All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 29, 2021 - Dinesh D'Souza
54:08
BIDEN'S BANKRUPTCY SCHEME Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep207
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
What the Biden administration calls success is actually a bankruptcy scheme for the U.S. I'll give you the latest state of play in the infrastructure debate.
The Biden people want to pay $450,000 apiece to a group of illegals.
No one can think of why.
I've thought of three reasons, which I'll tell you.
The prosecution in the Kyle Rittenhouse case is trying to now go after Kyle for, well, thought crimes.
Let's see if the judge goes along with it.
And Congressman Mary Miller, a first-term congresswoman from Illinois, is going to join me.
She's going to talk about Mrs.
Miller Goes to Washington.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza podcast.
America needs this voice.
The times are crazy, in a time of confusion, division, and lies.
We need a brave voice of reason, understanding, and truth.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza podcast.
What the Biden administration calls success.
is actually a bankruptcy scheme for the United States.
The backdrop of all this is that the country is already $30 trillion in debt.
That's an almost unimaginably huge number.
And so you would think that any prudent group of statesmen would be trying to get that number down, not promiscuously add to it.
Now, Biden's implying that he's got some momentum.
We've got a framework.
I think this is an exaggeration, and this is actually a device by Biden to imply that, oh, we've got this one figured out.
Everybody else needs to fall into line.
But it doesn't look like people are falling into line.
Manchin won't say that he supports the new scaled back.
$1.75 trillion.
This, by the way, is on top of the other infrastructure bill, which is for about the same amount.
So we're talking about in excess of $3 trillion, clearly.
Manchin won't say he's for it.
Sinema won't say she's for it.
And then on the left, Sanders won't say he's for it.
The progressives, in fact, are basically grumpy about having to cut back on a lot of their favorite programs.
Actually, their massive vote buying scheme that they hoped would deliver both houses to the Democrats decisively in the 2022 midterm election.
So, all of this is now uncertain, and I'm certainly not going to try to predict where it's going to go.
I think if it works, if Biden gets it through, it will show that McConnell made a very foolish mistake in giving the Biden people more time.
He basically said, all right, listen, you know what, this is your...
Bill, I'm going to let you delay this.
I'm going to agree to a framework of extension.
And Republicans often do this.
The Democrats are about to fall apart, and we give them a little rope that allows them to sort of get out of their predicament.
Now, I will say, with Manchin and Sinema, I don't entirely trust either one of them.
Debbie and I were talking just the other day about, you know, Manchin and West Virginia, a conservative state.
And yeah, Manchin's a nice guy and all, but the West Virginians need to figure out that he's not a reliable guy on our side.
So a nice guy, though he may be.
And I don't want to downplay, there is an achievement on the part of Manchin and Sinema.
They have taken a $3.5 trillion boondoggle, an absolute economic disaster, and basically cut it in half.
So that is something, but it's not enough.
Why? Because this is still terrible.
It's basically like saying, you know, instead of cutting the patient in half, we're just going to bleed the patient.
Well, the bleeding is bad also.
And there's a very interesting analysis in the New York Post that talks about how this $3.5 trillion is actually a great deal more.
Because even as the Democrats have been forced to scale back, scale back to $1.75 trillion, it's not as if they're actually cutting off programs and saying, we won't do this, we won't do that.
Here's their scheme. It's basically to take a government program and say, look, How about if we just budget it for a year?
We're just gonna fund it for a year in the hope that by creating a new entitlement, and the entitlement can be something like extending the childcare credit.
It can be an entitlement that involves Medicare.
By doing this, it's gonna be impossible to stop after a year.
So a subsequent Congress will have to extend it.
So even though the cost for a year is very modest, it understates the true cost of the program over many years.
So this is a devious scheme to get things into the system.
It's almost like putting a kind of fiscal heroin into the budget, hoping to hook people on it, and then the cost, of course, will be greatly magnified.
The other thing the Democrats are doing...
Is they are imposing taxes in the future.
So they'll say, oh yeah, well, let's have a tax from 2025 to 2027.
That's gonna bring in half a trillion dollars.
And then they count that money, even though they have no intention of actually imposing that tax down the road.
So what they're doing is they're creating fictitious tax income.
That they're then using to offset spending that they intend to do now and going, oh, you know what?
It's paid for. It's paid for.
This is their favorite phrase.
It's paid for.
Or even worse, it's going to cost us nothing.
Well, first of all, it's going to cost us nothing is just a flat-out lie.
Even if it is paid for, it doesn't mean it costs you nothing.
If you buy a car and you pay for it, It didn't cost you nothing, did it?
You paid for it. It cost you what you paid for it.
So this is a process that is clearly broken.
It's riddled with misrepresentations, shenanigans, and these are being done basically with Pelosi and collusion.
With Schumer and the acquiescence and indeed support of the Biden administration.
My hope is that the whole thing goes up in flames, that the progressives and the moderates get to each other's throats, that in the end, Manchin votes no, Sinema votes no, Sanders votes no, and this will be, quite honestly, not just a big win for us, but a big win for the country.
