too much
	time on that.
	I favor militarizing the southern border.
	I favor not just building the wall, but literally relocating the US military there, stop funding
	for sanctuary cities, cut foreign aid to Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and so on until they've
	fixed their southern border.
	But I suspect we agree there, and so we don't need to dwell on the illegal immigration issue.
	So militarizing the southern border I think I'm about as both legally and constitutionally
	for the record. And for the record also, I'm the first candidate who has offered a legal and constitutional basis to go that far, and I stand by it, and I've said I would do it by March 31st, 2025.
	That's really important. Now let's go to legal immigration where we may, I'm not sure, but we may have some daylight between us.
	So what I've said is, and I've said this in countless settings, I favor merit-based immigration, but I have a very clear definition of what merit means.
	To borrow an expression I've used through this campaign, does that mean a bunch of tech bros in Silicon Valley?
	No, it does not. We have a massive, diverse set of skills needs in this country.
	And so it's not just a bunch more tech people going and sitting in Silicon Valley.
	I would gut the H-1B program, which is a disaster.
	A, it's a lottery. B, it's not meritocratic.
	C, it's like a form of indentured servitude that effectively is a lobbying protection to the companies who get to keep the immigrant who comes over, but they can't even work for a different company.
	That's a product of crony capitalism of lobbying.
	I would gut that program.
	But here's what I do think merit means.
	Merit means two things.
	Do you have an ability to make skills-based contributions to this country?
	And do you also have civic commitments to this country?
	What does that mean?
	I would take the citizenship test from the back end of being a citizen,
	move that to the front end before somebody even gets a visa to enter this country.
	You got to know something about that country.
	This is consistent with what I think of as a hardcore nationalist position of mine
	that every high school student who graduates from high school should have to pass that same test.
	I think part of the problem of why we have deep ingratitude in this country,
	ingratitude from the Rashida Tlaibs and the Ilhan Omars who come here as immigrants,
	But frankly, it's an ingratitude that grates on me.
	If somebody grew up on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, fifth generation, that hates this country equally as Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, or AOC for that matter, is the same problem.
	People don't know something about that country.
	That's why I favor making English the national language.
	I think the U.S. is a country founded on ideals, but you have to have a common language to express those ideals with one another.
	Now, I don't favor a hard, like there's this Tom Cotton bill, and I love Tom Cotton.
	I don't support the absolute number cap because I think that's sloppy.
	I think that we have to be much more precise about what we're actually solving for.
	I'm solving certainly for a revival of national identity.
	That's what this whole campaign is about.
	That's what my first and second term in office.
	We'll be all about. But I think that we have to solve for that national identity grounded in who we are.
	Revive civic duty.
	Revive actual civic knowledge about this country.
	Stop viewing the US as just an economic zone.
	We're not just that. We're a team of citizens.
	We're not just a nation of immigrants.
	As a kid of immigrants.
	I go out of my way to say this all the time.
	We're not just a nation of immigrants.
	We're a nation of settlers.
	Yes, I am one of those settlers in this country.
	And I understand that some people may say, oh, you've only been here for one generation where I've been here for six.
	Well, I disagree with you because I am as deeply rooted in this country.
	You try to shake me, you'll have to run through me to try.
	I am as deeply rooted in this country more so than many people with ingratitude who take it seven generations in.
	So that may be where we have a debate and let's smoke that out because I do think that current exists and And you're right.
	It bothers me. But I'm an American nationalist, and the fact that I'm first generation shouldn't stop me from feeling that way.
	But on policy, I suspect there's not a ton of daylight between us.
	But that at least explains to you what my position actually is.
	Why no cap, Vivek?
	Why do you think no cap on legal immigration, I think, is a fair question.
	Yep. That was my question as well.
	So it's like the way I think about the debate about military spending.
	Is it more or less? No, it's the right kind.
	Same thing with respect to immigration.
	So here's a problem that I think I suspect you guys may agree with me on.
	It's something I've been vocal on for a long time.
	Way too much immigration is just chain-based migration.
	People bringing their parents or other people who aren't really making contributions but may even contribute cost to this country.
	I am all in on ending that.
