All Episodes
Previous Next
April 6, 2023 - Dinesh D'Souza
50:38
JURY OF HIS ENEMIES Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep553
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This episode is brought to you by my friend Rebecca Walser, a financial expert who can help you protect your wealth.
Book your free call with her team by going to friendofdinesh.com.
That's friendofdinesh.com.
By the way, a quick announcement.
Today, Thursday, is the last podcast for this week.
Tomorrow's Good Friday, so it's a holiday.
I'll be back in the saddle on Monday.
Coming up today, I'll show how the Saudis are teaching Joe Biden a painful lesson, but one that all Americans will pay for.
Debbie's going to join me for our roundup.
We're going to discuss the charges against Trump, whether Disney outplayed DeSantis, and how Gisele Fetterman plays the victim card.
If you're watching on Rumble, remember to hit the subscribe button.
If you're listening on Apple, Google, or Spotify, please subscribe as well.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza Show.
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.
I want to focus in my opening segment on a different topic than the one that we're all focused on these days, and that is the Trump indictment.
Debbie's going to join me.
Our normal Friday roundup this week is a Thursday roundup, but we're going to talk about Trump and we'll get to that.
I want to talk about something else that just came about, and that is a major decision on the part of Saudi Arabia and OPEC, the oil-producing cartel countries, To cut back on oil production.
Now, why would they cut back?
When a cartel cuts back on production, they're trying to drive up the price.
That's their point. In fact, sometimes when prices go low, the cartels will produce less, and they are producing less by the laws of supply and demand.
Same demand, less supply, price goes up.
So Saudi Arabia is cutting its production by 500,000 barrels per day.
Pretty big number.
And Russia has already reduced production by 500,000 barrels per day.
And Russia has decided to extend that reduction.
And then the other oil countries are also kind of kicking in.
So, for example, United Arab Emirates is going down 150,000 barrels a day.
Kuwait, 128,000.
Kazakhstan, Algeria, Oman are also cutting back.
And this should be understood.
Now, if you listen to the vocabulary coming out of Saudi Arabia, it's very neutral.
Now, we are moderating the supply in response to global demand.
So it looks like this is a technocratic decision, but it is foolish to understand it that way.
And the same is true with the Russian cutback.
Russia is using oil as a weapon.
Now, the West has sanctions against Russia.
The West and the European countries are not buying the Russian oil.
So Russia is selling the oil elsewhere.
And it's selling the oil now, as it turns out, not in U.S. dollars, but it's selling in the Chinese currency, the yuan.
And so Saudi Arabia, which by and large used to be very friendly to the United States, the United States could call up the Saudi prince and say, hey, we are having some trouble here.
Could you increase oil supply?
And I remember going back to the Reagan and the Bush years that the Saudis were quite obliging and being willing to do that, at least within reason.
And now Biden has made an enemy of these people.
And this is very bad because it's been done in a very short-sighted way.
Now, of course, there are some people who would argue, well, listen, Dinesh, we were at one point fully dependent on Saudi oil, and we had to call them up and implore them to adjust their oil production and thus adjust oil prices.
But now the United States has its own sources of oil and natural gas, not to mention all these new technologies like fracking, which are ways of getting the oil and the natural gas.
And all of this is true, but here's the problem.
We have been sabotaging ourselves.
When I say we, I don't mean you or me.
I mean the Biden regime.
In the interest of climate change and appeasing the climate fanatics, by and large, we are not fully developing our own resources.
We're limiting the drilling on federal lands.
We're not approving leases, or at least we're approving them in a very glacial and slow fashion.
And so the net effect of it is that this makes us more dependent on foreign oil.
So let's look, for example, at the White House's statement in response to the Saudis and the Russians cutting back on oil.
You might think if really the planet was existentially threatened, oil is really bad for the world, the Biden administration would go, well, this is great because there are going to be less emissions.
It's good that they're cutting back supply.
So what if the prices rise?
Because we don't have any alternative.
The planet has only a few more years, so we might as well extend it, even if we have to pay a little more.
But no, you'll notice that they say the exact opposite.
I'm now quoting, the president is disappointed by the short-sighted decision by OPEC. I always love it when we lecture other countries about their own interests.
It's very shortsighted of you to do this.
We understand better what's good for you.
To cut production quotas while the global economy is dealing with the continued negative impact of Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
I mean, just think of the sheer obtuseness of this statement.
Because we are interested in Ukraine.
We want you.
And think of who the you is.
It's not just Saudi Arabia.
Russia is itself in that group.
We're lecturing the Russians because of the Ukraine.
There's a real need for global energy, for you to cut back supplies, really short-sighted on your part.
I mean, how other countries, not just countries that are involved directly in OPEC, but just watching this must laugh when they see this kind of foolishness.
At a time when maintaining a global supply of energy is of paramount importance.
Listen, countries don't sit around thinking, what is of paramount importance to the globe?
