All Episodes
Previous Next
July 19, 2023 - Dinesh D'Souza
50:07
THE HENCHMAN Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep624
| 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.
Coming up, I'll discuss a likely new indictment against Trump.
What is this? Number three with potentially four to come, this time for his role in January 6th.
Strange business with the Kennedy family.
They're all ganging up on Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
for remarks that were clearly taken out of context.
And Debbie joins me. We're going to preview the 2024 election.
We're also going to discuss the Hollywood strike that has brought the film industry to a very welcome halt.
Hey, if you're watching on Rumble or listening on Apple, Google, or Spotify, please subscribe.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza Show.
The times are crazy, and a time of confusion, division, and lies.
We need a brave voice of reason, understanding, and truth.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast.
Donald Trump just put out a statement saying, in effect, that he has received a notification from the Department of Justice that he is likely to be indicted yet again.
Yet again. So let's keep track here because we're dealing with something that is totally spinning out of control.
This is potentially the third of four separate indictments.
So the first one, of course, is the Alvin Bragg indictment in New York.
This is over the Stormy Daniels.
It's over business records.
The second indictment is the classified documents indictment brought by the special counsel, Jack Smith.
And this one is also Jack Smith, but this one is January 6th.
So presumably, the indictment here is going to be incitement to violence and seditious conspiracy.
I mean, that's really the bombshell accusation.
Think about it. The former president is accused of seditious conspiracy to overthrow the government.
Wow! And this will obviously carry serious penalties.
And not only that, but there is a good chance that Jack Smith will go to the court.
And by the way, these are charges likely to be filed in DC. So we're talking about the DC court system.
We're talking about DC juries.
And Jack Smith may well say, listen, if someone is accused of seditious conspiracy, they have to be held before trial.
You can't just let them roam free because the charge is so serious.
And so Trump can't be allowed to be out there on the campaign trail.
He can't be allowed to be a free man pending trial.
And again, I almost have to gasp here because let's lock up the leading candidate of the Republican Party in the months leading up to an election so that he can't really campaign for that job.
Let's take him out of commission.
And this is really, I think, what this is all about.
If Trump weren't running for president, if he had just decided to retreat into the shadows, just sort of live his life in Mar-a-Lago, none of this would be happening.
And it is very shocking that it's happening in America.
Here's a recent comment by Mark Levin.
The seriousness of what's being done to Trump by local and federal Democrat prosecutors cannot be overstated.
It's alarming, it's shocking, and the republic is...
Now, why is the republic teetering?
It's teetering because America, at its core, is not set up to be a one-party state.
And yet, that is exactly the operating assumption of the Biden regime.
We are a one-party state.
Our opposition is illegitimate.
Its leading candidate deserves to be criminalized and locked up, but not just Trump.
I mentioned yesterday and I emphasize again today that in Michigan they have filed charges against a bunch of Republicans and many of these guys were electors.
They want to play their part in the election process.
They genuinely thought that Trump won Michigan and so ordinary people are now facing felony charges for in some ways interfering with the election in Michigan.
And these are charges, by the way, brought by the Michigan District Attorney.
Again, these are Democrats making charges against Republicans.
I've said many times, and I emphasize again, the reason that the Democrats are doing this is because Republicans don't.
Democrats never have to fear that Republicans will do the same.
Let's think about it this way.
We have Republican Attorney General in a number of states.
How many of those Republican AGs have brought charges of any kind on any issue against prominent Democrats?
Can you think of one? Can you name one?
No, I can't either.
And that's because they don't do it.
And so the fact that Republicans sort of play by the rules...
Allows Democrats to say, we won't play by the rules and we won't suffer any penalties.
At the most, Trump is going to be exonerated.
But again, this is a shotgun type of prosecution, by which I mean, okay, maybe he gets off in the New York case.
Maybe he gets off in the classified documents case.
Well, yes, but maybe we can get him in the Georgia case.
Or maybe we can get him on, or we'll have multiple charges.
We'll have 37 counts.
And that way, even if he gets off on 36 counts, we can still get him on the 37th count.
And that's a felony.
So Trump literally has to beat every single rap, every single charge, in order to be able to defeat this enterprise as a whole.
And so the Democrats are kind of playing the odds.
They're betting the numbers. And this is clear election interference.
And so what we're seeing here is the Democrats became gangsterized under Obama, but this gangsterism has been pushed to a whole new level.
And I won't say Obama's out of it.
I wouldn't be surprised if he's playing an active role.
In instigating things himself, even from the outside.
Let's remember, Biden was his number two.
Biden was his vice president.
And so there's no reason to think that Obama is out of the picture.
But this is something that makes you fear for your country.
And if you're not alarmed at this, you are just not informed.
You're not seeing what is coming down the pike.