Guys, if you have MyPillow merchandise in your house, if you've given it away as a gift, you have helped to build MyPillow into the amazing company it is today.
Mike Lindell is grateful and he has an amazing offer for my listeners on his standard MyPillows.
Now, you'll get the standard MyPillow regularly $69.98 For $19.98.
These wonderful pillows don't go flat.
You can wash and dry them as often as you want.
They maintain their shape.
They're made in the USA. And the pillows come with a 10-year warranty, so you know they're going to last.
And a 60-day money-back guarantee, so you know you have nothing to lose.
It's time to start getting the quality sleep that we not only want, but need.
You'll also get, if you go to MyPillow.com, you get deep discounts on all the MyPillow products, up to 66%.
The MyPillow towels, MyPillow mattress topper, the robes, the MySlippers, and so much more.
Go to MyPillow.com and use promo code Dinesh to get Mike's standard MyPillow for just $90.98.
Or call 800-876-0227.
Be sure to use promo code DineshDinesh.
The Biden administration is planning to pay $450,000, and I'm not kidding, $450,000 apiece to a substantial group of illegals who were supposedly the victims of Trump's zero tolerance policy.
Remember the family separation policy?
An adult shows up with a child, the two are temporarily separated while the matter is sorted out.
The ACLU and a group of left-wing organizations have sued.
They go, oh, this has caused so much trauma.
Trauma, by the way, to people accustomed to living in Mexico and El Salvador and South American countries.
So much trauma that these people need to be given a settlement.
And of course, the Biden administration is only too happy to reach into the taxpayers' wallet to pay these guys half a million dollars, just about, per person.
That means for a family of two, one million dollars, or close to a million, nine hundred thousand dollars.
For a family of four, close to two million dollars.
Of whose money? Of your money and my money.
Now, The sheer, stupefyingly outrageous nature of what's going on is something that defies explanation.
A lot of people, in fact, on social media are like, we don't even get this.
Why would the Biden administration do this?
And do they have the authority to do it?
Well, it turns out they do.
Why? Because this is not being done as a matter of policy.
We just want to give the illegals money.
It's being done as a settlement.
We're being sued. We're trying to get out of the lawsuit.
So we're going to make a settlement. So when you're the head of the administrative branch of government, the executive branch, you have the discretion to enter into these kinds of agreements.
So this would be legal for the Biden people to do.
But why would they do it?
One of my friends suggested, well, are they just doing it to divert attention from other disasters?
But I think no, because Biden is polling worse on immigration than any other subject.
So this does not on the surface seem to make any sense.
But I can think of, in fact, Dan Crenshaw goes, hey, you know, if you're a military family and a service member is killed in action, the family gets $400,000, less than the illegals are getting.
The relatives of September 11th, victims of the terrorist attack in 2001, they have gotten, in some cases, less than $450,000.
So think about this. Think of what this says to U.S. Think of what it says to legal immigrants like me.
I came to America with $10,000.
I had to make my own way at the beginning.
I mean, I couldn't even afford to eat at McDonald's because when I realized I'm going to live in America, that's the only money I would have And I guess, looking back, I did it the wrong way.
I should have followed this policy, collected my $450,000, invested it, and I probably wouldn't have to be doing this podcast.
No. But the point is, I can think of three reasons why they're doing it, and I haven't seen any of these.
Number one, The Biden people want to thumb their nose at Trump.
So the idea here is that we're doing public penitence for the evils of Donald Trump.
This is the Trump policy in 2018 that led to the lawsuit.
And so the Biden people are like, we have to wash our hands off the matter.
We've got to sort of show that we have fully repudiated Trump.
Number two... They want to get a huge amount of money into the hands of all these left-wing legal organizations that are suing on behalf of the illegals.
Notice that when the organizations do that, they typically tell the illegals, listen, we're going to get $450,000.
We'll keep a third, $150,000.
We'll give you $200,000.
That's more money than you've ever seen in your life.
So you're going to be happy. We're going to be happy.
So this is a way for the Biden administration to funnel taxpayer money to left-wing advocacy organizations that they can count on to do their bidding and other matters.
And number three, the Biden administration wants to signal to other illegals that the welcome mat is open.
Hey, listen, it's an open invitation.
In fact, this is a country in which manna falls from heaven.
Look at these other illegals.
They're dancing up and down. Why?
Because suddenly $450,000 has come their way.
They'll never have to work again, as far as they're concerned.
And so it's basically a green light to get more illegals magnetically drawn to the United States now.
Not with the promise of even working here, but with the promise of not having to work because we'll basically extract the money out of American citizens.
So I think you're beginning to see in this one policy alone the full insidiousness of what we're dealing with in America.
This is going to be seen, I think, retroactively as a dark phase of American history.
Either the slipping off the cliff from which we will not be able to easily come back, Or two, a period that narrowly averted a full collapse of the country to the great detriment of our lives, yours and mine, and to the great rejoicing of our adversaries.
Inflation is out of control, right at the highs of the last couple of decades.
And now the Democrats are trying to get agreement on another massive spending plan over $3 trillion.
