All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 2, 2023 - Dinesh D'Souza
49:10
UNCHARTED WATERS Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep634
| 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, another Trump indictment. I'll examine it and argue it reveals a nation that has lost its moorings and is drifting dangerously into uncharted waters.
I'll reveal that far from selling an illusion, Hunter Biden and the Biden brothers were selling political access to Joe Biden with Joe Biden's full knowledge and consent.
Sloan Rackmuth, president of the Education First Alliance, joins me.
We're going to talk about the malfeasance of North Carolina hospitals.
Hey, if you're listening on Apple, Google, or Spotify, please subscribe to my channel on Rumble.
There's a little red button that says join.
That's a way for you to check out my locals channel.
please do that. Hey, this is the Dinesh D'Souza Show.
♪♪♪ America needs this voice.
The times are crazy. In a time of confusion, division, and lies, we need a brave voice of reason, understanding, and truth.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast.
Yesterday, another huge indictment comes down from the special counsel, Jack Smith.
This is the second indictment by Jack Smith of Donald Trump, and it's the third major indictment that Trump is facing.
So the first one, you recall, the Alvin Bragg indictment in New York.
The second one was a Jack Smith indictment over the classified documents.
This involves the Mar-a-Lago raid and Trump supposedly hanging on to documents that he had no business hanging on to.
And the latest indictment, in my view, the most serious of the three, this is an indictment based upon four counts connected with apparently, supposedly, Trump's effort to overturn the 2020 election.
Now, this indictment really puts the country into uncharted waters.
And remember, it's probably not the last indictment Trump is going to face.
There's one more potential indictment, a Georgia indictment, which again could come within days, certainly sometime this month.
That's what Fannie Willis, the Fulton County DA, has said.
And that involves Trump's efforts to...
illegally or supposedly illegally, allegedly illegally overturned the election results in Georgia.
Now, last night I printed out this 45-page indictment.
I don't believe in sort of surfing an indictment like this, so I think I was telling Debbie tomorrow I might do the whole show on this indictment and go through it in some detail, in part because I think that this is a very worrisome indictment on a bunch of different counts.
Let's look at a couple of reasons why that is so.
First of all, the Alvin Bragg indictment is on the face of it a little preposterous.
Trump is accused of doing a payout to Stormy Daniels.
Well, frankly, even if he did, it wasn't illegal to do it.
And the other is he supposedly had some business documents altered in order to facilitate the payout.
There's an attempt to hitch that case to a campaign finance scheme, so it's a state case that is hooked onto a federal claim of a federal violation.
The whole thing is very murky and doesn't look like it's going to carry much substance.
Now, the Mar-a-Lago documents, the classified documents indictment is more serious.
But again, you've got all these other presidents who have classified documents.
Biden has classified documents.
Biden held on to classified documents much longer.
He was very careless with them, much more so than Trump.
His documents were in his car, in his garage, or lying all over the place, some of them going back to his days in the Senate.
The other point to be made is that the classified documents case is in Florida, and it's being heard by a Trump judge, Eileen Cannon.
And she has already shown that she's not going to put up with any nonsense from the Biden DOJ. And all of this bodes well for Trump.
But now contrast all this with the circumstances, the general circumstances surrounding this new indictment.
First of all, it's an indictment in Washington, D.C. That's bad news because it means you're dealing with Washington, D.C. Juries who are notoriously biased against Trump, in fact, have shown in the January 6th cases a willingness to just exercise a kind of political vendetta.
Go after January 6th defendants really for what they said, in some cases not even for what they did.
If they're chanting, USA, USA, go USA, or even the election is stolen...
Somehow this free speech is criminalized and is treated as some sort of an incitement to violence, even if the defendant engaged in no violence whatsoever.
So you've got the troubling venue, Washington, D.C. Trump's case has already been assigned to a judge, and it's sort of the worst of the draw.
It's this woman named Tanya Chutkin.
She's a Jamaican immigrant.
She is a leftist.
She is an Obama appointee to the court.
She is someone who has shown herself willing to give even harsher sentences to January 6th defendants than the Justice Department wanted.
Normally a judge will look at what the DOJ wants and go somewhere in the middle of what the DOJ wants and what the Defense Council is asking for.