They don't think about that. They think about what is of paramount importance to me, to my country.
They act in their own national self-interest.
So again, offering these sermons about what the globe needs when nobody believes that the United States is in a position to speak for the globe, to speak for the planet, to speak for the climate.
All of this is sheer hot air.
But the bottom line of it is Biden put us in this situation.
And as a result, it's not just he, it's all of us who are going to be paying the price at the fuel pump.
Debbie and I gained a bunch of weight, not saying how much, too much during COVID, and we decided it's time to lose some pounds.
We started the PhD weight loss and nutrition program nine weeks ago.
Debbie has already lost 12 pounds!
And I am down almost 20 pounds.
Wow! The program is based on science and nutrition.
No injections, no pills, no hours in the gym, no severe calorie restriction.
Just good, sound, scientifically proven nutrition.
It's really simple.
They make it easy by providing 80% of your food at no additional cost.
They tell you when and what to eat.
And guess what?
You can do this without ever being hungry.
The founder, Dr. Ashley Lucas, has her PhD in chronic disease and sports nutrition and is a registered dietitian.
She helps people lose weight, get healthy, and most important, maintain that weight loss for life.
If you're ready to lose that excess weight for the last time, as we are, call PhD Weight Loss and Nutrition at 864-644-1900.
Or find them online at myphdweightloss.com.
The number again to call, 864-644-1900.
Debbie and I thought we would start by talking about this Trump situation that has dominated the news this week and I think is going to dominate the news for quite a while.
I think, what do you think?
It seemed to me that the initial reaction to the indictment was...
There's not a whole lot here.
But it doesn't mean that they aren't going to try to use it to the hilt.
Because they are known to run with things where there's not a whole lot there.
Look, why do you think they impeached Trump twice?
Was there a there there for impeaching him twice?
No. Okay, we know that they'll do it because they hate him, right?
They're going to do whatever it takes.
And this is just one of three things that they're going to do to Trump.
This is just the beginning.
If this spaghetti doesn't stick to the wall, they're going to throw another one, another spaghetti noodle at the wall.
And that'll be the January 6th.
You know, his role in January 6th.
If that doesn't stick to the wall, there's the Georgia election and his so-called interference to that.
So they're good. The classified documents.
Oh, yeah. Sorry. Four spaghetti noodles to the wall.
Listen, they're going to go after him no matter what.
What they... Their goal is to have him not run.
If they can lock him up, that would be a bonus, right?
But they don't have to lock him up.
They can ruin his life without doing that and ruin his chances of becoming the next president.
That's what they want to do. So let's look at how they want to achieve that.
Part of it is going to be, let's tie them up.
Right. Because Trump has to have batteries of lawyers.
It's a considerable expense.
And it also takes up a huge amount of time.
You've got to answer discovery.
It's an endless process.
So that's one. The second is, I wonder if they're trying to scare away Republican donors.
Right. Yes. That's probably another part of their...
Well, if you think about it, Biden won with all of the soccer moms, you know, all of the women that thought that, you know, Trump was a little bit too toxic.
So what are they trying to do?
They're trying to solidify that with those voters.
And maybe people that were on the fence, you know, hey, you know, he's too toxic.
Let's not go there.
So what they're trying to do is they are trying to poison that well, so to speak.
And that's why they're trying to fight with, you know, they're trying to bring DeSantis on to fight with him and all of those things.
I mean, when I listen to the rhetoric of the DeSantis supporters, and neither of us is...
Anti-DeSantis. We know DeSantis.
We like DeSantis. We are not party to the critique of DeSantis.
We think DeSantis is doing a great job.
But here's the point, is that the DeSantis supporters generally make the arguments that suggest that the left's tactic is working.
In other words, they will say things like, well...
The issue is not the merits of Trump.
The issue is not whether he did anything.
We're just saying that he's not so electable.
Yeah, because they're tired of Trump having so many issues with people and so many legal battles and all those things.
And so they think that that's going to be a distraction to the election, even though...
It's, you know, the merits of it are obviously worthless.
And in many cases, see, the thing is, if it's not of Trump's doing...
Now, there may be some things that the dissentist people allege that are of Trump's doing.
Like they say, Trump is extravagant in his rhetoric.
Trump makes enemies. He doesn't have to.
So we're going to put that aside.
But here's my point. If the left can do it to Trump...
They can do it to DeSantis.
They can do it to anybody. And it's almost like DeSantis is just the next guy in line.
They're going to use DeSantis against Trump.
But then when DeSantis becomes a candidate, they'll go against him with full force.
And then there'll be a new group of people who go, let's have Nikki Haley or let's have somebody else because DeSantis is too toxic.
DeSantis has now become radioactive.
They've got all this stuff, all these investigations going into DeSantis.
And so we've got to deal with this as a...
As a chronic or as a built-in problem rather than thinking it's a one-off with Trump.