So here's the deal.
If you think money grows on trees like our government evidently does, well, you can keep living in the dark.
But if you're freaked out as I am about the impact this additional spending is gonna have on high inflation, then protect your savings now.
Diversify a portion of your savings into gold and silver with Birch Gold Group.
Now, if you haven't reached out to Birch Gold to diversify part of your IRA or 401k into a precious metals IRA, do it today.
I buy my gold from Birch Gold.
They have an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, countless five-star reviews, and thousands of happy customers.
Talk to them. Have them help you safeguard your investments.
Text Dinesh to 484848 to claim your free information kit.
And to speak with a precious metals expert on holding gold and silver in a tax-sheltered account.
Again, text Dinesh to 484848 and protect your savings today.
Hey guys, I'm really happy to welcome to the podcast someone that I met a couple of months ago.
I was giving a talk in Illinois, and sitting next to me was Mary Miller, the congresswoman from the 15th District of Illinois, and her husband, who I believe is a state rep.
She'll correct me if I'm wrong.
Mary's on the Agriculture Committee, the Education and Labor Committee.
And their family is, by profession, they're farmers.
And what I love about chatting with Mary and her husband was these are normal people who have been flung into the throes of D.C. political life.
Mary, welcome to the podcast.
Thanks for joining me.
I mean, as I said to you a moment ago, to me, this is Mrs.
Miller Goes to Washington because you strike me as sort of the embodiment of a kind of a farm girl in Illinois.
And I want you to start by telling me this anecdote that you told me at dinner, but I want to share with the audience about someone coming to your husband and asking him if he would sing at a memorial or at a funeral.
Tell that story, if you will.
Sure. So, my husband and I have been married for 41 years, and we've had a great time together thanks to him.
He has a great sense of humor.
Even when I've tried to have a fight with him, he makes me laugh.
Of course, that makes me mad. But anyway, we...
Over the years, one of the things we've done with our extra time is look for places to minister to what we call the least of these.
And we've done this nursing home ministry, and we got to know this couple.
Well, when the husband passed away, the wife called my husband and asked him if he would see me.
I'm laughing just thinking about it.
If he would sing a solo at her husband's wedding.
At the funeral.
At the husband's funeral. And my husband felt bad telling the sweet little old lady no, so he said yes.
Well, then she picked out the hardest song to sing.
Anyway, I was sitting kind of toward the back, and it was so bad.
I can't even tell you.
It was so off-tune and so bad.
I was cringing. Didn't he forget the words of something like that?
He forgot the words, and he started making them up.
Plus, he was off-tune, which he doesn't have a bad voice, but it was a hard song to sing acapella.
And this woman in front of me turned around and she mouthed to me.
She didn't know who I was.
She mouthed to me, who is that?
And I said, my husband.
I just had a great laugh about that.
But anyway, when you are willing to serve people, my husband says to be humble sometimes requires a lot of humiliation.
So anyway, he was humiliating.
Humbled at the same time.
Well, at the event I was at, he was called upon to do the auction because apparently the auctioneer didn't show up or something.
And I loved it. He gets up there and he goes, you know, I'm not an auctioneer.
I don't know how to get money out of people.
He goes, but I've been to a bunch of mega churches and I've kind of seen the techniques that these pastors have perfected.
And I was just chuckling as I heard him draw this analogy.
Yeah. Well, Mary, you're a farm family.
Talk a little bit about your background and what gave you the idea of wanting to run for Congress?
Because you're a first-term Congresswoman now.
Sure. Well, of course, my husband's in the Illinois legislature and he's kind of like me.
We never envisioned ourselves actually being in the positions we're in.
You know, we've been farming for over 40 years.
We've raised seven children.
We're expecting our 18th grandchild.
We've been very involved in community and, you know, church activities, that kind of thing.
So about a decade ago, I told my husband, don't call me a Republican.
I'm a conservative constitutional Christian because I've been irritated at the people that we elect.
They talk the talk, but when they get there, they don't walk the walk.
In fact, I told my children, don't listen to what a politician says.
Look at what they do.
And so anyway, my husband ran and he's, even though he's funny in that, he is kind of an introvert and I'm an extreme extrovert.
So when I was helping him campaign, they would teach him that they got the wrong candidate.
And so when this position opened up, local people and business men encouraged me to run for the spot.
And actually within a couple of days, they put up over $100,000 to get me on my way.
And then also Bill Montgomery, he's the one that got Charlie Kirk started with Turning Point.
He's a friend of ours and he encouraged me to run.
And I remember saying to him, but I'm not a politician and I'm not a lawyer.
And he said, Mary, we need you.
You represent the family.
And it was a kind of a turning point for me in light of agreeing to run because I do represent the family.
I also represent small business.
And, you know, the family is a foundation of our culture and small businesses and agriculture are the foundation of our economy.
So anyway, I'm glad that more regular people have gotten involved.
I think you could see that in the freshman class.
I do believe President Trump inspired regular people to get off the sidelines and get involved.
You know, our freshman class is a diverse group.