And in fact, there's a certain kind of almost denialism, willful blindness on the part of the Republicans.
And I'm not just talking about the ordinary guy who's like, well, I don't know where this is all going to go.
It's very disturbing. But I'm talking about Republicans in Congress who, by the way, are in a position in the House.
In the Senate, they're probably not only in a position to speak out against it, but they're in a position to take steps even in the Senate.
But in the House, I just saw Kevin McCarthy and he's condemning it.
But it's not clear what he's going to do about it.
And ultimately, that's what leadership is.
Leadership is exercising the kind of power that causes the opposition to take note and to modify its behavior.
So far, they haven't modified their behavior.
They've only ramped it up.
And so Kevin McCarthy, to this degree, may be rhetorically effective, but from a leadership point of view on this issue so far, ineffective.
The debt ceiling crisis has come to a head.
The Biden administration is doing its best to force more government spending.
They've reached a settlement to get the deal done, but our national debt continues to skyrocket.
Not good. Well, how are you protecting your savings?
Times like these are when concerned savers like me turn to gold, and I, like thousands of similar-minded people, buy my gold from Birch Gold.
Here's the easiest way to do it.
Birch Gold will help you convert an existing IRA of 401k into an IRA in gold.
You don't pay a penny out of pocket.
As the BRICS group Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa band together against the dollar, more and more central banks are diversifying.
You know what they're buying? Gold.
Follow their lead.
Get started by texting Dinesh to 989898 for a free information kit on gold.
There's no obligation, just information.
Birch Gold has an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
Thousands of happy customers.
Birch Gold can help protect your savings, too.
Find out more. Text Dinesh to 989898 today.
I'm continuing my discussion of the likely indictment of Donald Trump on January 6th.
Now, there is a clause in the 14th Amendment that outlaws insurrection.
This is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
And you can see why the 14th Amendment has this, because it came on the heels of a bitter and bloody civil war, 600,000 Americans dead.
And so the idea was, let's not let this happen again.
So the 14th Amendment says you cannot stir up an insurrection against the U.S. government.
But of course, in the Civil War era, we were talking about an armed rebellion that was carried out by multiple states, attacks on forts, massive fighting, ultimately a bloody four-year war, battlefields, Manassas, and Gettysburg, and so on.
And what does this all have to do with now?
What you had is a protest at January 6th.
And by the way, the left's view of January 6th is a kind of shifting business because it's an insurrection.
And then when it came out, this was like last week, that Ray Epps...
Was filing a lawsuit against Fox News, and they had Ray Epps, and he was clearly inciting here.
It's Ray Epps on the video.
And then the left goes, no, no, no, no, it was a protest, and Ray Epps was just part of the protest.
And now that we're looking at an indictment of Trump, it's an insurrection again.
So this is not a serious legal analysis.
In fact, when you look at the type of legal experts that I see regularly on MSNBC and CNN, this is a stacked panel.
It's the familiar kind of mix of left-wing analysts and never Trumpers.
Basically everybody that wants Trump out of commission is put on the panel and naturally they all affirm, encourage and agree with each other, but this is not what the law is about or is supposed to be about.
But in some ways, what Jack Smith is counting on is that, hey, I can run a Stalinist prosecution here.
Why? Because I've got the D.C. legal system in my back pocket.
And this is something that Julie Kelly has been warning about in her articles in her kind of thorough and comprehensive coverage of January 6th.
Julie has made the point that some people have missed, but you can't really miss it, that look, January 6th is not just about the Trumpsters.
It's not just about the people who went into the Capitol.
It's not even about the people who were outside the Capitol who got into a fracas with the cops.
It is about Trump.
Why? Because what they're trying to do and what they have done to some degree is they've got, first of all, they have a high rate of convictions of January 6th defendants, either through direct convictions or plea bargains. Number two, they have been able to make some seditious conspiracy charges stick, and stick by and large on pretty light evidence.
These are not people who actually conspired to do anything.
And they certainly weren't overthrowing the government, nor did they think they were.
And so you define conspiracy down.
Conspiracy is, well, didn't you talk about it?
Didn't you say it would be really nice if we could drag Nancy Pelosi out of the building?
And the very fact that you said that, even if you were just talking, nevertheless, other people were talking with you.
And since it takes more than one person to create a conspiracy, there you go.
You've got a conspiracy.
It doesn't matter that nobody brought arms to D.C. or nobody brought—and I'm talking here specifically about the Proud Boys.
No one took arms inside the Capitol.
None of that matters. We've just got enough here for a pliant jury to go, yep, yep, that's it.
That's a conspiracy. There we go.
Seditious conspiracy.
And then that precedent is deployed against Trump.
So this is a...
A very dangerous situation we are in.
Certainly dangerous for Trump, but also dangerous for the country.
And Julie Kelly thinks, and I agree with her, this isn't just going to be an indictment of Trump.