	But it is a hard fact today that we do have more jobs in this country than we do have people.
	Talk to any small business.
	Talk to any large business.
	It's just a fact that that's an impediment to economic growth.
	And so if there are people...
	Here's my view on it.
	And the problem with the 400,000 or the 200,000 or whatever number we pick is,
	I think there's a version of the world where we may want less than that.
	But if there's a version of the world where there's more than that too,
	who fit the criteria of making honest commitments to this country, not coming here to be an immigrant,
	coming here to be a settler, coming here to be a settler who knows more
	about this country and the constitution and our language and our laws than many people
	who are third or fourth generation born into this country.
	If those conditions are met, then I have no problem with those people
	And what we may find out is that it's fewer than the cap that actually meet that description.
	It may be more than the cap, but I just think it's a sloppy, low resolution way of doing it versus asking ourselves, what do we care about?
	We have an erosion of our national identity, no doubt about it.
	Big part of that is an invasion, literally now an armed invasion.
	Just look at the pictures from yesterday across our southern border.
	That's a problem. It's why I'm a hardliner.
	It's also why I'm a hardliner on bringing the civics test to the visa, gut the H-1B program, end chain migration, which is most of the legal immigration that's useless that we're seeing today is just family members coming over.
	No, I don't want any of that.
	I think we need to put an end to it.
	Asylum, forget about it.
	Humanitarianism is not the goal of immigration policy.
	So I go back to that first principle.
	We all agree on this, I think.
	The purpose of any nation's immigration policy, including ours, should be what advances the interests of the homeland.
	That's the question. Now, we can disagree about specific policies of which one actually advances American interests, but that's where I'm at, is that I think that there are some ways in which actually there are kinds of merit-based legal immigration that can advance the interests of the homeland.
	The way we're doing it today absolutely does not, and that's what I would change.
	Okay, so people at home can take that or leave that.
	That's where you stand. Maybe some years it'll be more immigration, some years it'll be fewer immigrants that are coming into the country, but you don't think that a cap is the right solved to it.
	You said it's low resolution.
	Illegal zero, and I'm also on illegal immigration.
	I just want to be clear about this.
	I have been clear since day one.
	I'm dead set against amnesty.
	I will never break up families, but we will relocate families as entire units to the countries of origin because I do see that as a threat to our rule of law and a threat to our national identity as well.
	So everything, Candace, you just said applies to strictly even just true merit and civic-based legal immigration.
	Okay. Candace, could I have just...
	Absolutely, Rogan. Anytime you want to pop in.
	Yeah. So, you know, I think it is...
	A fair criticism when people say you want unlimited merit-based immigration, you say no cap, that those are symbiotic positions or criticisms.
	And I think what you should know on behalf of The base on behalf of American middle class voters.
	You talk about what's best for America.
	Are you talking about the people that own companies in stock or the middle class who is watching their border be invaded by millions of illegal aliens over the past couple of years watching our great cities be flooded?
	People sleeping on the streets in New York City.
	in Boston, in Portland, in LA, in Seattle, in Chicago, and then to take the position that,
	well, actually, I don't want a cap, I actually want to increase immigration.
	I'm sure you could see how that, especially in conjunction with your previous statement
	to re-enter into the TPP, that this would actually just be an overall process
	to lower labor costs for stockholders in this country, ship American jobs out and keep effectively
	the massive invasion that has been in this country.
	I haven't really heard you talk about a mass deportation policy, which President Trump
	We have to get these millions of people who came in out.
	So Rogan, I'm glad we're having this discussion because it's good to smoke out.
	I think it's good for our party.
	I just think this is a really important topic.
	So I think it's double click on this is good.
	I have been probably the staunchest candidate in this race about opposing the invasion across somebody else's border, use of our resources to protect against an invasion of somebody else's border when we have literally an invasion across our own southern border.
	I am for not one case of amnesty.
	Relocate anybody who is in this country illegally.
	To their country of origin, period.
	As a family unit. Don't just take the parents.
	Take the whole family unit that addresses the criticism of separating families.
	Because there's no merit in the reason that they're coming over into this country.
	There's no merit. And that's driving crime.
	Driving large waves of crime in this country.