Right. No, it's built in for sure.
For sure. And, you know, they even did it to you.
Not that you're running for anything, thankfully.
But they try to destroy your career.
And so they will destroy any conservative's Political career, political ambitions, otherwise, any critic.
So basically what they do is they go after political opponents, regardless of what that political opponent does for a living.
They want to destroy.
Yeah, say a word about this.
I mean, the left is very opportunistic.
They will pick on something, even if they know it's a false accusation.
And what happened in my case was, and this is before my actual case, Or after my actual case, when, remember we had, actually it wasn't even me, it was my social media guy, had retweeted some stuff that had some hashtags, which had been planted there by the left.
There were vicious hashtags.
I obviously didn't even see them, but they were retweeted under my name.
Dinesh is an anti-Semite, Dinesh doesn't like Jews, and so on, when I've been actually pro-Israel and pro-Semitic all my life.
And so, but they knew that.
They knew that. And they were trying to get me, and when it failed, they just dropped it.
And now no one says it because it was like, you know, we thought we had a window of opportunity.
It was a brazen lie, but we thought we might be able to pull it off.
And in my own case, the most important thing for me was to not let that work.
Because I said to myself, if they're able to destroy my career, and my career shrinks, and then people don't watch my movies, they don't read my books, then the left will have won.
Because that's really their goal.
That was their goal. Their goal isn't deport Dinesh, lock up Dinesh.
It is neutralized Dinesh as a political adversary.
And so I'm like, I got to have my career be bigger than ever.
This is also where the pardon helped.
The pardon sort of erased all that.
Let's talk about that in the next segment.
Yeah, we'll be right back. Who likes aches and pains?
Nobody. Well, Debbie and I started taking Relief Factor a couple of years ago.
The difference we've seen in our joints has been nothing short of amazing.
Aches and pains are totally gone thanks to this 100% drug-free solution called Relief Factor.
How does it work? Relief Factor supports your body's fight against inflammation that's the source of aches and pains.
The vast majority of people who try Relief Factor become regular customers.
They love it. They order more.
Because it works for them.
Debbie's a true believer. She can now do the exercises that for a long time she wasn't able to do.
Relief Factor has been a real game changer for her, her aunt, other members of our family, Mike here in the studio, and for many other people.
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 the new number 800-4-RELIEF to find out more.
The number again, 800-4-RELIEF. Or go to relieffactor.com, feel the difference.
We're continuing our weekly roundup, and when we left off, I was talking about my pardon and my disdetermination that the left's political javelin not lodge itself in the middle of my chest, and that I'm able to get up and walk.
And walk away from this whole thing and continue doing the work.
And actually, when Trump called to talk about the pardon, that's what he said.
He goes, listen, you've been a huge force for liberty and freedom, and I want you to be able to go out there and just do your thing the way you've been doing it, except with a bigger voice than ever.
It's so heartbreaking because, of course, Trump pardoned you.
And one of the times, well, every time actually that we see him, he always brings up the pardon.
He's always glad that he pardoned you.
Well, he makes a funny observation.
He's told this to us at least twice, but we always chuckle.
He goes, yeah, he goes, I don't feel quite the same way about Scooter Libby.
Oh, yeah. Because he had pardoned Scooter Libby right before me.
And then he discovered a little bit later, and actually think about this.
Think from Trump's point of view.
Scooter Libby, shortly after getting a pardon from Trump, goes to a fundraiser for Liz Cheney.
Wow. And Trump is like, really?
And so Trump is like, I didn't really want to call him and tell him.
But Trump was really, I think, disgusted.
And he had someone in his operation kind of let Scooter Libby know.
And apparently Scooter Libby was like, what do you mean?
I... He pretended like he didn't even recognize that there was a problem here.
So I think Trump brings this up only to say that he's happy he pardoned me, not as happy in every case.
Yeah, but he pardoned a lot of people.
But anyway, but the funny thing is, at one of the times, I jokingly said, well, who's going to pardon you?
You know, it was one of those things that, like, I knew they were going after him.
In fact, I've told you this before, I was right again about the fact that I knew they were going to try to get him.
And that they were going to bring a criminal charge.
Yeah, and so anyway, so we all kind of ha-ha chuckled.
But now thinking back, you know, that was a little prophetic and sad, too, at the same time.
Yeah. Because he takes so much abuse.
I mean, I don't... I don't know how he gets up in the morning and faces another day of haters.
I mean, you know, it's just...
A normal person would be brought down by it.
It's so true. And even last night, you know, during his speech, he said that his family has been through a lot.
I can only imagine.
I can only imagine.
Yeah. You know, and a little later, I'm going to talk about Giselle Fetterman and make the comparison of what she's talking about.
But... But anyway, back to Trump.
Really, I don't think he does it for any other reason than he knows that what he did when he was president for the country was good for the country.
And I think he thinks he's the only one that can do that.