But in her case, she would use her discretion to exceed what even the venomous Biden DOJ wanted.
So a very bad judge for Trump. That's very bad news for him also.
And this also affects the date of this trial because Eileen Cannon, the Trump judge in the classified documents case, has pushed the trial back to the next summer, so the summer of 2021.
and it could easily be pushed back much further, even past the election.
And that's probably what Trump wants.
But in this case, I think Tanya Chutkin, like a typical leftist, will try to time the trial to do maximum damage to not Trump's chances of being convicted, but Trump's chances of running for election successfully.
So this is an election maneuver by the left.
And it is unprecedented in U.S. history.
The idea of indicting the presumptive nominee of the other major party, for one party to do this to the opposing party, this is an escalation of a kind that Republicans cannot ignore.
If Republicans pretend like there's nothing unusual here, no big deal, we don't have to do the same thing, we're better than you are, we're not going to stop Stoop to your level.
This is really the death knell of Republicans because if Republicans go, well, we're not going to impeach Biden because that's going to create a sort of standard that if you don't like a president, you're going to impeach him.
Well, that is the Democratic standard.
That's the standard that they apply.
And there's no reason to think it's going to begin and end with Trump.
So Republicans need to be very vigilant, very on guard, and be willing to strike back using the power that they do have.
Or as time passes, they will find that they have no power left at all.
Debbie and I are on a great health journey, but we still struggle to eat enough fruits, veggies, and fiber.
Lucky for us, we discovered Balance of Nature.
And there's no better way to get all your fruits and veggies plus fiber than with Balance of Nature.
This is Balance of Nature's fruits and veggies made from fresh whole produce.
The produce is powdered after an advanced vacuum cold process, which stabilizes the maximum nutrient content.
And the balance of nature of fiber and spice, right here, a proprietary blend of fiber and 12 spices for overall and digestive health.
Start your journey to better health right now.
This is the final week to get a free Fruits and Veggies Travel Set plus $25 off your first order as a preferred customer when you use promo code AMERICA.
Call 800-246-8751, that's 800-246-8751 or go to balanceofnature.com, use discount code I'm continuing my discussion of the Trump indictment, the indictment on January 6th, or the indictment on illegal efforts by Trump supposedly to overturn the 2020 election.
I'll be going into the claims and charges specifically in more detail.
By the way, this is not just a case against Trump.
There are six unindicted co-conspirators.
So these people haven't been named, but the charging documents talk about an attorney who worked with Trump to do this and a consultant who worked with Trump to do that.
So presumably, indictments will come down against those people.
Also, we don't yet know who they are.
But I want to focus now on the heart of this claim on the part of Jack Smith.
It is not just that Trump claimed that the 2020 election was stolen.
It's not just that Trump contested the results of the 2020 election.
It is that Trump misled the American people.
And incited the American people to action, even though he knew that he had lost the election.
So this is a very startling claim, not just that the election wasn't stolen, But that the election wasn't stolen.
Trump knew it wasn't stolen.
And nevertheless, he persisted in challenging the results.
Almost as if he's nothing more than a sort of political provocateur, a kind of insider, somebody who was doing this for whatever reasons, maybe for fundraising reasons or maybe to avoid embarrassment or humiliation.
He wanted to insist he didn't lose even though, quote, he knew he lost.
Now, let's go to the heart of that matter and ask the simple question, did Trump know that he lost the 2020 election?
I'll go into the supposed proof or the evidence that is put forward in the indictment, but on first glance, that evidence looks to me to be very weak, and in fact bordering on stupid.
Why? Because it's essentially Trump claimed X Somebody else told him why.
Therefore, why is true.
Therefore, Trump should have believed why.
And since Trump continued to say that the election was stolen, he obviously had been told by why and therefore knew from why that it hadn't been stolen and therefore Trump was lying.
Well, this is really hardly convincing to anyone with the brain because many times you believe something and someone tells you the opposite, but you don't believe them.
Or you've got other people who are telling you what you believe, and so it's your job to kind of weigh the credibility, the value, the likelihood of someone being correct.
In other words, you form an opinion based upon varied observations, varied sources of data, varied numbers of people telling you different things.
I can say from personal testimony, Debbie and I were...
We showed Trump the movie 2,000 Mules.