Because think about it. If it's an indictment of Trump, what do you have?
A conspiracy of one?
One guy conspired?
Well, who do you conspire with?
And so there have to be other people.
And Julie thinks it could very well be Republican congressmen.
It could possibly involve a Republican senator or two.
So try to imagine what we're facing with going into an election year.
The head of the Republican Party, de facto, the leading candidate of the party for next year, the clear favorite of the Republican base, and Republican elected officials for All facing seditious conspiracy charges over what?
Over the delay of a proceeding for an hour and a half, a proceeding that was not, in fact, reversed.
Nobody took over the government.
Nobody even pretended to take over the government.
Nobody could have taken over the government.
Let's say that the protesters on January 6th were left alone.
The cops all left the building.
What would happen? Would they start running the government?
Would they start making laws?
Of course not. By and large, the police would return in greater force.
They would surround the Capitol, and all these guys would exit, probably to be met with handcuffs.
So there's no conspiracy.
There's no insurrection.
All of this is a political hit, but a very alarming one.
And I agree with I agree with Mark Levin that this is a very dangerous past that we are in as a country, and the treatment of Trump is just a reflection of that.
If aches and pains are your problem, Relief Factor is your solution.
Debbie and I started taking the Relief Factor a couple of years ago.
The difference we've seen in our joints, 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 order more because it works for them.
Debbie's a true believer she can now do exercises that for a long time she wasn't able to do.
So Relief Factor's been a big game changer for her, her aunt, other members of our family, Mike in the studio right here, and for many other people.
You too can benefit. Try it for yourself.
Order the three-week quick start for the discounted price of just $19.95.
Go to relieffactor.com or call 800-4-RELIEF to find out more about this offer.
The number again to call 800-4-RELIEF or go to relieffactor.com.
Feel the difference. Toby and I normally do a Friday roundup, but we're doing our session on Wednesday today because we're going to be a little bit out of commission tomorrow and Friday.
I've recorded special episodes that will be featured tomorrow and Friday, but the reason is we are in a kind of new phase of life.
Tomorrow's the big day.
Tomorrow's the big day. Grandbaby number one.
We don't know if it's a boy or a girl.
Which I hear is unusual.
Danielle was saying that the doctor told her that he actually had to make a note that he should not mention the sex situation.
Because these days it's so common for people to find out.
They want, of course, a chance to plan.
But these characters, Brandon and Danielle, are going old school.
I mean, like, old old school.
Even before they were born old school.
Because, obviously, when they were born, we all knew...
We had the technology back then to know if it was a boy or a girl.
Now, ultrasounds were not as advanced, obviously, when they were born 20, 29 years ago.
But you could still see the sex of the baby, even with those ultrasounds.
And you knew with Justin and Juliana, right?
Yeah, of course. And actually, we knew with Danielle.
Well, I think the thing that Debbie and I were talking about on the way to the podcast this morning is we were like, well...
You know, I'm just over 60.
Debbie's in her 50s.
Late 50s.
And we were kind of doing the math.
We were like, okay, when this new grandchild is 20 years old, we are going to be very old.
Yeah, I know. You're like, when our grandchild is 20, you're going to be 77 and I'm going to be 82.
And I was like... That really is depressing.
And that's our first grandchild.
If we end up with a bunch, and there's no reason we shouldn't, we're going to be even older.
And so, you know, you were making the point that, in a way, the arrival of a grandchild, particularly in a later sense, because there are people who have grandchildren in their mid-40s, and then they've got a lot of their life left.
But at this age, it is a kind of, the bell is tolling with a certain acknowledgement of mortality.
Yeah. I don't think it's a bad thing, and I think it's actually good for us to keep in mind that our life isn't permanent.
In fact, we were talking just a couple days ago about a friend of yours who is now well into her 80s, but she just has a short time to live.
And the truth of it is we all have a sort of a destiny.
We all have a time to live.
And not to mention the fact that there is in a heart only so many heartbeats.
There's a certain number of heartbeats.
Which is what makes that joke that you did several months ago so funny about the doctor saying, why do you want to exercise?
You don't want to... The Japanese doctor.
Yeah, the Japanese doctor. You want to, like, slow down the heartbeats, you know, because you only have so many.
So it was really funny.
I saw there was an Indian internet guy, and he was talking about the fact that life is about 25,000 days.
If you do the math, that's roughly how long you have.
And that seems like a lot, but it also doesn't seem like a lot in a certain way.
Not when you're happy. In any case, we're thrilled about this new development.
It is a real change of life.
And it, of course, brings a new being into the world, which is super exciting.
And so we're looking forward to this new phase.
So we're going to go visit.
And the in-laws, of course, are going to come in from Brandon's side.
And we're going to have a couple of other friends and relatives around.