We've got several farmers, doctors, pharmacists, business people, restaurant owners.
You know, I love that.
I think our Founding Fathers intended for regular people from diverse backgrounds to go out there and take a turn representing the people.
and I kind of cringe that I'm being called a politician now because I truly look at myself as a servant representative.
Now, Mary, here you are, you come out of, you might say, normal life, you go to Washington, DC.
We've all learned about government in civic school and in college, but you now get to see the Pelosi Democrats up close.
So let's take a short pause, but when we come back, I want to ask you about the experience as a Republican, as a conservative, as a constitutionalist of dealing with the Pelosi Democrats.
Okay.
you Fruits and vegetables are integral to any healthy diet.
Why do so few Americans actually eat the recommended servings of produce every day?
Well, because it's hard to prepare that much produce daily.
So this is where balance of nature comes in.
By taking balance of nature, you're giving your body all the nutrients it needs to increase your cells' vitality.
Get the nutrition that can only be found in whole natural fruits and vegetables.
Debbie and I Take 10 daily servings of fruits and veggies, all in 6 small capsules.
There are absolutely no trouble swallowing.
Always fresh, nothing artificial.
They smell great. And Debbie swears by the fiber and spice.
I was finally convinced to take it myself.
We are really liking it.
Invest in your health. Invest in your life.
Join me and experience the Balance of Nature difference for yourself for years to come.
For a limited time, all new preferred customers get an additional 35% discount and free shipping on your first Balance of Nature order.
Use discount code AMERICA. Call 800-246-8751.
That's 800-246-8751.
Or go to balanceofnature.com and use discount code AMERICA. I'm back with Mary Miller, Congresswoman from the 15th District of Illinois.
We're doing sort of a Mrs.
Miller goes to Washington.
Here's Mary Miller raised in a farming family for 40 years with children and grandchildren.
And Mary, you show up in Washington, D.C. and describe that experience initially and then also take stock.
Here we are eight months into this.
What do you make?
What have you learned so far?
Okay. Well, first of all, I'm going to start with the good, then I'll go to the bad, and then the ugly.
The good is that I'm a member of the Freedom Caucus, and they are a group of constitutionally committed members.
And it's given me a team to play on, which I really appreciate.
We kind of go over what's going to happen in the week to come and how we're going to try to throw sand in their gears and message and all that.
Some of the members from Freedom Caucus have helped me hire a great staff.
I want to tell people there are fantastic people out there.
We're not in the driver's seat right now, but they're there.
So I want them to take hope.
We want to multiply that in the next election.
But... Now the bad.
These people are just the ultimate hypocrites.
They just lie with no shame.
I mean, even the titles of the bills are just every bill a complete lie.
What they name the bill is the opposite of what the bill is.
It is and does.
We don't because of COVID. They're using COVID to basically dismantle the traditional way that the government has run.
One of the things is that the Democrats vote proxy.
So, you know, I mean, you could see newspapers piled up in front of the Democrats' doors where they just don't show up forever.
I mean, there are some members that I've heard haven't shown up.
They voted proxy since January.
So, I mean, this is outrageous.
We don't meet in person for our committees.
And, you know, I'm not exactly even sure where my committee hearing rooms are.
So everything's done on Zoom.
They cut us out of debate.
They bring up the bills like 24 hours or less before we're supposed to.
Be debating on them.
Everything is partisan, pretty much.
No matter how common sense great our amendments are, they will vote.
They stick together.
They always stick together.
And actually it makes me mad that the Republicans don't stick together more.
And I think an example recently is the NDAA, the National Defense Authorization Act that was just passed.
There were a few dissenters on that.
I do believe our leadership whipped a yes.
I talked to some of my friends that were members that were planning to vote yes when they knew there were bad things in the bill.
I was like, why are you voting for that?
Actually, these are good people.
They said to me, well, they promised they were going to take the bad stuff out.
And I said, make them take it out first and then vote on it.
Why are you going to trust them?
We should not be trusting the Democrats and we should be sticking together.
And there are bad things in the National Defense Authorization Act.
It's another kind of omnibus spending bill with stuff added.
It's supposed to be basically funding our military and they've added all this stuff in there.
They've recently added drafting our daughters.
There's a red flag law in there.
But more than that, why are we going to vote to fund our military after the Afghanistan disaster?
Heads should be rolling. People should be fired or tried for treason or something.
I mean, that is outrageous what has happened there.
I mean, the consequences of Afghanistan is going to reverberate for lifetimes.
Mary, you mentioned the fact that the Republicans don't play by the same ruthless tactics as the Democrats.
Why is that? Is that because they treat our side as if we are the bad guys, and we treat their side as if they are sort of misguided?
And so we're always trying to appeal to the better angels of their nature, and it doesn't seem to have dawned on some people in our team that there are no better angels of their nature.
Well, I'm not exactly sure and I'm learning a lot, but I think the Republicans, the Republican Party has some just total fakes in there.
They might as well be Democrats.
And I do think Americans need to wake up and look at what their schools are doing, the curriculum.