I hope that's not true, but he definitely had the right recipe to fix the I mean, look, Trump has strengths and he has weaknesses, but these three cases, or four cases, if you will, there's really no there, not just in this case, the Alvin Bragg case, but in any of them.
I mean, let's go through them one by one.
A hush money payment.
And again, you know, I've said this before that I don't know what happened with Trump and Stormy Daniels.
I've talked to conservatives who are like, you know that he did do something.
And there are others who go, listen, there are all kinds of business people who are shaken down by people.
And both companies and CEOs are often paying money under the table and it's just to make the problem go away.
It's not worth it for them to fight it out.
So whatever the truth of the matter, You know, you have this hush money payment, and obviously the hush money payment is because it's hush money payment.
Stormy Daniels said nothing happened.
Did she not? Stormy Daniels said nothing happened.
Michael Cohen said nothing happened.
My point is there's nothing here.
And then you move on to the Georgia case.
What did Trump do? He calls the Secretary of State.
Trump genuinely believes he won the state of Georgia.
Anyone who denies that, anyone who thinks Trump knew he lost, he wanted the Secretary of State to find some fraudulent votes, that's absurd.
No, Trump believes he won Georgia fair and square, but there was cheating in Georgia that prevented the rightful victor, him, from being recognized, and he wanted the Secretary of State to look into it, and that was the meaning of the phrase, find the votes.
Find the votes is find legal, legitimate votes.
I do think, though, that sometimes he does things without proper advice, or he doesn't take advice, and sometimes he can get himself into hot water because of it.
If you recall that Burisma phone call, right?
Well, we know that nothing happened there, but just the mere call itself Yeah, I don't agree, because I think, no, because, I mean, look, here you've got, here's Trump, he's talking to the Ukrainians.
He knows that there's all this money that is mysteriously flowing to the Biden family through the sun, who has no experience or expertise in oil or energy at all.
So Trump knows it's corrupt, and all he's doing is he's saying, hey, guys, why don't you look into it?
I think this is a perfectly legitimate thing for him to say.
You don't think that if Trump had similar dealings, that Biden would call up a foreign leader and say, hey...
Well, we know Biden gets away with whatever Biden gets away with.
We know that. So they're not playing on a level field.
They really aren't. So that's part of the...
Well, that's the heart of the problem. That's the problem.
That is the problem right there, is that it is definitely not the same justice for us and for them.
Debbie and I started eating better this year.
We're on the road to losing some weight.
But one of the foods we can't seem to eat enough of, and it's a requirement, are veggies.
Now, there's no better way to get all your fruits and veggies than by taking Balance of Nature.
Balance of Nature is sourced from 31 whole fruits and vegetables.
You'll get maximum nutrition with their star product.
Fruits and veggies in a capsule.
So easy. We not only look better, but we feel better too with lots of added energy that Balance of Nature gives us.
Start your journey to better health right now.
Take advantage of this great offer from Balance of Nature.
Get $25 off plus free fiber and spice with your first preferred order of fruits and veggies when you use discount code AMERICA. The offer can end at any time, so act now.
Call 800-246-8751.
That's 800-246-8751 or go to balanceofnature.com.
Use discount code AMERICA. Here's an interesting article.
Actually, Debbie showed it to me.
It's called How Disney Just Beat Ron DeSantis.
Now, the reason this is interesting and perhaps significant is that there's been a lot of publicity.
Ron DeSantis took on Disney.
Ron DeSantis showed Disney.
Ron DeSantis, in his new book, apparently has a chapter that focuses on taking on the mouse, taking on Disney.
And the book is supposed to be a kind of soft launch for the presidential campaign.
The DeSantis chapter, by the way, is called The Magic Kingdom of Woke Corporatism.
And no one can die. The premise is true.
Disney has become woke.
They're very heavily into the LGBTQ business.
And when Florida passed the law that the left mischaracterized as the Don't Say Gay law, this was the reason for the skirmishes between DeSantis and Disney.
DeSantis set about trying to strip the company of its status as a special tax district and also replace the members of the board that oversees what goes on in that district with Disney.
But now, according to this article...
This board that has now come in has been sort of hoodwinked.
And been hoodwinked by who?
Well, by the previous board, which obviously was more friendly to Disney.
So the previous board apparently signed a contract with Disney that basically says, Hey Disney, you can continue and build a new theme park in the special tax district with the special tax protections.
And number two...
If the state of Florida wants to make any changes to the Disney property, they would need Disney's corporate approval to do so.
So what the theme of the article is that it seems that this new board that is here to kind of clean things up and teach Disney a lesson can't do it because they are legally bound by what the previous board decided to do.
This is a very kind of almost devious move by the previous board.
And there were a couple of quotes from the new board members saying things like, well, we're going to take this to court.
So it's not as if the new board is like, we're just going to sit around and do what the earlier people decided.
They're going to challenge it.