So it's going to be a little bit of a gang.
Yeah, it should be fun.
And, of course, you know, on Monday we will have photos.
Yeah. Absolutely.
We're looking forward to it.
Let's talk a little bit about this Trump, this likely Trump indictment.
I mean, in a sense, you saw it coming as well.
You saw that they're never going to stop.
Which is really a very interesting thing, because when Trump was president, and you got your pardon, I was extremely happy that you got your pardon because I had a really bad feeling about Trump's future in the White House.
And I knew that they were targeting him even then.
And I was like, you know, I know his days are numbered.
I know they're going to try to get him any way they can.
And I was right.
I was... So, I mean, you almost saw the pardon as a window.
Yeah. Because you thought they might even try to get him removed from the White House.
Yeah, exactly. Even then. And they did try.
I mean, that was the point of the impeachment.
The impeachment, yeah. So, I was just like, you know, very appreciative of Trump to do that, but I was very afraid for him and for his...
Well, you know, the left tried to go after Reagan, but part of the reason that they couldn't is that they were opposed by a unified Republican Party that just said no.
And so they dragged out Iran-Contra.
They would have loved to pull Reagan out of office, but it just didn't go anywhere.
With Trump, I think part of Trump's vulnerability is that there are a lot of Republicans, and maybe some Republicans even running for president, who wouldn't be entirely unhappy if they were to take Trump out.
And so they're cheering this, maybe mutedly.
They can't go out in public and say that.
In fact, they may even in public be saying things like, well, we deplore the weaponization of the government and so on.
But in reality, they are not...
Too unhappy that the Democrats are doing this.
So the ruthlessness of the Democrats is encouraged by the passivity of the Republicans, including the cooperation of some Republicans who have a stake in Donald Trump's departure.
Debbie and I are eating better now.
We've lost some weight. But foods we can't seem to eat enough of, and it's a requirement, are veggies and fiber.
Now, what better way to get all your fruits and veggies plus fiber than with Balance of Nature?
This is Balance of Nature's Fiber and Spice.
It's a proprietary blend of 12 spices for digestive health.
The intense flavors and deep colors of spices are the most condensed whole food source of phytonutrition available.
It's recommended to be paired with this.
There's star product, fruits and veggies in a capsule.
So easy. Select the whole health system for the best price.
Start your journey to better health right now.
Take advantage of Balance of Nature's terrific offer.
$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. With the 2024 election approaching, fast approaching, Debbie brought to my attention an article in the Wall Street Journal, an article that is about how the two sides, the left, the right, the Republicans, the Democrats, how they view the coming election.
And I think you mentioned, and I agree, that the article is...
And perhaps no surprise, the Wall Street Journal is a little better than, say, the New York Times.
They would have spun it. Republicans are paranoid.
Democrats are reasonable. But this article doesn't do that.
It just says, look, we're going to interview people on each side.
And I think the striking thing about the article is both sides...
this as an existential election.
We talk often on the right that we see this as the country is at stake, it's hanging in the balance.
But interestingly enough, the left thinks so also.
Right.
And so they, and interestingly, most of it is not about the economy, but about cultural issues, social issues.
Right.
Because the left sees the right as taking away abortion rights.
making, you know, gender, going back in time with gender issues, going back in time with racial issues.
And so they were making it about social policies.
And they act as if the restriction of trans propaganda to young children is somehow book banning.
It's censorship. So we're back to the dark.
Oh, this was what Obama was saying in his statement.
And this may also drive the left's idea that what they're doing...
Because I think normally if someone was a Democrat, they're going to say...
This is a little strange to be trying to make criminal charges against the leader of the opposition party, just like we would think it's strange if it was happening in the opposite direction, just on the basis of...
Imagine if we were launching multiple criminal prosecutions of Biden from all different directions, state charges, federal charges.
I think it would make us a little uneasy that this is happening in America.
I don't think we would do it.
Well, and ironically, this is the case where we should do it.
And what I mean by that is simply that on the...
And you've talked about the fact that policy differences are not a reason to go after...
I mean, you can criticize Biden, but you can't pull someone out of office because you don't like their policy on guns or you don't like their policy or even their policy on student loans or their policy on the border.
Yeah. But on the other hand, if you're taking money, and you have taken money from foreign governments in exchange for access and policy, I mean, that's outright corruption.
So that's a little bit different.
No one's even alleging that in the case of Trump.
But I think economic issues are less likely to become the fulcrum of an existential clash.
Why?
Because you can compromise on economic issues.
The Democrats think the tax rate should be 45%.
The Republicans think it should be 35%.
You meet sort of in the middle.
Even with government programs, you can scale back or scale up.
And so you're talking about gradations.
But when it comes to abortion, neither you have it or you don't.
Well, and that's just it.
The Democrats think that our court is stacked against them, right?