They need to look at what school boards are promoting and what's going on in their local districts.
You know, wake up Americans.
We have been asleep too long.
It may be too late, but I'm just saying wake up.
And also in light of our national representation, look at what your representatives are doing.
If they call themselves a Republican, we have a party platform and we have a constitution and they should have to explain themselves why they aren't sticking to that.
You know, there's not enough transparency and accountability or enough desire from regular Americans to find out what's going on.
And I understand you're busy when you're trying to raise a family and run a business and live life, but it's going to be too late for us if we don't wake up and find out what they're doing.
And I think... Obviously we want to turn over Democrat seats, but we need to replace Republicans that have been selling us out.
Let's find out who they are and let's replace them.
Do you think, Mary, that when you think of somebody like Pelosi, that this is someone who has just become a completely rotted creation of D.C., who operates essentially divorced from the interests of the American people?
I mean, I know that Marjorie Taylor Greene has been saying things to the effect that these people in Congress just don't care about ordinary Americans.
Oh, not at all.
They don't care about ordinary Americans.
Let's look at how they're forcing Americans to do things like take the jab, but yet giving illegals special privileges.
And even recently now, the Biden administration considering giving $450,000 to illegal immigrants who claim they were separated from their children in 2018 I mean, and they've got $100 billion in the reconciliation bill for $100 billion for illegal something or another.
I mean, the open borders, you can just see they don't care about regular Americans.
It's really outrageous and they're liars.
But elections have consequences, and we need to get with it.
We need to be engaging.
We need to see that the firewall of state and local governments, but also we need to be engaging our children, our neighbors, our business people in strategic conversations to help them change their minds.
We need to have a change your mind campaign, whether it's about The Democrat Party, abortion, government spending, the border, whatever.
We need to see that there's consequences to these policies.
And the Democrats, what they are doing is destroying our nation, destroying our sovereignty, destroying our economic rights.
I mean, there's going to spin us into a depression.
And I heard the other day there's 11 million jobs unfilled right now.
This reconciliation bill is going to offer so much social money that they're estimating another 9 million people will leave the job market and go sit at home and do nothing.
And one thing I've learned from raising children, if you're doing what you should be doing, you won't be doing what you shouldn't be doing.
And when you pay people to do nothing, you are going to have so many social problems.
And it's just, it's a bad idea.
Mary, I sense in your voice, you know, just a kind of urgency that even though you're a positive person, we're in a very bad situation as a country.
We're really glad you're out there fighting for us.
And I think your advice is dead on.
Thanks for coming on the podcast.
I'd love to have you back sometime.
Really appreciate it. Well, my privilege.
Thank you.
Nobody likes aches and pains, but they come to us all eventually, whether from the normal wear and tear of time or from injury.
But now there's a 100% drug-free solution.
It's called ReliefFactor.
ReliefFactor supports your body's fight against inflammation.
That's the source of aches and pains.
The vast majority of people who try ReliefFactor order more and they keep ordering.
Why?
Because it works for them.
Debbie's been suffering with frozen shoulder for a couple of years now, so she decided to give it a try.
She found that ReliefFactor works amazingly well.
Her pain went away, and she knows that if she doesn't take it regularly, the pain comes right back.
So she's made a vow never to be without it again.
Being able to lift her arm and exercise is super important to her, and ReliefFactor is the tool that she needs, and she's glad she did.
Well, you too can benefit.
Try it for yourself.
Order the three-week quick start for the discounted price of only $19.95.
Go to relieffactor.com or call 833-690-7246 to find out more about this offer.
That number again, 833-690-7246.
So go to relieffactor.com.
Feel the difference. I spoke yesterday about how the judge in the Kyle Rittenhouse case looks like he's turning out to be a good guy, by which I mean a fair guy.
And very interestingly, the judge told the prosecution, you cannot refer to the three guys who were shot by Rittenhouse, two of them, by the way, died, one of them not, as murder victims.
Why? Because we haven't proven a murder.
Think about it this way.
These guys, at least according to Rittenhouse, tried to attack him.
He shot in self-defense.
So what makes them the victim?
What makes him the perpetrator?
Obviously, if he didn't shoot them, he was likely to be gravely injured.
Potentially, he was likely to be killed.
So, the point is that the idea of who's a victim of a murder is something that the trial is there to prove.
Now, looking at the tactics of the prosecution, just from the pre-trial hearings, it's very obvious they're trying to...
I don't think that they must think that they have a good case.
The facts must be in Rittenhouse's favor.
And as we get closer to the trial and into the trial, I'll talk about the actual facts about who did what, and I'll talk a little bit about whether the self-defense is legitimate and likely to persuade a jury.
But before we even go there, the prosecution is trying to go after what you'd have to call thought crimes.
They're following the old strategy of, let's try to make Kyle Rittenhouse into a really bad guy.
So, the prosecution has gone before the judge, this is Bruce Schroeder, and said, we want to show in the case...
Kyle Rittenhouse has been hanging out with members of the Proud Boys.
The idea is the Proud Boys is this malicious, racist organization, even though it's not.