	It drives an undermining of the rule of law in this country.
	I believe over the objections of posse comitatus militarize the border.
	So I just think it's important we separate that issue, Rogan, from the question of We're good to go.
	But this is what I favor, which is, I think, much more precise in accomplishing our shared national identity goals than to even think that, look at what many others in the Republican Party are, say, hey, we did some cap and then we're done with it.
	Oh, and then we're still kind of looking the other way and turning the other cheek on the southern border.
	No, it's just a different vision of how to address the interests of citizens in this
	country, which is what I stand on the side of.
	When running a business, your employees can create all kinds of interesting situations.
	That's why you had better talk to Bambi.
	Bambi gives you access to your own dedicated HR manager starting at just $99 per month.
	This person is available to you by phone, email, and real-time chat.
	They'll help you run employee onboardings, terminations, and performance reviews.
	With Bambi's HR Autopilot feature, you can automate important HR practices like setting
	policies, employee training, and feedback procedures.
	All of Bambi's HR managers are based in the United States and can support the nuances
	across all 50 states.
	HR managers can easily cost $80,000 per year, but Bambi starts at just $99 per month.
	So schedule your free conversation today to see how much Bambi can take off your plate.
	Go to Bambi.com right now and type Candace Owens under podcast when you sign up.
	Spelled B-A-M-B-E-E dot com.
	Bambi dot com.
	And type in Candace Owens.
	Very quickly, because I think we're going to get to one more topic.
	Obviously, big pharma.
	A huge topic. People are obviously...
	I knew, obviously, that you were involved in pharmaceuticals before you ever entered the stage as a presidential candidate.
	First, though, Rogan, I will say, when you sent that as one of the things that you want to talk about, vaccines...
	I this is where I actually separated from Trump on.
	This is one of the really big ones that I disagree with Trump when he was in office and I was his most one of his most vocal supporters.
	And when he locked down the you know, obviously Trump did lock down the government.
	I was shrieking that it was the wrong thing to do only because first off, let me be fair.
	Nobody would know what you would do when you have the experts telling you that everyone's going to die.
	So I do not discount the fact that Trump was in an incredible pressured position that none of us will ever know what that feels like when they tell you all of your citizens will die unless you do this.
	And he was actually being given that false information from the quote-unquote experts.
	At the same time, I said, even in those moments, the right thing was to say, let people live as they will.
	The government should never tell you whether you should go out the door.
	Regarding vaccines, Trump very much trumpeted the vaccines.
	Even after everything happened with COVID and people were being injured and I sat down with him, he still said, this was the greatest thing.
	We got it done. Operation Warp Speed and things of that nature.
	So I know that you have critiques about Vivek's Yeah, and that's a very fair question, and it's probably...
	The biggest criticism of Trump supporters is his position on the vaccine, which I do believe has been modified in recent months especially.
	But, you know, people have to remember President Trump was the president of an entire country.
	He wasn't just a Republican activist.
	He wasn't an influencer. He wasn't a businessman.
	He had to steer an entire country and effectively the world out of a pandemic.
	Now, some could say it was, you know, We're good to go.
	I disagree. Administration, they tried to mandate it for federal contractors and other employers.
	And there was so much pressure from Hollywood and big tech was censoring and every other commercial was sponsored by Pfizer.
	And what we've seen is that it wasn't safe and effective.
	It wasn't effective really at all for young people.
	And now what we're seeing is a lot of long term side effects and very dangerous side effects that a lot of people are being silenced on and being able to talk about.
	And frankly, a lot of them have died.
	I know people personally who are young who have had strokes and died.
	My father was permanently injured from the vaccine.
	My grandfather, who was sick, got the vaccine, went further into dementia.
	It somehow made his dementia worse, which a lot of older people were saying, which is why I disagree with the assessment that it's good for older people.
	And he died a few short months after that.
	Just a full spiral from where he was at a year before when he got it.
	So I am... I will say emotionally and personally attached to this issue.
	I have an entire show discussing the ingredients in vaccines.
	And it's something that I do feel that Trump got very wrong in the post.
	Not when he was president. Like I said, the pressure, we will never know.