That the court decided Roe v.
Wade, overturned Roe v.
Wade, and so therefore, it's an attack on all women.
And again, it goes back to the problem that I don't think that we have ever really made a real case against abortion.
Right. You know, Danielle with her book, The Choice, she tried to do that, but I don't think that it really, it's something that until and when society realizes that murder is murder in the womb, we're never going to get over this.
People are, they're still going to talk about how it's a woman's right issue when in fact it's a human rights issue the other way.
I mean, what the court did in the Dobbs decision was decentralize the issue.
It was ultimately a decision not even about abortion, but over who decides.
And the court goes, well, it's not up to us to decide.
We live in a democratic society.
We have different states and there are...
There are majorities in different states that have different views of this subject.
So let democratic local governance prevail.
Let the states decide.
Ironically, what you're saying is if there was a widespread conviction that, hey, listen, that life begins at conception, it is human life, personhood begins along.
When human life begins, you become a person.
What else do you have? Then you would have abortion illegal in all 50 states.
Exactly. And it wouldn't be a woman's right issue.
It would be a human rights issue.
But we haven't made that case.
And interestingly, then, the article also talks about on the right side of the aisle, people feel that there is a level of not only politically motivated prosecutions, but cultural degeneracy.
Right. We're good to go.
You know, again, you know, Christian-hating communists, really.
And this actually has happened in countries that have become communists, become socialists.
They attack the church, they attack the family, because then they have free reign.
And then the state is the warden.
So I think that that is something that Republicans are very concerned about.
And of course, the left, not so much.
In a good democratic society, losing an election should not be like losing a war.
But I think the point of this article is that both sides view it that, hey, if we lose, essentially our way of life is lost.
Debbie and I made a New Year's resolution to lose weight.
This was after a couple of years of COVID, and thankfully, PhD weight loss came to our rescue.
Debbie's already lost 24 pounds.
I've lost 27.
You can see it on us, and we're now both in maintenance.
The program is based on science and nutrition.
No injections, no pills, no long hours in the gym, no severe calorie restriction, just good, sound, scientifically proven nutrition.
It's so 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.
She's a registered dietitian.
She helps people lose weight and, most important, maintain that weight loss for life.
So if you're ready to take the step of losing weight like Debbie and I have, call Ph.D. Weight Loss and Nutrition.
Here's the number. Write it down.
864-644-1900.
You can also find them online at myphdweightloss.com.
Again, the number to call, 864-644-1900.
Hollywood is on strike.
And, hey, who cares?
Right? I mean, in other words, Hollywood is such a force for evil these days.
Their movies are bad.
And even when they're good, they're bad.
And what I mean by that is that even a movie that is technically well made, that is...
That keeps your interest has such perverted and distorted values that it's promoting that it gives you a dirty feeling when you finish watching the movie.
And this is now institutionalized in Hollywood.
It used to be that Hollywood would make thrillers and they'd make romantic comedies.
And every now and then you'd spot the ideology.
You'd see a thread and you'd be like, why are they going there?
But now that's the norm.
That's the norm. And it's actually propaganda.
It's pure propaganda.
Left-wing propaganda. And it's not just Hollywood.
In fairness, it's not just Hollywood.
When we went to London, I was looking at London theater.
And the same is true, by the way, of Broadway.
It used to be I'd go down and I'd be like, oh man, there are seven things I'd like to see.
Let me see where I can get tickets and hone into the one that I want to see the most.
Now I go through them, and one after the other, it's like perverted propaganda.
And I'm like, I can't bring myself to watch this.
So I'm down to one or two options.
Which is why we saw Grease.
We saw Grease. And typically, there are options.
I've already seen them. It's like, I want to go see Les Misrab all over again.
I've seen it like three times.
Yeah. So, Grease. And then, of course, we saw The Marriage of Figaro, the opera, which, again, that one doesn't have any political anything.
It's a very old opera.
Mozart. Mozart. And so, again, we do have to look for things like this because that's not even the norm anymore.
Right. I mean, one of the questions is, I mean, it's not that Hollywood never makes a movie we want to see.
In fact, we've been talking about going to the theater to see this upcoming film called Oppenheimer, which is made almost as a documentary.
It's not a real documentary.
It's a recreation of Oppenheimer's life.
Robert Oppenheimer was one of the key figures in the invention of the atomic bomb.
And in the Manhattan Project that produced and then ultimately dropped two bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Oppenheimer was also gay.
And so he had problems getting security clearances.
So this is all about the kind of tension between Oppenheimer's private life, which was certainly at that point, taboo, and his public role, which required high level security clearances.
So anyway, Christopher Nolan's movie.
Interestingly, when they had a London premiere, the actors walked off the set and Nolan was left.
The Screen Actors SAG, Screen Actors Guild, American Federation, had to pull their actors out.