But it could be sometimes when there is a contract, a court goes, well, this contract is pretty watertight.
After all, it doesn't seem to have any duration.
It doesn't expire on Wednesday or the end of this year.
So, it could be, the theme of this article is that DeSantis might have taken on Disney, might have gotten a lot of publicity for it, might even have declared victory, but this victory is, well, to put it mildly, incomplete.
Well, you know, what I say about all this is, why doesn't Disney have a competitor?
Yeah. I think that we need to do a theme park for Patriots.
Why not? Right?
Why does Disney have to be the only theme park in America?
I mean, you've mentioned this to me before. It's a great idea.
Many times. But the other thing, too, that makes me mad is that They claim they're so like, and this is Vox, by the way, and the reason I get all of these like, you know, Elle magazine and Vox and all of that is because I get the Apple News, which has only left-wing news, by the way.
Oh, yeah. So anyway, but they try to evoke a sense of like, I don't know, righteousness with right-wingers and with DeSantis saying that he's...
God put him in charge.
And so they try to make it seem like he's a hater.
And so he went after Disney, even though he claims he got married at Disney.
Yeah, he says in the chapter that he...
That his wife loves Disney and she chose Disney as the site.
And so he's like, little did I know at that time that I would get into this great battle.
But look, the point about Disney is this, and I think this is what I find so disgusting, is that Disney would want to point, and this reflected Walt Disney himself.
Walt Disney was a Republican, not a...
Right-wing Republican, perhaps.
Yeah, but this is back in the 50s.
People weren't that way.
That's right. You know what I mean? And he was certainly a patriot.
He was certainly conservative.
And he loved American history, and he loved Americana.
He loved, you could call it, traditional American ideals.
And you can see that Disney is full of all that, except now they have somehow twisted it all.
And so, you know, they call DeSantis, like, An authoritarian for doing this.
Right. Well, how are you an authoritarian when you're the elected governor of a state?
You're using your... In fact, the left at one time, if you just go back, you know, a few decades, the left would have been pro-democracy and anti-corporations.
Disney is a huge corporation.
It's a mega corporation.
And you have an elected governor representing the constituents of his state operating through the normal legal channels.
Governors appoint people to boards and commissions.
So DeSantis is not doing anything out of the ordinary.
In fact, part of why he's effective is the left has not been able to find a way to say, this is inappropriate.
You know, because DeSantis has been, he's taken over a progressive college.
And do you know if Disney has been hit financially by all this?
Because, you know, I was telling you the other day that it's kind of hard to tell your little kid why you don't take them to Disney, you know?
Because they're going to be like, what? Everyone goes to Disney.
Well, I mean... Yeah, my friends are going.
You know, so-and-so is going. Why can't I go, mommy?
What do you tell them?
Well, this is a good question.
I don't know the answer to it, but I mean, isn't it amazing you've got a company that has a business model that is essentially based upon alienating one half of the American population?
What a weird way for a company to operate.
We all know our digital privacy is under attack.
Big tech steals your private information, pictures, chat, and email.
All of this is very, very bad.
So is there a better way?
Well, yes, there is.
Secure, which is spelled S-E-K-U-R, offers secure instant messaging and email hosted in Switzerland without using any of the big tech platforms and using Swiss privacy laws, which are the strictest in the world.
Debbie and I signed up for Secure.
We're using it. We love it.
Secure's proprietary technology allows you to communicate privately without fear of spying from big tech companies, your email provider, or hackers.
Use Secure to chat or email with everyone, including non-secure users, thanks to Secure's unique features called Secure Send and Chat by Invite.
Secure is an email and messaging application that guarantees your privacy.
Go to secure.com.
That's S-E-K-U-R dot com.
Use promo code Dinesh to get 25% off for the next 24 months.
Again, that's secure, S-E-K-U-R dot com.
Debbie was telling me about a rather passionate and pompous article that she just saw.
Where is it from? Elle Magazine.
Elle Magazine, yeah.
It's written by Giselle Fetterman.
It's an op-ed.
It's an op-ed by Fetterman's wife, Giselle Fetterman.
And Fetterman, I guess, is now out of the hospital.
I guess he's back on the job.
I haven't really seen Fetterman functioning ever since he was in the hospital, so we'll wait to see what we can find out about him.
They say he's okay, but this is all from his wife's point of view, and it seems like it is like victimology from start to finish.
Well, the first thing that struck me, Jill, Giselle, let me just tell you, is, you know, when you start talking about how people attack you and it's all about you and that it's your fault that your husband ran for Senate, it's your fault that he had a stroke, all those things, you know, she's just going on and on and on.
And she says how she viciously gets attacked.
Giselle, I challenge you to go through my timeline on Twitter.
And see what the attacks are on me and our family, right?
Apparently, she thinks she's the only one that gets attacked.
And apparently, she thinks that only right-wingers attack.
It's almost like she's claiming the traditional left-wing immunity.