	That's like global pressure.
	They shut down the world. But then after when supporters were saying, hey, this is how we feel about this, I'm not sure that he heard us.
	And that was something that I felt that he just kind of got wrong, you know?
	And so I just want to say that.
	And people already know that I'm a show. Obviously, everyone knows I'm anti-vax, whatever, crunchy Candace.
	I'm totally fine to hold that brand.
	But I do wish that Trump had more strongly stated, listen, I was dealing with the facts of what was being told to me up to the minute.
	Now I'm obviously listening to more of my supporters in terms of what was done wrong, would have, could have, should have, hindsight 2020.
	But I think acknowledging that error is really important, really, really important because of people who were injured by this vaccine and people's lives who were ruined.
	This is really important, actually.
	This is a really important issue.
	I agree with everything you guys just said, but I'm not going to hit Trump on it because I and DeSantis and everybody else who's running for president, with one exception, and he's not in our party, RFK, who got it right— Was at some point in this journey wrong on this issue.
	Now, the facts have dramatically changed.
	And I think that when you see the myocarditis levels now spike years later amongst young, healthy men, thankfully, I'm one of them.
	Is so far, right?
	And I think that that is something that we should just be open about, to say that if we're going to do this again, and I have said this, okay?
	And I said this at the time as well, and I was on Tucker's show in December of 2020 when I said this, that they were rolling out the vaccine too quickly, that this could risk being Tuskegee all over again.
	As somebody who literally came from that industry and It doesn't make any sense, and I said this then too, it didn't make any sense, that on one hand, they say you can't even safely take a drug or a vaccine unless it's been in testing for 10 years, and you don't even have the choice to take it.
	Like, right to try? No, you don't even have the right to try it.
	That's the same federal government that said, here's a vaccine that they pushed through
	in less than nine months, and you have no choice but not to take it.
	That is the first hypocrisy right there.
	So I'm a right to try, if somebody wants to have full information
	and try something, even though the FDA hasn't stamped an approval on it.
	I actually stand on the side of believing that anyone who's a citizen should,
	but I also am dead set against any vaccine mandate and have been,
	but here's the mistake I made.
	Had I had the facts that I have now and where I am right now,
	I would not have taken the two shots, and I'll admit that I did.
	And I think there are other candidates in this race.
	DeSantis is one of them. Won't even say whether he got the second shot.
	I just think it's important we be honest about it.
	And the only thing about the big pharma piece, because I've heard this criticism, is my entire business that I started, I just want people to understand this.
	It was all about challenging the hypocrisy of big pharma, developing medicines that they had purposefully cast aside in coordinated behavior.
	And so to call me part of big pharma when all of them hate me, I mean, not now.
	They hated me then. It's like the equivalent of calling Rumble part of big tech.
	And I say this as somebody who personally was one of the earliest private investors, outside investors in Rumble long before it went public.
	And so that just tells you where I'm coming from in addressing that.
	Are you currently in a massive multi-hundred million dollar deal with Pfizer?
	I'm not in any deal.
	I'm not affiliated. I founded multiple companies.
	Are you the sixth or seventh largest stockholder, Royvent, who was in a multi-hundred million dollar deal with Pfizer?
	So Royvent, I read the public information that you do.
	I'm not on the board, but Royvent did do a deal that licensed a drug from Pfizer.
	You were on the board in February when the deal passed last winter.
	Yeah, to license a drug of monoclonal antibody for treating a particular disease, immunological disease.
	Yes. So you're owned by Pfizer is what I'm saying.
	How can we have someone...
	How can we have someone regulate Pfizer?
	It's like the equivalent of saying that Rumble is owned by Google because they have done licensing deals with other tech companies.
	We have to be in a position as a movement to say we compete and win, not just through politics, but in the marketplace.
	And so the fact is, this would take an hour discussion.
	Will you admit that your largest source of wealth is tied in a deal with Pfizer?
	That's incorrect. Yeah, that's incorrect.
	It's not? How much is the Pfizer deal worth?
	Wait, Rogan, let me just answer the question first.
	Go ahead. Royvin's entire business model was to do deals with pharma companies on drugs they had purposefully abandoned to license them in as part of licensing deals.