You could tell from his reaction, just his spontaneous reaction, that it was a vindication for him.
He's like, I knew it. Here you go.
Here's the evidence. Here's more evidence than I've ever seen before.
So Trump is reacting in a way that makes it really clear.
And then he seemed almost downcast at the end of the screening.
He's like, I just feel very sad for my country.
So you can see here that Trump...
Fully believes the election was stolen.
Sees in our film, which of course comes much later in 2022, a kind of vindication of that sincere belief.
And then in the Mar-a-Lago premiere, which occurred a few weeks later, the same thing.
Trump is reacting. He's seen the movie once, but he's now giving further commentary, sitting right next to me.
And again, if there's one thing that the guy believes for sure...
It's that the 2020 election was stolen from him.
He believed that from the beginning.
He's believed that all the way.
He believed that when he saw 2,000 mules, and he believes it still.
So the idea, if your premise of your whole case is that Trump knew that the election wasn't stolen, you're off to a really bad start.
But there's a second point that Jonathan Turley made today on television that I want to touch upon, and I'll develop this point far more.
Jonathan Turley takes, in a way, a more radical view.
He goes, so what if Trump?
Let's just grant the prosecution.
Trump knew the election wasn't stolen, but he continued to say it was.
In other words, he's a politician who knows X to be true, but says Y. Turley's point is, so what?
He has a free speech right to do that.
Politicians have a free speech right to lie.
In other words, politicians who know one thing, think of Joe Biden.
I've never been in business with my son.
I've never talked to my son about his business dealings.
That's a lie. He actually knows that the opposite is true.
He was in meetings. He was on the phone calls.
Money has flowed into the Biden family account.
So he knows all of that, but his public stance is completely different.
Well, Joe Biden is a liar.
He's a... He's a crook.
He's a mafia guy.
He's running a bribery scheme.
But can he be indicted solely on the grounds that he knew one thing and believed another?
I don't believe so. There's no crime there.
The crime is elsewhere. The crime is taking the bribes.
The crime is delivering public benefits or delivering political benefits in exchange for money.
That's where the crime is.
It's bribery. But the crime is not free speech.
It seems to me that I'm not saying that this is a strong indictment on the merits, but I'm saying it has a lot of accusations that need to be carefully considered.
Why? Because we have a prejudicial judge and very likely a prejudiced jury that is going to be hearing these charges not too far from now.
You heard about the Durban Accords.
They're the greatest threat to the U.S. dollar's global dominance in the past 80 years.
On August 22nd, coming up, Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa are expected to announce the launch of a new international super currency fully backed by gold or other commodities.
Now, this is part of a long-term plan to supplant the U.S. and the dollar as cornerstones of the global financial system.
Well, how can you protect your IRA or 401k from the fallout from this landmark change?
You can diversify with gold from Birch Gold Group.
Historically, gold has been a safe haven in times of high uncertainty, which is right now.
Get a free information kit on gold IRAs and decide for yourself if a tax-sheltered retirement account backed by physical precious metals is right for you.
Text the word Dinesh to 989898.
A monumental shift is happening among nations that control one-third of the world's GDP starting August 22nd.
So protect your retirement savings.
Get started by texting Dinesh to the number 989898.
Claim your free information kit on gold from Birch Gold.
I'm now moving from discussing the Trump case to discussing Biden corruption and what we're learning about it from many different quarters.
There's still some debate about this testimony by Devin Archer before the House.
The testimony was conducted in private, so we're relying on other people telling us what he said.
The Democrats have been saying that all that Devin Archer said is that Joe Biden was present at these meetings with Hunter Biden and his business associates, or that Joe Biden called in or was brought onto the phone and put on speakerphone, but he, Joe Biden, did not in fact discuss any business.
This is contested by Marjorie Taylor Greene, who says that their conversations were, quote, about their business deals.
So we're going to have to wait for a transcript of the Devin Archer testimony to look more closely at what Devin Archer actually says.
But whether or not Joe Biden specifically talks about business, I mean, typically it's not really done that way.
You bring in the guy who has the influence and his job is not to argue the details of the business, typically in a business.
And this applies even to a small business.
I mean, take, for example, if we're negotiating something to do with, let's say, a film distribution deal.
We have a small film team.