Exactly. I'm on the left.
This is not supposed to happen to me.
Nobody's supposed to question my motives.
Exactly. And so then she says, you know, that as a woman, you know, that on social media, people accuse her of kidnapping her kids and leaving for Canada.
And they promote conspiracy theories that claims that she was an ambitious, power-hungry wife, yada, yada, yada.
Well, let's hold on for a second.
Hold on for a second.
A conspiracy theory, if you just think about it, is a theory that supposedly involves a number of people colluding together to produce some kind of an illegal outcome.
If you're talking about a husband and wife, and the wife, let's just say, is very ambitious, she wants her husband to run for office and succeed to increase her own visibility, that may be right or it may be wrong.
It's not a conspiracy theory.
There's no conspiracy involved or alleged.
Right, no. People have motives.
She keeps going on and then she says, they even told me to go back to my country.
Hello, how many times have they told us to do that?
Well, I'm constantly being deported.
Have we written an op-ed about that?
Okay, no. And then she's like, even though I got my green card in 2004 and my citizenship in 2009, I've been criticized for my appearance, going after my eyebrows and hair.
First of all, Giselle.
Let me check out her eyebrows and hair.
You're a very pretty woman, and you're from Brazil.
I'm from Venezuela.
South American women got it going on, okay?
I'm just saying. So forget about the criticisms on your looks.
That's not the problem, exactly. That's not it, right?
But then you start saying...
That they're the same attacks leveled at Meghan Markle and Jada Pinkett Smith and Jill Biden.
Apparently, my apparent competitors for worst wife in America.
Right, hold on. Notice here that she carefully selects examples that come from her side of the aisle.
Again, to give the idea that the only sort of attacks are made against people on the left.
And that was my criticism.
Think of the attacks, for example, that have gone against Trump's wife.
Melania. Melania.
Oh, my goodness. The vicious attacks.
The vicious attacks. Look at what happened to Sarah Palin.
Look how they attacked her.
Look how people attacked Sarah Sanders.
Oh, my goodness. Oh my gosh, Sarah Sanders.
For appearance or weight. I mean, the people bash her left and right.
Even Nikki Haley.
I've seen leftists on social media mocking her by giving her Indian name and saying, hello, Nimrata.
In other words, in a manner that is almost, you know...
And then she even says, hate is a lot like fire.
If you don't control it, it spreads.
Yeah, put your money where your mouth is, Giselle.
I mean, the hate that comes from the left makes anything from our side.
I think a better op-ed really should have been her talking about how women in general, both left and right, are attacked by, you know, for their looks, for who they're married to, things like that.
I would have been a little bit more sympathetic.
But the fact that she went completely like, no, it's not our fault on the, you know, left wing.
It's all the right wingers' fault.
They're the only ones that ever do this.
I was like, really?
And then look at Elle magazine.
It's obvious at Elle magazine again.
You know, you'd think there'd be some editor who'd be like, oh, Giselle, you know what?
This is actually a bipartisan problem.
And we are a magazine for, by, and of women.
Apparently. Certainly not all women.
Exactly. So Elle is here very clearly giving her an ideological platform to lash out.
And that's what she's doing. And then she even says, you know, that the girls report feeling persistently sad and hopeless, a record high mental health crisis for young women.
So she feels like this is, you know, not helping matters.
Well, yeah, I mean if you want to write a real op-ed about the problem Then why don't you include people like?
Mel Melania people like Sarah Sanders people like Sarah Palin And this is not a call for for civility in America This is not a call for a truce in the heated rhetoric on both sides.
Nothing of that sort. It appropriates the idea of the victimization of women and girls, but then it applies it in a one-sided way only to her own side.
And so that makes people like us, when we read it, we recoil because we recognize that this is a partial, selective, one-sided attack and therefore lacks credibility.
Just when you thought it couldn't get better, Mike Lindell and MyPillow are launching My Mattress Topper 2.0.
The new 3-inch MyPillow mattress topper is made up of three unique layers.
Layer 1, MyPillow patented foam, which provides superior support and durability.
Layer 2, transitional foam, which provides optimal comfort, evenly distributes body weight and helps relieve pressure points.
And Layer 3, the cover made from a special material to keep your body temperature regulated through the night.
This MyPillow mattress topper is washable and dryable.
It's made in the USA, comes with a 10-year warranty and 60-day money-back guarantee.
This incredible 3-inch mattress topper is as low as $219.59 with promo code Dinesh.
So go ahead and call 800-876-0227.
The number again, 800-876-0227 or go to MyPillow.com.
But don't forget to use the promo code D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
There's been some very interesting conversation in articles and interviews and across social media on the subject of artificial intelligence.
And this is a topic that I like to cover because it's becoming very important in our culture, but also in our corporate sector.
It is changing the way that work is done.
Arguably, AI is going to have the same kind of long-term impact as the Internet itself.