	They've done hundreds of those deals with universities, companies, both large and small.
	That's the business model of the company.
	I'm not on the board of that company.
	I did found the company and I'm darn proud of it because actually we called a lot of pharma's bluff.
	And I think the reality is, for the same reason, again, I was one of the first private investors, came in from the outside of the founding, in Rumble, challenging big tech.
	We've got to be thinking bigger than just saying that, hey, we have to...
	Turn away from an economy as opposed to winning through that same economy.
	And the reason, and Candace, as you know, I'm being pulled here,
	but the reason I embrace this discussion, and I just think this is really, really important
	for our people to understand, and I do say our people,
	and yes, I say that for the three of us, our people to understand,
	is that MAGA is bigger than Donald Trump.
	It is bigger than me.
	It is bigger than any one of us.
	Okay, this is a movement that will outlive Donald Trump.
	This is a movement that will, I think, define the future direction of our political leadership
	in our country if we get this right.
	And so one of the things we haven't really done, and you guys started doing it on the vaccine point,
	I'm bringing it to the table in other ways, is have healthy debate within our own movement, okay?
	Debate on how we actually put America first, how we actually protect the homeland,
	how we actually create a government that tells the truth to its people.
	And I think it's really important that we have that discussion
	without trying to vilify or take someone down.
	You got the Soros stuff.
	Well, Trump got $160 million loan from George Soros.
	Am I ever gonna take him down for that?
	No, I'm not, because I understand the business conditions under which he did it.
	And so in our movement, and I think it's different
	from the neocon establishment that'll come after us and wants to send hundreds of billions of dollars
	more to Ukraine, but the reason I'm embracing this,
	the reason my team is literally wincing at me, trying to drag me to the next thing,
	but I'm staying on here, Is that this is important because MAGA and America First, it is bigger than Donald Trump.
	And I think we just need to accept that and get it in our head.
	It's bigger, certainly, than me.
	I'm the newcomer, so I deserve to be screened and tested just as Trump was put through the ringer back in 2015.
	And you could play the same game about past political donations or business interests he started or loans he's taken or stances he's taken on the vaccine to try to take down one man.
	Don't do it to Trump. And I'm not saying this in a self-interested way.
	Don't approach that the same way with me either.
	Let's get to the bottom of what advances our movement.
	We haven't actually had healthy debate within our movement about shared goals.
	How do we achieve them? That's what I'm bringing to this.
	I think that will make our movement outlive this election.
	And I don't see myself as running against Trump.
	I'm running for the America First agenda, for this country.
	And I think there is, amongst thoughtful people as we're having here, room for good discussion on exactly how we do that.
	And I'll invite more of it.
	It's part of why I came on. Rogan, I appreciate you, actually.
	I know that you're not some troll that's just in this to sort of take a guy down.
	So I took this seriously.
	I do take it seriously because I think it's an important evolution for our movement.
	It is bigger than me. It is bigger than any one man.
	And if we approach it with that spirit, I will continue to engage as openly as I have here.
	Vivek, I'm going to let you go.
	There's only two more points that we didn't get to.
	I just want to say for people that are listening to this, I did not tell Vivek any of the topics that were sent to me from DC Drano.
	Vivek had pretty much the same topics that he wanted to discuss anyways to clear the air on, which was amazing.
	And so I do want to commend you on just always your willingness to say, I will come on and have a discussion with anybody.
	I think that is something that's very special.
	And by the way, I just also want to commend Rogan here because this is a phenomenal list.
	I mean, I really do. I wish we could get to these last two things.
	Actually, you had a little bit longer, too.
	So I'm just going to say, Vivek, I would love to bring you back on because I think this is super crucial.
	It's not happening. We'll get to them. We'll come back.
	I'll come back. I know you have to go.
	Your team is going to kill you. Thank you.
	Brogan, can you stay on? Because I want to get some post thoughts from you.
	Yes. I just want to say thank you to Vivek for coming on.
	I know these are tough questions.
	And I respect you for confronting them because I think I do speak for a lot of people.
	You do. And we got your opinions out there a little more clearly.
	And my only challenge to you in...