We negotiate all that out.
And then I might show up, and my goal is basically to say some niceties, to look over maybe some of the key elements of the deal, to shake hands, and then the signatures are all performed later.
The point being that Joe Biden is the man providing the access, getting the job done.
And what I want to emphasize is that there is a lot of evidence coming, not just from Hunter Biden, but all the Bidens, That Joe Biden is, in fact, delivering this access, and then we know that the things that the bribe payers are paying for get done.
Let's look at a couple of examples.
A 2015 email by Burisma.
This is Burisma emailing.
The email is coming from Vadim Pozarski of Burisma, and it's to other Burisma executives.
And it's very clear that they're talking about what this deal with the Biden involves.
Quote, the scope of work should also include organization of a visit of a number of widely recognized and influential current and former US policy makers to Ukraine in November, aiming to conduct meetings with and bring positive signal message and support on Nikolai's issue to the Ukrainian top officials above with the ultimate purpose to close down any cases or pursuits against Nikolai in Ukraine.
So what are they saying?
The whole point of all this, this is what we're paying the money for, is to organize the top U.S. officials using their influence with Ukrainian officials to end a corruption investigation.
That's what we're paying for.
That's what they understood to be buying.
And by the way, that is what they got.
So here is an email from James Biden, and it is to the investment authorities of Qatar.
And James Biden is talking about what the Bidens can deliver.
Thank you for my communication with my friend and associate, blah, blah, blah.
My family could provide a wealth of introductions and business opportunities at the highest level.
So James Biden is saying, my family, meaning the Bidens.
Now, everybody knows it's not James Biden's influence.
It's not Frank Biden's influence.
It's not Hunter Biden. It's Joe Biden's influence.
Joe Biden is offering here, through his brother, James Biden, to open doors, quote, at the highest level.
And then he goes on to say, if this is in keeping with the vision of His Excellency, on behalf of the Biden family, I welcome your interest here.
And then he recommends a series of steps to be taken.
So you can see very clearly that what's going on is an offer of selling influence.
An offer of selling influence that is, in fact, being sold.
It's not an illusion. Because when they want to get the prosecutor fired, the prosecutor is fired.
When someone, an oligarch in Moscow, wants to get off the sanctions list and is willing to send $3.5 million to the Bidens, she's not on the list.
So, the result does in fact occur.
With Biden, he has phone calls including a dinner in Paris with a French energy company and in China with Jonathan Lee of the BHR. He attended a business dinner, this is the one I just referred to, with his son Hunter and associates at Cafe Milano in D.C. Elina Baturina, a Russian oligarch who is the widow of the former mayor of Moscow, attended the dinner.
And we talked about the business that she...
So, Devin Archer, in a way, summed up the whole business when he said that what the Bidens were selling is, quote, the brand.
So, Joe Biden is the brand.
Hunter Biden is not the brand.
People don't want to buy the reputation of a coke addict and a user of prostitutes or a guy who's, like, totally spinning out of control.
They're buying the influence of Joe Biden.
That's the brand that is being sold very similar to Nike or any other brand except in this brand there are no products There are no Nike shirts. There are no Nike shoes There is just political influence that is being sold and so So the notion that is now being the kind of fallback position of the left. Yeah, you know Joe Biden was there yeah, he wasn't attendance, but he wasn't doing business and
Everybody else thought he was.
The other Bidens thought he was.
The people who paid money for the influence thought he was.
and they got what they paid for.
Bank failures, record inflations, spy balloons, mass layoffs, it's a recipe for disaster if your investments are with a typical financial advisor.
But my friend Rebecca Walser is different.
You've seen her on the podcast.
She's just got a very canny grasp of the world economy and the US economy.
She's a wealth strategist, a tax attorney.
She has a global MBA from the London School of Economics.
Rebecca told her clients to get out of equities back at the end of 2021.
She got it right when most advisors got it wrong.
And who had to pay the price?
Well, you as the consumer.
So don't let blind loyalty leave you losing money.
Call Rebecca Walzer's office today to protect your wealth from the market uncertainty.
Debbie and I did a call with Rebecca's team, and we're moving ahead.
Go to friendofdinesh.com to book a call with Rebecca's team.
That's friendofdinesh.com to protect your investments and your future.