They couldn't even do a red carpet premiere.
Yeah. So this is a strike that involves the writers and the actors both.
And apparently a big reason for the strike is that they're worried that Hollywood is figuring out a way.
AI. Yes.
Yeah. To use artificial intelligence.
So if Hollywood owns your likeness, let's just say you're Laurence Olivier, they can take Laurence Olivier, the image, the personality, they can create new scripts that will then be played by the AI, the artificial intelligence figure, Laurence Olivier, but it'll be marketed as Laurence Olivier, except Olivier will have nothing to do with it.
Olivier will not be paid for it.
Or even, you know, like a current actor, Tom Cruise, right?
So Tom Cruise won't get paid for his role.
And they could make a whole bunch more movies, let's just say Top Con Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, all featuring Tom Cruise, but it's not really.
So anyway, this is what they're fighting about.
Right, right. And also, they claim there's a discrepancy in producers being paid or directors being paid versus some of the actors.
And to be quite frank, there's about 10 actors that are overpaid.
Well, I mean, the studios, you know, on the one hand, if you talk to libertarians, they'll be like, it's the market, it's the market.
But, well, it's not really true.
And the reason it's not really true is because in the old days, the studio, the market was still operating, studios would hire an actor, let's say Reagan, and they'd sign him for the next five films.
And Reagan wouldn't have any choice in what those films are.
And they would say, okay, we'll pay you, let's just pay a million dollars a year for the next five years, whatever movie, however much the movie makes, that's what you're going to get.
And that was the deal.
Now, obviously, there are certain actors that have tremendous box office power, they get paid more and so on.
The ordinary actors and workers in movies don't get paid a lot.
Yeah, but let me say this also.
You know, this article actually is about, it says, Hollywood strikes could open up opportunities for more conservative content to thrive.
And yes, it could, unless, of course, the actor happens to be a SAG member.
Then obviously it would interfere.
Which brings me back to Infidel.
When we did Infidel, you know, back during COVID in 2018, Jim Caviezel is a member of...
And so had this happened, he wouldn't have been able to do media, he wouldn't have been able to do anything really. He would have been on strike. So it could really affect anybody making a movie with actors that are in this organization. I mean, we've talked before about the importance of us creating our own institution.
We don't want to be dependent on Hollywood.
We don't want to be dependent on Disney.
We don't want to be dependent on Yale.
And that involves a long-term project of creating rival institutions.
And this includes feature films.
It includes comedy. It includes, of course, the kind of documentaries that we've specialized in doing.
So I think it may be that this Hollywood strike is a moment of opportunity because, after all, people's appetite for entertainment hasn't changed, and if the studios aren't producing it, well, some of it's going to be produced abroad.
Foreign producers are going to be making more movies, and there may be a chance for conservatives as well to up our game.
This is the 20th anniversary for MyPillow and over 80 million MyPillows sold.
Mike Lindell at MyPillow wants to thank each and every one of you by giving you the lowest price in history on his MyPillows.
You get a queen size MyPillow for $19.98.
Regular price $69.98.
Just $10 more for a king size.
You get deep discounts on all the MyPillow products which are on sale.
Bed sheets, mattress toppers, MyPillow beds.
The mattresses, the MySlippers, the robes, and so much more.
This is the time to try out some of their other amazing products that you've had your eye on.
Go to MyPillow.com, use promo code Dinesh to get this amazing offer on the queen-size MyPillow, $19.98.
Or you can call 800-876-0227.
The offer comes with a 10-year warranty, a 60-day money-back guarantee, so you have nothing to lose.
It's time to start getting the quality sleep you deserve.
Once again, call 800-876-0227 or go to mypillow.com.
Don't forget to use the promo code D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
Debbie and I were able to watch two days of Wimbledon.
This was in the first week.
And then we came back and we eagerly watched the final between Alcaraz and Djokovic.
First thing I want to say before we talk about the final or about the two players is I was very pleased that at Wimbledon there was not, I think you'll confirm this, a hint of wokeness.
We walked the grounds.
Not long. Everywhere else in London, in certain stores and out on the streets, you have pride flag, you have this, you have that.
It's this kind of woke exhibitionism.
But at Wimbledon, not a word, not a sign.
You go to the Wimbledon store you're looking for, is there going to be like woke merchandise with the rain blow flag and Wimbled the Wimbledon?
No, none of it. None of it at all.
So that was a good thing.
It's just tennis. It was just straight out tennis.
And of course, it was a thrill for us.
We've never done anything like this before.
And it was really cool.
We had a little suite and they gave us some really nice strawberries and cream and other good snacks.
And then we could go out to Santa Court and take in the match.
And of course, my family was there and they loved it.
They loved it too. And you followed tennis, but not all that closely.
I used to follow tennis 20 plus years ago.