The head of it is actually a Latino guy.
Evidently, Kyle Rittenhouse did go to a tavern in Mount Pleasant where he posed with members of the Proud Boys organization.
And they want to show that he also met at another place called Pudgy's Tavern with the national leader of the Proud Boys.
And the idea here is to show that the Proud Boys are all about causing trouble.
They're all about unleashing racist violence.
These are people looking for trouble.
And Kyle Rittenhouse, since he...
Now, let's pause for one.
Kyle Rittenhouse is not a member of the Proud Boys.
Second, Kyle Rittenhouse did not meet with the Proud Boys before these incidents.
It's really after the incidents when he was demonized and made into this horrible person, and the Proud Boys came to his defense that Kyle Rittenhouse met with those guys.
So this is stuff that happened after the incidents in question.
And the prosecution is trying to show that this is the guy.
I mean, I'll just give you a taste of their rhetoric.
Most everyone was there because of their beliefs.
Chaos tourist. That's the prosecution's description of Kyle Ritten.
He was a chaos tourist.
Like, the defendant were drawn like moths to the flame.
They take pride in using violence to achieve their means.
So, the prosecution is going to try to show that Rittenhouse came there looking to shoot somebody, anybody, in effect.
And that the shooting was just a pretext for a kind of premeditated desire to...
He brought his gun so that, in effect, he could use it.
Now, the judge...
They did not buy it.
This is very good.
Judge Bruce Schroeder goes, nah, this guy, and I'm not quoting the judge.
If this organization embraces the defendant after the fact, because he's lionized because of his behavior, that is not something that the jury can make anything out of that would be lawful.
In other words, Rittenhouse's conduct with the Proud Boys, whatever you think of it, occurred subsequent to the events in question, and therefore cannot be invoked as a motive for We're good to go.
And I think what's particularly disgraceful is that so many conservatives, so many Republicans, have been very hands-off on this case.
Even the National Rifle Association, interestingly, has not been outspoken in defense of Kyle Rittenhouse.
And I'm not really sure why.
Is it because he's, you know, this is a tough case.
He's a 17-year-old.
What was he doing with the gun?
Why was he there? Oh, we don't want to get into the racism issue.
We just want to focus on, you know, some guy in his home when somebody broke in and he drew his weapon.
I mean, when you're defending rights, it's important to realize you don't just take the easy cases.
You don't just defend the sort of stereotypical, let's make an ad out of this guy, because after all, this is a woman, a single mother, and she came to the defense of her child, and everyone draws a tear.
If you want to defend rights, defend them at their outer edges.
You want to defend free speech?
Defend free speech even when the speech in question is objectionable, is abominable, is even hateful.
Defend hate speech.
That'll show you that you're really a defender on principle of free speech.
If you're a defender of the Second Amendment, defend the Second Amendment when it is used legitimately, even in a tough case, even in a questionable case.
And so I think that this is a case where, like January 6th, like the case with the McCloskeys, like so many other cases, we have organizations that raise a lot of money in the name of defending people and defending rights.
But like I'm saying, if you're going to defend rights...
than even Kyle Rittenhouse, who might be a 17-year-old when all of this happened, but might've been in a difficult situation.
And yes, tempers may have raged, and yes, the whole situation was delicate, a kind of a, you may say, a political minefield, but that's when the defense of rights becomes truly important.
I wanna challenge you to become a MyPillow super shopper, We don't just patronize MyPillow.
We go all out to support Mike Lindell.
And this is a guy who appreciates our support.
And we're happy to do it because he also makes great products.
Now, Mike Lindell wants to make it easy for you to be a super shopper.
And it's perfect time with Christmas on the horizon.
How? He's giving you some great deals.
For example, Mike is offering a buy one, get one free on his Giza Dream Sheets.
And he's offering up to 66% off Colby College.
This is a kind of elite liberal arts college up in Maine.
has decided to outlaw discrimination based upon the caste system.
When I first read about this, I was like, the caste system?
I wonder what they're talking about. Are they talking about the caste system in India?
And it turns out they are.
No kidding. They're outlawing discrimination at Colby of somebody discriminating on the basis of the Indian caste system.
Now, I was like, I've got to investigate this craziness.
So I began to look into it.
And sure enough, this was being pushed by the Women's Gender and Sexuality Studies at Colby.
There's a professor there named Sonia Thomas.
And she discovered, yeah, we outlaw race and gender and transgender discrimination.
So why don't we have caste?
Let's add that in here. And of course, Tao Clyburn, Dean of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, is all on board.
And she goes, yes, we've got to promote the inclusivity and safeguard members of our community.
I'm thinking to myself, you know, it's an exaggeration to say that these people have nothing better to do.
They literally have nothing to do.
They have nothing to do, and so they sit around thinking about, well, yeah, you know, there's tension between the Hutu and the Tutsi.
Maybe we should outlaw that at Colby College.
In other words, what I'm getting at is they're solving problems that don't even exist.
There's no evidence ever that Colby College or frankly any other college in the United States has ever discriminated using the compass of the Indian caste system.
The Indian caste system is in India.