I'm continuing my discussion of Biden family corruption, starting with the man at the top, the head of the family, Joe Biden himself.
Here is a statement that Hunter Biden made to a group of Chinese business associates.
Quote, We're good to go.
Are the best at doing exactly what you want.
So in other words, we will perform the task for you.
You're not just paying for a photograph with Joe Biden.
You're not paying even to go to the Lincoln bedroom.
You're not paying for attendance at a state dinner.
This is not ceremonial.
Whatever you want, we are the best members.
Meaning there are other people who might be selling influence, but nobody does it like we do.
We are sort of the Rembrandt of this criminal art form.
That's really what Hunter Biden is saying.
And that spells it out beautifully.
Now, interestingly, I think?
And I want to give you a window of the kind of talk that they exchanged with each other, which is all now coming out, because it shows you the inside of this criminal operation.
It's kind of like going into the mafia and seeing what they do.
Wow, listen, they're making meatballs while they're plotting and killing this guy.
Hey, look, this is how they function in their ordinary life.
So here's a text exchange between Devin Archer and Hunter Biden.
Why did your dad's administration appointees arrest me and try to put me in jail?
Just curious. Some of our partners are asking out here.
Why would they try and ruin my family and destroy my kids and no one from your family sidestep in and at least try to help me?
I don't get it. And I'm depressed.
Bunch of these Asians getting in my head asking me the same, so just curious what I should answer.
So here's Devin Archer.
They went after him, the Biden DOJ. Now, not in anything to do with the Biden family corruption.
They carefully stayed away from that.
They've been covering for that.
But they went after him for doing some shady deals, supposedly, with an Indian tribe.
And here is Devin Archer going, hey, listen, they prosecuted me.
They want to send me to jail.
What's up? I'm your friend.
Why doesn't your family intervene on my behalf?
Here's Hunter Biden's reply.
Hunter Biden goes—and this is almost unbelievable—unbelievable in its pomposity, its duplicity— I mean, I don't even know what to say.
And first of all, I'm not even putting myself in the place of Devin Archer.
Think of what he thought reading this absolute madness, this gobbledygook, this attempt to rise.
Oh, listen, Devin.
Well, first of all, follow the logic of it.
Every president's family is held to a higher standard.
So what Hunter Biden is saying is, our family would like to help you, but we can't help you.
You know why? Because any other family could help you.
If this was a case where you were in a business, the CEO of the business would help.
You are part of our operation, but we can't help you because we're held to a higher standard.
We can't get involved.
And because we're so powerful, we have to be noble and good so that these excessive restrictions on us, we would like to help you, and ordinarily we would.
These excessive restrictions are for the greater good of society.
And then more from Hunter Biden.
Every great family is persecuted, prosecuted in the U.S. He says not one or the other.
It's persecuted, prosecuted in the U.S. You are part of a great family.
So he's implying you're one of our—and he is.
Devin Archer is in the Biden crime family.
Now, this is very important here because, I mean, if you've seen Goodfellas, if you've seen The Godfather, it's very important for the Corleone family to try to convince other people, Luca Brasi, or...
Or Tessio or Clemenza.
Hey, listen, you're not just Clemenza, some guy who works for us.
You are part of our family.
We're going to treat you as a family.
This is mafia talk.
Very interesting to see it surfacing here.
It's the price of power and the people questioning you have power.
Truly have none, whereas you do through perseverance and poise.
So you're a better man than they are.
You sort of should just endure what you're going through.
We're not really going to do anything for you, but you can rest assured that we care about you.
You're part of our operation.
You are a Biden, so buck up and sort of face the music.
And so this is a very, to me, A kind of eye-opening look, a window into this criminal operation known as the Bidens, how they relate to each other and the important place of Devin Archer.
But you can also see here how they sort of didn't help Devin Archer at a time when he thought he needed help.
And this may be part of the reason why Devin Archer is like, well, you know what?
I'm going to show up before the House Oversight Committee and tell them what I know.
As you get older, aches and pains start kicking in and if you need some relief, we have a relief factor solution for you.
Debbie and I started taking ReliefFactor 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 ReliefFactor.
How does it work?
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 is a true believer now.
She can do exercises, planks, and push-ups, and so on, that for a long time she wasn't able to do.