And then I kind of went through a phase where I didn't watch at all.
And so a lot of these names were very like...
Foreign to me. But I did know who Djokovic was.
And I just kind of started like looking into his life and about, you know, his kids and his wife and everything.
And I found out that this man is an incredible human being.
I mean, just even outside the court, right?
Just an incredibly generous human being.
He and his wife have a restaurant for homeless people.
They feed the homeless.
Think about that. And he's a devout Christian, which I didn't know.
And of course, him doing that is a reflection of his Christianity, so it's no surprise.
Well, the other thing you mentioned to me was that he is, and he's of course become very wealthy because not just sponsorships, but he has a massive arsenal of titles.
And I think, in fact, seven wins at Wimbledon alone.
Roger Federer has eight.
So part of the tension of this match was Djokovic was going to rival to equal Federer's eight wins at Wimbledon.
He wasn't able to do it because Alcaraz pulled it off.
But what I was getting at was Federer is paying to restore old artifacts and churches and icons.
Federer? No. I'm sorry. We're talking about Djokovic.
Djokovic. Is funding in his native Serbia.
Yeah. The restoration of the Orthodox churches, old churches that have fallen into disrepair.
Yeah. And he wears a wooden cross.
I mean, it's like, this man is a walking, like, billboard.
A testament. Testament to Christ.
And of course, he became famous, or at least outside of tennis, even a little notorious to some, because he wouldn't take the vaccine.
Now, I'm not really sure.
You said we were discussing whether this is something that is an outgrowth of his Christian convictions.
I also read elsewhere that Djokovic is kind of a purist.
He's a purist about his exercise regimen, which he's very strict about.
He has very precise ideas about the human body, how much he should work out, what kind of workouts he should do, and that includes what he puts into his body.
Which is important. Yeah, he's very careful about what he eats and drinks.
And so it seems to me they come along with it, take this vaccine, you know, what's in it?
Well, don't worry about it.
You may have to take the vaccine.
He's like, no, I'm not going to take that.
I'm not going to put something into my body when I don't even know what it is or what the effect of it's going to be.
So this is a guy who is in some way principled across the board.
Yeah, yeah. And he's paid a price for it.
Yeah, unfortunately. But anyway, so we were rooting for him.
For sure. And we did see Carlos Alcaraz play.
Who did he play that first day?
He played somebody and he was playing kind of poorly.
He wasn't playing like a number one player.
I mean, he won the game and he won fairly easily.
But it was a little boring. There was nothing exciting about him and we didn't see the kind of shots.
The So it looks like Alcaraz was almost like, you know, he warmed up through the tournament.
He got better and better.
And ironically, with Djokovic, Djokovic peaked in the semifinal because Djokovic was playing really well going into the final.
And then if you watch the final, and in a way, it's kind of a pity because Alcaraz playing at 100% beat kind of 80% Djokovic.
Now, could Alcaraz have beaten Djokovic at 100%?
I don't think so. Probably not.
Probably not. But Djokovic, for example, just take his serve.
Djokovic is not Sampras.
His serve is not the best in the world, but it's an excellent serve.
And yet there were entire games where all the points, the first serve was put into the net.
And then you also commented on the fact that Djokovic, very uncharacteristic because he's a very precise player, was hitting shots out and dumping them into the net.
And he's supposed to be like this amazing returner, right?
Yes. And he wasn't doing that either, really.
Yeah. And he knew it.
I mean, I thought the comment that he made afterward, which you saw live, but it's here in this article, where he talks about the fact, he's very kind of philosophical about it.
He goes, you know what? I've played some games in the finals where, you know...
I maybe should have lost, but I pulled it off.
I lucked out. I kind of luck turned my way.
So he goes, you know what?
If I lost this one, hey, you know, you win some, you lose some.
Yeah, he said, even Steven, I loved it.
But I really loved when he was speaking to the commentator.
And he began to get choked up.
Not because he lost, like the woman that lost in the woman's badge.
Who was bawling and acting, yeah.
No, no, no. Because he looked up in the stands and he saw his son smiling at him.
And it choked him up.
And it choked me up.
So anyway.
Anyway, it was for us a tremendous experience and we were delighted to be part of it.
We're in one of the most vulnerable times in U.S. history with our markets and our economy, and it calls for an expert financial advisor for your investments.
Yet, most Americans are with the conventional right out the dips in the market advisors that have kept recycling the same advice since the 1980s.
That advice will fail you today.
Luckily, my friend Rebecca Walzer is different.
You've seen her on the podcast.
She has an excellent grasp of global economic issues and also economic issues in this country.
She's a tax attorney, a wealth strategist. She has a global MBA from the London School of Economics.