Now, interestingly, a couple of important people, including Elon Musk, have talked about pausing AI or at least keeping a careful eye on AI. Elon Musk goes, we should be more worried about AI safety than we currently are.
And he says we need a regulatory authority that oversees AI. It's quite a dangerous technology.
Oh, no. No, we don't need any more regulatory...
Well, we are just as suspicious of...
If you have government overseeing this, it's not that government sort of fixes it or what happens is that they appropriate it to their own missions.
They're like, how do we use AI to manipulate the American people?
To spy on writers.
To spy on people, to control people's minds.
And here's a guy who's the godfather of artificial intelligence.
His name is Jeffrey Hinton.
He was apparently one of the key figures in creating AI. And he goes, at the beginning, everyone thought it was nonsense.
And then he goes, you know, can these neural networks learn by just drawing on a vast ocean of knowledge and then by making connections?
He's a little agnostic on the question of whether or not AI can sort of teach itself.
Because that's a really interesting question.
Remember, that was the question at the heart of the Terminator.
Oh! The idea that the machines, they took over because they ultimately were able to learn and they were able to communicate.
Or there was one movie where the guy fell in love with the computer and she had like a soul.
I mean, and I was like, yeah, right, uh-huh.
This was like 1984.
Well, I think that in the short term, there may be some longer term implications.
And one can always, and movies are good for this, think about scenarios.
Like, for example, think of NORAD. NORAD is the place, the missile launching site in Cheyenne, in the Cheyenne Mountains of Colorado.
And that's where the U.S. missiles are, land-based missiles are housed.
Imagine if AI was somehow, this would be very reckless to do, somehow controlling NORAD and, quote, took over NORAD and was in a position to start World War III all by itself, ultimately through programming that humans would be shut out of.
And we'd have an artificial intelligence war.
Oh, except we'd all be caught in the middle.
That's right. The Chinese have their own AI. Oh.
Well, one of the short-term effects- That would make a good movie.
That would make a good movie.
And it wouldn't even be a sci-fi movie so much as it would be a political movie about what happens when you cede so much authority or so many tasks- To mechanical functions that can run outside your control.
Now, in the short term, there's an interesting thread I saw on Twitter about, hey, listen, we can talk about all that, but AI right now is transforming the workplace.
And the significant thing is it's not just transforming so-called blue-collar jobs, it's transforming white-collar jobs.
In fact, more the white-collar than the blue-collar.
Why? Because you still need a plumber to go to somebody's house and look and see what's not working.
And so, by and large, if someone is doing something with their hands, Well, yeah, you can build a robot to do it, but in many cases, the hands work better.
But if you think of somebody who is doing mental tasks, for example Composing a legal brief like you told me like a paralegal would like not be needed anymore or even a lawyer Yeah, or a lawyer or a doctor Now, this is even more scary because although it's now regulated and you told me like no one can write prescriptions except doctors and nurses and PAs and so on.
No, nurses can't write prescriptions. Okay.
No. But so regulatory authority can try to stop things and regulate them.
But what happens is imagine if you have...
Someone has symptoms, right?
And they're able to go to an artificial intelligence program that is better than a typical medical graduate in being able to say, Debbie, we've looked at your blood work.
This is actually what is wrong with you, and this is what you need to take.
Well, I mean, now, think about it.
People do kind of self-diagnose a lot.
Like, we go to WebMD, you know, it's like, what symptoms do you have?
You plug in all your symptoms, and then it'll have like a A variety of options.
Okay, it could be this, it could be this, it could be this.
The problem I see with artificial intelligence is that it can't really know exactly what is wrong with you.
Right. That may be true.
You have to go in for blood work, you have to go in for x-rays or whatever, MRI, whatever.
Artificial intelligence just can't do that.
No, but it could reach a point where you just take a drop of your blood and you put it on, just the way people now do a genetic test, and the technology takes over and then works it over.
You don't have to sort of go in for it.
Like, do you have proteins for this or that?
Let me read you a couple of things.
Just as Excel spreadsheets were able to replace entire accounting departments, AI chatbots will be able to replace much of the human plumbing of organizations.
What he's getting at is that he says in many corporations today, Many people do very little.
They don't realize that, but they're...
So my problem with all this is, what's going to happen to all the people that are no longer employed?
Well, this is the question that's being raised.
And I think the only way we can answer it is to think back to other massive technological innovations that change things dramatically.
So think, for example, of people working on family farms.
Who would work using manual labor, pushing a plow.
And this went on for centuries.
But then you have a tractor that can plow an entire 1,500 acres.
And suddenly those 80 people who are doing that aren't needed anymore.
And so they go do something else.
I think the question you're raising is...
Is there something else? Is that there always has been a somewhere else to go and there's something else to do.
There's an option. What's the option now?
What happens when that something else disappears and there is literally nothing left?