So Relief Factor has been a big 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 just $19.95.
Go to relieffactor.com or call 800-4-RELIEF to find out more about this offer.
The number again, 800-4-RELIEF or go to relieffactor.com.
Feel the difference. Hey guys, I'm happy to welcome to the podcast a new guest.
Her name is Sloane Rachmet.
She's president of Education First Alliance, based in North Carolina.
She's an investigative journalist.
She covers education issues, healthcare issues, and she has been uncorking some major findings about North Carolina's hospital system and also North Carolina politics.
Sloan, welcome to the podcast.
Delighted to have you.
Let's start by giving our listeners and viewers just some sense of the landscape in North Carolina and what kind of got you on this track of investigating what these hospitals are doing.
Well, thank you very much for having me.
In North Carolina, it's dubbed the state of education and medication for a very good reason.
We've got about 800 biotech companies, so major employer.
We have twice the national average for pharma manufacturing A lot of people don't know that.
We've got three top-tier research universities, five medical schools, soon to be seven.
So it's probably no surprise that we have become the mecca, if you will, for child sex change procedures.
But this is very interesting.
So the medical industrial complex, we've got that, but it's juxtaposed against the population here in North Carolina.
We're second only to Texas in terms of rural population.
So it makes up about 55 to 60 percent of the people here that live in the mountain communities, farming communities.
And, you know, we're center right and we're in the Bible Belt.
So on the one hand, you've got this highly concentrated, if you will, A system that's pushing down on the population things that they simply don't want.
I mean, goodness gracious, 99.9% of the American population doesn't want offered to their children two-, three-, four-year-olds or all ages screening for transgenderism, which is what we have here in the state.
Now, Sloan, let's walk through this because you as a journalist, as somebody who is interested in education, and I take it that part of what you're saying is this isn't just the medical community.
Is it the medical community sort of in alliance with the sort of academic community in the sense that I'm assuming where did the therapists all come from?
Well, they come from academia.
Where's the propaganda being drummed into children?
Probably in the schools.
And then you have the hospitals.
So is there a kind of...
Are these two kind of massive industries in North Carolina working in concert toward a common and in some ways mutually profitable end?
Absolutely. And we call it the classroom to operating room pipeline.
And it is in full swing.
And the way that that works, yes, is academia.
So if we back up, and we go back to 2015, here in North Carolina, we were battling the first ever bathroom bill is what they called it.
It was HB2. But it was a bill meant to keep men out of women's spaces.
Men out of girls' spaces.
And so exactly at the time that that started, Duke University opened its clinic for children.
They called it Children and Adolescent Transgender Clinic.
And so we see right away that they were going to weaponize children in their war for Marxism.
And that's what they did.
Forget about reckless treatment of children.
And then we saw UNC follow.
We've seen others.
And now we see ECU, which is interesting because ECU, Eastern Carolina University, it provides the lion's share of our primary care physicians and rural healthcare physicians in the state, but also throughout the country.
And they're looking to be a mecca for child sex change procedures.
And to your point, they're marketing it through school.
So, The left is in an uproar about marketing e-cigarettes to children, but they have a direct-to-child marketing program in communities all over this state.
I mean, it seems, Sloan, that if we flash back to earlier campaigns by the left to take over various causes and get corporations or hospitals behind them, you had the leftist ideology on the one side, but the corporation's desire to maximize its profits on the other side.
And so there was a countervailing force against the left, which is, hey, we don't want to do this stupid thing because it's going to cost us a lot of money.
It seems to me one of the strange things about this transgender business is it's big business for the hospitals.
It's a lot of money for them.
So is this a case where sort of ideology and commerce come together, both pushing this time in the same direction?
Yes, I mean, if we look at Eastern Carolina University, and this is a big one we've been in because it's responsible for the health of 1.5 million rural citizens in 29 counties, and this is going on across America.
This is by no means isolated.
But they're facing a $100 million loss last year.
And lo and behold, they're closing clinics, Dinesh.
Five clinics they closed.
The stated reason?
They weren't profitable.
At the same time, they're getting this program up and running and marketing it to the schools.
So... It's a little bit of both, right? What was the price we could get for that?
It's a recurring business.
We can create a chronic condition within three-year-olds and bill for that.