Rebecca has seen what is coming and protected her clients back at the end of 2021. She can do the same for you now. Debbie and I did a call with Rebecca's team to talk about our investments and we are moving forward. So please join us. Go to friendofdinesh.com to book a call with Rebecca Walser's team today. That's friendofdinesh.com to secure your investments and your future.
Here's a very interesting story in the Hill and I only mention it because it reverberates across social media as well as the national media.
Democrats condemn RFK Jr.
over reprehensible COVID-19 remarks.
Robert F. Kennedy is facing fierce backlash over his claims that the COVID-19 virus was manipulated to target white and black people while avoiding Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people.
Now, as I'll mention in a moment, this is a false statement.
This is not something that Robert F. Kennedy said.
We'll come to what he said in a moment, but the article goes on the conspiratorial comments.
Once again, we have this insinuation of a conspiracy theory.
Now, let's remember that If the U.S. government in conjunction with the Chinese government is funding gain-of-function research, if they are cooking up viruses, they're working on it together, this is called a conspiracy.
And by conspiracy, all we mean is a group of people performing some nefarious task collectively, working together.
So simply to call it a conspiracy theory is not to invalidate anything.
It simply means we have to look at the evidence of what is actually going on.
But The Hill is certainly right that these comments have caused a firestorm among Democrats.
And so you've got these Democrats now saying that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
is not qualified to be president and should drop out of the race.
Anyone who traffics in anti-Asian and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories are unworthy, I think he means is unworthy, of the highest office in the land.
This is Representative Richie Torres of New York, Democrat, of course.
And And there are other remarks to this effect.
What I find really disturbing is that members of the Kennedy family have also been weighing in.
I'm assuming that they're put up to it by the Democratic National Committee and by their connections on the left.
But here's Kerry Kennedy, the sister of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
She serves on the board of the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Organization, said she, quote, strongly condemns her brother's, quote, deplorable and untruthful remarks.
So think about this. You've got a Kennedy running for the presidency.
And far from getting the Camelot treatment, he's getting the Trump treatment in a sense.
And I can only assume that part of the reason for this is because he poses a threat to Biden.
It didn't seem that he would originally.
It seemed that, well, the Democrats kind of have their nomination process locked up.
They probably still do.
They have a way of corralling all the money into one pool and putting it on Biden.
And so it's really difficult for an outsider.
But at the same time, if you look at polls, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
has been climbing in the polls.
He's now in double digits.
He's being taken seriously.
A lot of people are like, I don't like Biden.
I want somebody else for the Democratic nomination.
And naturally, they're going to look at Now, what exactly did Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
say? He was in a restaurant.
He was talking about COVID. And he made sort of three observations, which are not identical.
They're all being sort of glommed together.
One is he suggested the possibility, not the certainty, but the possibility that COVID-19 was engineered as a bioweapon.
It doesn't mean that the Chinese released it as a bioweapon.
It means that they were making a bioweapon that somehow it got out.
So it could be both that COVID-19 was created as a bioweapon and that it leaked out.
Those two are not mutually exclusive.
So I think that's point number one.
The second point that Kennedy Jr.
was making is he was saying that these viruses, these diseases, including COVID-19, do not affect all ethnic groups equally.
And by the way, there's nothing surprising about this.
There are all kinds of diseases that don't affect ethnic groups equally.
And in fact, you can go further to say that there are certain types of diseases, like Tay-Sachs disease and others, that So disproportionately fall or reach a particular ethnic group, so much more so than any other.
And so there's nothing inherently controversial about this either.
All you have to do, it's a simple empirical question.
You have COVID-19, you take 100 randomly selected, let's just say whites, blacks, immigrants, Asian-Americans, let's just take some Ashkenazi Jews, and you just look and see what is the likelihood that they're going to get it?
What's the likelihood that they will face serious infection?
What's the likelihood that they will recover quickly?
So this is something that is an open question, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least.
And Robert F. Kennedy Jr. goes, I've got some studies, and he attaches them, that talk about the fact that these viruses do not affect ethnic groups equally.
And COVID-19 specifically makes whites and blacks more vulnerable and makes Asians and ethnic Ashkenazi Jews less vulnerable.
So this is not a conspiracy theory.
This is an open question that has to be investigated.
And of course, the final question, and here is where the sort of sly media insinuation comes in, that somehow Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is saying that he knows that COVID-19 was intended to get rid of more whites and blacks and spare the Asians and spare the Ashkenazi And I went back and looked at Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
And his comments are conversational, so they're a little bit muddled in a sense.
But it's pretty clear he's not saying that.
Or to put it differently, it is not clear that he was saying that.
So here's a case where the left has grabbed onto this thing.
Of course, they get to accuse him of being a racist, engaging in ethnic stereotypes, blah, blah, blah.
But this is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
just breaking the mold, refusing to go along with the prevailing left-wing narrative, and that's really what he's being punished for.
▲
Export Selection