I don't know if we'll ever reach that point because the human imagination in conjuring up new wants and new desires and will always be replaced by machines.
So we go here and then we get a machine and we go here and we get a machine.
So eventually we're going to run out of things to do.
Is there an end point?
I mean, that's the question.
Guys, I'd like to invite you to check out my Locals channel.
By the way, there's a connection to Locals. If you're watching on Rumble, just to the left of you, you'll see a little button and you can check out Locals.
Locals is a subscription based channel, but you can join as a member and check it out for free and then you can become either a monthly subscriber or an annual subscriber for For that, you get exclusive content, you get direct interaction with me, my live Q&A, which I do once a week, and also just movies, which I put up on the channel, both mine and movies by other guys, including 2,000 Mules.
And these movies are free for people who are annual subscribers.
So check it out. It's dinesh.locals.com.
That's the website. You get Dinesh unleashed, Dinesh unchained.
I'd love to have you along for this great ride.
Again, the website, dinesh.locals.com.
I've been talking about the philosopher David Hume and the question of whether or not scientific laws are verifiable.
And I've made the argument that they are not verifiable because even if you see something happen again and again, it doesn't follow that it must happen or that it will happen in the future or that it happens always and everywhere.
You simply don't know that.
Now, it seems that in saying this, I am denying the obvious connection that we see in the world between cause and effect.
After all, if there's cause and then there's effect, then this would seem to create a necessary connection between causes and their consequences or their effects.
But it was Hume himself who pointed out that there is a sort of a logical problem built into the idea of cause and effect.
We see event A, and then we see event B, and we assume, the keyword is assume, that event A caused event B. But Hume says all we see is event A and event B. We don't see this third thing called cause.
That's something that we infer that we ourselves insert into the transaction, so to speak.
Because all we have is a correlation.
We have event A followed by event B. And so, this conjunction that may occur time after time doesn't mean that one event is causing the other.
Let me give kind of a conventional example of this.
If I notice that every time I'm perspiring on the road...
The asphalt on the road is also melting.
I might conclude that my perspiration is causing the asphalt to melt.
But no, that's not the case.
The sun is causing both.
So to put it differently, just because two things are going together doesn't mean that one is causing the other.
It could be that a third thing is causing both, or it could be that the two merely happen to go together for whatever reason.
Now, I want to give a very simple illustration that goes to the heart of the problem that Hume sees with the idea of cause and effect.
Consider a child who is bouncing a ball on the ground for the first time.
The child has played with toys before, but they're all soft kind of toys that don't bounce.
They just sit there.
And so the child drops the ball and is very surprised that the ball pops back up.
It bounces. And so the child is like, what's this?
Now the child's parent or uncle who's sitting there, let's say a graduate of MIT, explains to the child that, listen, young man or young woman, So there's a causation that is going on here.
There's a property that a ball has, which is the property of bouncing.
And Hume then says, in considering this kind of example, this is my example, not Hume's.
Hume says, in effect...
Although the uncle or the parent is talking in this highfalutin vocabulary of properties and causation and so on, what does the uncle know?
What experience has the uncle had that the child has not had?
This is a kind of profound question because Hume goes on to point out that the uncle has actually seen a whole bunch of balls bouncing.
And so every time the uncle or parent has dropped a ball, whoops, it bounces.
So, and every time the uncle has seen somebody else bounce a ball, the ball has also bounced.
And so, this is the basis.
But the point is, this is the sole basis for the uncle's superior knowledge.
So, Hume now draws a startling and arresting conclusion.
He says, look, the uncle has not had any experience fundamentally different from the child.
The uncle has merely repeated the experiment more times.
So it is custom or habit that makes the uncle think, hey, because I've seen this happen many times before, therefore it must happen again.
But the uncle has in no way figured out some necessary connection.
It's just an expectation derived from past experience.
How does the uncle know that at every future time, if you bounce a ball, it's going to bounce?
Actually, the uncle doesn't know that as a fact or as a logical necessity.
The uncle merely expects it because every time I've seen it before, it's kind of like if I've got an acquaintance who's a customary liar.
I'm like, well, this guy's a liar.
I'm going to expect him to tell lies.
But of course, he has to tell each lie independently.
It's not as if because he told a lie yesterday, he has to tell a lie tomorrow.
I merely expect that because that's been my experience.
So... Hume is basically saying, and this is a very remarkable thing to say, that nature does have laws, but we don't really know what these laws are.
When we posit a law...
We surround the law with all kinds of vocabulary that gives the false impression that we have found some kind of necessary connection, some kind of imperative that makes this happen.
But all that we mean is here is our best guess.
Now, that's good enough.
We can function in the world with that, but that is a whole different thing from saying that we have figured out nature's laws.
No, we don't have nature's laws.
We have Newton's laws, and we have Boyle's law, and we have Einstein's law, but those aren't the laws of nature.
Those are human laws which are imperfect attempts to understand.
▲
Export Selection