	My conclusion is if you will denounce Pfizer for criminal actions or injuries that they've caused with their vaccine publicly, despite having financial interests.
	And strip. So just to be really clear, I don't have any financial interest in Pfizer.
	But yes, and the answer is I've also committed, but I'll re-announce it here, stripping any of the special protections for product liability, which I think is the biggest actual failure of the system.
	There should not have been a special wrapper for COVID. That did happen under Trump.
	I'm not criticizing Trump personally, because as you said, Candace, you can easily Monday morning quarterback anybody, but I will strip that back.
	And that's a policy where I will be different than Trump.
	They will not enjoy that special liability protection under my watch.
	I'm on record with that.
	So thank you, my man. Vivek, thank you so much for joining us.
	All right. So that was—actually, I was pleasantly surprised.
	I really thought that some of these would trip him up.
	The part about the book, I should have read it.
	Honestly, I didn't read the passage.
	I only saw it was circulating on Twitter.
	And if he was—that is actually what Stacey Abrams said, dark day of democracy.
	So if that was tongue-in-cheek, I want to make sure that we aren't committing the same sins that are being committed against Trump in the media, where we're excerpting things and taking things out of context.
	Just want to get your overall thought process on that conversation, how you're feeling right now for talking to him.
	Yeah, I mean, I wish I could have read all three of his books to figure out where that passage was in, you know, the two days before this interview as well.
	Yeah. In all fairness, I mean, that wasn't my main point.
	My main point was about election fraud.
	Overall, I think you had fantastic questions.
	I think that he had very good answers that were well thought out.
	I think this is going to be a very big podcast.
	I think it's something that people are going to want to listen to, which allows them to get a better idea of who he is.
	And just you, I just want to commend you because I really do think that you voiced a lot of the concerns that people have, a lot of holdups, a lot of question marks, because it does, and he even admits, Seemed like Vivek came from absolutely nowhere and now he's here.
	So he has to go by the fire like every other candidate has had to appear by the fire.
	And we just need to get to the bottom of some of these questions.
	Yeah. And I do give him a lot of credit for even still after that heated interrogation that he still understands that my heart is in this for the American people.
	I'm not paid by any campaign.
	I don't work for Trump. I don't work for I just work for what I believe is the American people.
	Okay, Rogan, where can my listeners find you?
	I'm sure all of my listeners are already following you, but just in case they're not, where can they find you?
	Any social media.
	They let me back on Twitter.
	Elon did. So I'm back on there causing a ruckus.
	DC underscore Drano.
	And, you know, I'll be talking truth about corruption in D.C. for a long time.
	So looking forward to it. Thank you for having me on, Candace.
	Thank you so much for coming back on.
	It's been a while. Do you know what big tech and big government have in common?
	They both want to silence any dissenting voices into submission.
	Let's say you're a proud gun owner and want to talk on social media about the right to bear arms.
	Well, chances are that your post will be flagged by a content moderator.
	you might end up on some kind of government watch list.
	To fight back against having your voice censored by both big tech and big government,
	I recommend ExpressVPN.
	The problem with big tech is that not only do they attempt to censor you,
	but they also track what you do online.
	What you're searching for, the videos you watch, virtually everything that you click.
	They can match your activity to your true identity using your device's unique IP address.
	When I use ExpressVPN, they can't see my IP address at all.
	My identity becomes anonymized by a secure VPN server.
	Plus, ExpressVPN encrypts 100% of my internet data for protection from hackers and eavesdroppers.
	What I love most about ExpressVPN is it could not be easier to use.
	The app has just one button.
	You tap it and you're protected.
	It's that simple. Protect your data today at expressvpn.com slash Candice.
	That's E-X-P-R-E-S-S vpn.com slash Candice to get three months free.
	Visit expressvpn.com slash Candice to learn more.
	Ladies and gentlemen, that is all the time that we have for today.
	As a reminder, a shot in the dark since we were talking about big pharma and vaccines.
	You guys know my perspective. That show is now available on Daily Wire Plus, so be sure to click the link in the description and subscribe right now.
	And also be sure to come back tomorrow because there will be a brand new episode.

▲