It's even outlawed in India and the younger generation regards it as absurd.
So, this makes absolutely no sense.
Incidentally, every now and then on social media, when I talk about things, people will sometimes on the left, you know, they'll be like, Dinesh, you know, yeah, what caste are you?
Tell us what caste you are. Are you a Brahmin?
Are you a member of the upper caste?
They're trying to make it sound like I must be some sort of homegrown elitist in India, and therefore I'm defending, you Nothing could be further from the truth.
But the simple fact is that these people are completely ignorant about India itself.
The caste system in India is within Hinduism.
There's no caste system in Islam.
There's no caste system in Christianity.
And since my family was converted, probably out of Hinduism, to Christianity...
Hundreds of years ago, so far back in time I can't even trace it, were not in the caste system.
So I observed the caste system.
It was around me.
There were vestiges of it, particularly in Indian villages and in poorer communities.
It was said of the British, by the way, that they love the Indian caste system.
They were like, this is fantastic.
We just want to put ourselves at the top of this whole caste system so we retain the caste system intact, but just put the Englishman, the white man, at the apex of it.
So... Back to Colby College.
These are people now who are trying to elaborate even further the great labyrinth of anti-discrimination.
A lot of the racism that they identify now is fictional.
It's made up. We're good to go.
There's a very interesting article in Revolver News about a Chinese philosopher and his critique of America.
Now, China, as we know, is very removed from America, very difficult for us to understand China.
America has, in the past, been dealing with opponents, Nazi Germany, for example, But Germany is not so incomprehensible to us.
Or Russia. And even though Russia is partly in the East and partly in the West, we have a much better understanding of Russia than we do of, let's say, the mind of the Chinese.
But sometimes we can learn in America when people from China, in this case, a guy named Wang Huning, a member, by the way, now of the Chinese Communist Party.
He didn't start out that way. He started out as an academic, kind of a mild-mannered guy.
But the party spotted him and they sent him to America to observe America and to write about America.
And he was looking for what makes America strong and are there weaknesses in America that he would observe, obviously, from the outside, from the Chinese perspective.
And so this guy wrote a book, actually now about almost 30 years old, called America Against America.
And the book is worth looking at, and the Revolver guys do a good job of this, because many of the trends that he describes are even more advanced, even more clear than when he wrote about them then.
And so this becomes an opportunity for us to kind of turn the camera on ourselves as Americans and benefit from an outsider perspective, see if there's anything in there that we might have missed.
Now, some of what the guy does is...
Is very admirable.
He admires a lot of things about America.
And in fact, he points out that America is much wealthier than China.
America is technologically far ahead of China.
Now, that gap has narrowed since 1991, to be sure.
But nevertheless, it's still there.
And he says the Americans are really good at this stuff.
They do these things well.
They've built the most advanced military in the world.
But, says Wang Huning, there are severe weaknesses in America that if they continue will essentially unravel the society.
We're going to see kind of a great unraveling.
And the unraveling is not on the front of technology, but on the front of values.
Essentially, what Wan Ho Ning says is that our values, particularly our family values, but also our civic values, and he doesn't neglect our political values, are eroding the foundations of our society.
Let's look at the political values for just a moment.
He goes, listen, America, we're always hearing talk about democracy, the people, the ordinary guy ruling the country, turning over power to the people, we the people.
He goes, in no society do the people actually rule.
He goes, every society is ruled by an elite, and this is no less true in America.
And he goes, if you want to understand who's really influencing the process, you've got to look at this network of lobbyists and activists, Who wield a massively disproportionate influence compared to, let's say, the ordinary guy.
And he says that...
These lobbyists are not just paid by corporations, for example, to lobby against a tax hike for that particular industry.
No. He said these are people who pretend to be researchers.
They put out position papers as if they're advocating for policy more generally.
They testify at hearings.
They draft legislation.
They make alliances with other lobbyists.
And they even answer letters on behalf of congressmen And senators from their constituents.
So the congressman gets an awkward letter.
Why are we giving a subsidy to these guys?
Turn it over to the lobbyists.
He'll draft a letter of response.
So essentially what Wan Ho Ning is saying is that this is not genuinely ruled by the people.
This is ruled by an elite who are masquerading as the champions of the people.
And I think we'd have to agree there's a lot of truth to that.
Wang Huning is certainly not politically correct.
In fact, he doesn't at that time.
He probably would, if he came today, be more aware of the taboos surrounding discussions of certain topics.
I'm just going to read a couple of lines of his description of the inner city.
He goes, I've been to black neighborhoods in San Francisco, New York, New Haven, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and Atlanta.
He goes, and my impression is extremely bad.
Generally speaking, these people are more dirty and poor than the areas where white people live.
And he goes, in front of many houses, there are lazy black people sitting around.
So this guy, it's like, ah!
You know, he doesn't know. He doesn't know you're not supposed to talk about these things.
Now, he doesn't say, he's not talking about all people.
He's just describing.
He probably sees himself as giving nothing more than a neutral description.
But of course, we live in an age where these neutral descriptions have become taboo.
Now... I think on a deeper level, what Wang Huning is saying is he says that partly because of the mobility of American life and partly because of the disintegration of the family structure, he goes, interpersonal relationships in America are very thin.
They're not deep. And I think this is a very profound point, and it's observed by anyone who comes to America from a society like mine, like India, where relationships actually are deep.
The phrase that he uses is thin socialization.
He goes, even husbands and wives, he goes, maintain separate bank accounts, separate zones of privacy, in some cases, separate friendships.
They have separate worlds.
Debbie's like, no, we don't do that and we don't do that.
But some people do do that.
I'm aware of a family in San Diego, for example, and they were fighting over what to name their adopted daughter.
And finally, they agreed that if you pay for the patio furniture, you can then choose the name.
This is a deal that's made between a couple, which obviously was operating separate bank accounts.
And so here's Wang Huning.
Even marriage does not break the fortress that is built in everyone's heart.
And his point is, in other societies, it does.
In other societies, you genuinely have a kind of full sense of intimacy.
The conclusion he draws from this book, I think, is stark and very telling, as he goes, listen, at some point, this values break down.
And by the way, I just saw separately, unrelated to the book, that the United States now leads the world in fatherless households.
Wow. I mean, this is not something we want to lead the world in.
We lead the world in fatherless households.
And fatherless households in America are, and this is at one point we complained about the black households, but the white households are now in exactly the same position that the black households were a generation ago.
Wang Huning concludes, if you want to defeat the Americans finally and overwhelmingly, you must do one thing, surpass them in science and technology.
His argument is that the only remaining aspect of American arrogance is based upon, yeah, but we build better iPhones.
Yeah, but we build better computers.
Yeah, but we are on the frontiers of science and technology.
And so, Wang Huning says, science and technology has developed into a cult of national superiority.
The Americans cannot imagine that any nation can surpass them.
And so if we, the Chinese, can beat them, you may say, at their own game, then they will have nothing ever again to boast about.
Guys, we're going to do an audio question today.
So let's go to our mailbox and listen.
Hi Dinesh. I've watched several of your debate videos on YouTube and having never taken a debate class in high school, what resources would you recommend for me to become a better debater in everyday social situations?
In a previous recording, you say that we should listen carefully to your opponent's position.
While listening, do you consider the Greek argument taxonomy to choose your counterargument to exploit a weakness?
What goes through your mind when you're setting up your reply?
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you. This is a very interesting question.
And of course, I've done a lot of debates, not just on Christian apologetics, but I debated Walter Mondale, former vice president.
I've debated Jesse Jackson.
So I've done a lot of political debates as well as Christian debates.
In fact, I debated Hitchens on capitalism versus socialism.
I think going back to 1989, Long before I debated him on his book, God is Not Great.
Now, in a debate, I have to say, and I don't know if I'm typical in this, I do not prepare at all.
And I should say that that's because I have prepared.
By and large, I take over a period of time, and in my case, you know, years, in some cases, most of my adult lifetime, to really read and try to understand issues at the granular level.
So if I'm looking, for example, at the Big Bang, I'm not just going to look at, oh, the universe had a beginning 14.5 billion years ago, or evolution, yes, creatures come out of other creatures because of survival of the fittest.
I will kind of go into it.
To such a point that I will discover things that are often latent in the literature that the other side, politically, is not aware of.
And so this becomes my secret weapon in the debate.
It's literally just the knowledge that I know more than my opponent.
And even if my opponent is an expert, let's say I'm debating an evolutionary biologist, he's going to know more about evolutionary biology than I am, but I'm going to know more about philosophy and history and teleology than And so, there are many weapons at my disposal that are not available to him at all.
And so I try to do interdisciplinary learning as part of just my ordinary life.
Now, when somebody hits you with a question, and particularly they're giving a rebuttal, they'll typically make five or six points.
In fact, often when I'm on a campus, someone will stand up and go, I want to raise three questions, Dinesh.
And this is actually playing into my hands because if someone raises multiple points, you don't have to rebut them all.
In fact, you don't have time to rebut them all.
In a debate, typically, or you have five minutes to rebut, In a question you should, Debbie sometimes goes, well, then I should sometimes go along.
But the point is, you have three to five minutes at the most to answer.
And so my suggestion is this.
If somebody hits you with three points, you might raise a question about one or two of the others, but pick the point that you think is their strongest point.
Because if you can destroy or body slam that point, you will have completely destroyed their credibility.
You don't have to answer all three.
You have to take the one that you think is really resonating with the audience and crush that one.
And I think that has become kind of my specialty.
So the reason I don't prepare is that when you prepare, you're captive to your notes.
You're like, oh, you know, I got to say this and I got to say that.
No. You should try to read the audience and try to gauge the situation.
What are the points being made in the debate that are resonating with the audience?
That's what you want to talk about.
And then you also want to speak in a kind of natural, non-academic style.
So you're able to be academic in the points that you raise, but your style is conversational, and the combination of knowledge and colloquiality, I think, is very powerful in a debate.
▲
Export Selection