So it's a marriage of both.
Wow. Let's take a pause.
When we come back more with Sloane Rachman, she's president of the Education First Alliance in North Carolina.
By the way, on Twitter, at Sloane, S-L-O-A-N-R-A-C-H-M-U-T-H. And the website, edfirstnc, North Carolina, edfirstnc.org.
It's MyPillow's 20th year anniversary and over this time Mike Lindell has sold over 80 million MyPillows.
Now Mike wants to thank each and every one of you by giving you the lowest price in history on his MyPillows.
You get the queen size MyPillow for $19.98, regular price $69.98 and just $10 more for a king size.
You get deep discounts on all the MyPillow products.
Everything's on sale. MyPillow bed sheets, mattress toppers, pet beds, mattresses, robes, MySlippers and so much more.
This is the time to surf the website.
Just try out some of the other amazing products that you've had your eye on.
Go to MyPillow.com.
Use promo code Dinesh to receive this amazing offer on the queen-size MyPillow for $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've got nothing to lose.
It's time to start getting the quality sleep you deserve.
Call 800-876-0227 or go to MyPillow.com.
Don't forget to use the promo code D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
I'm back with investigative journalist Sloane Rachmet.
She's president of the Education First Alliance in North Carolina.
We're talking about what's going on in the educational system, but also in the medical system in North Carolina.
Sloane, I remember surfing social media.
This is a few weeks ago.
And I see all this stuff that you're posting about Duke University and I'm not sure if it was UNC at the same time, but we're talking about prestigious hospitals in North Carolina affiliated with universities, and they're talking about transgender surgeries and puberty blockers and so on.
extending to children of a very young age.
Can you talk about how bad this is?
I mean, we're not just talking here about teenagers and adults, right?
We're talking about kids at a much younger age.
Well, surgeries are not performed on young children.
I don't think that that's going to happen anytime soon.
But I will say, here's the evidence we have.
The screening for children begins at around 2 or 3.
Welcoming children of all ages is what we see.
We see that the gender clinic, they call it, it's centered in pediatrics and they're marketing to children of all ages, which is ridiculous.
We've got Duke University with a doctor that is just crazy who admits to having two-year-old transgender patients.
And get this, she said on a video that she has treated children as young as eight years old with puberty blockers.
So these are the facts that we have, but we also know, if you take the left at their word and at their literature, publications indicate that when children at a very young age are socially transitioned, that means dressed in a certain way,
referred to by a different name and pronoun, 95% of them We're good to go.
I mean, this almost reminds me, years ago, I think this may have been a joke that goes back to the comedian Steve Martin, but he was like, you know, our children are going to be ungrateful.
We need to take revenge on them.
And one way we take revenge on them as parents is we teach them wrong.
So you point to a chair and call it a table.
And this was like a laugh line, you know, 25 or 30 years ago.
But it seems to me that when a parent takes a child away, Or an educator takes a child, a child who's a boy, and says, you're a girl, and sort of all of the society then begins to treat the child that way, you create massive confusion, and perhaps at some point the child goes, well, I guess I am a girl.
I'm new to the world.
All these adults are telling me I am this, and I need to feel this way, and I need to dress that way.
And so what you're saying is that the propaganda works.
It works very well.
And it's more insidious than that.
So we're finding that parents can take their child in.
Maybe they're not having eating disorder, you know, very young.
And this happens very much.
the doctor will come in and say, listen, Miss Smith, we need to really treat the root cause here.
And the root cause is gender confusion or identity, et cetera.
So that's the treatment.
So what they're doing is they're getting people, you know, in primary care settings, in a pediatric setting, in a psychological setting.
We can see that very easily in saying, hey, come with us.
This is what we think.
And so it's manipulating the parent.
Now, a lot of parents, you know, still think that anyone with a white coat should be listened to, should be obeyed.
And these doctors, not all, a small percentage, but some are taking advantage of that.
And they're hoodwinking the parents and the parents are being told this.
Would you rather have a dead child or a transgender child?
And they're being manipulated.
This is a predatory practice we're talking about.
So what's the solution here?
Is the solution here? Well, part of it, of course, is public exposure of the kind that we're doing right now.
But is it also legislative?
In other words, you just ban this kind of stuff because it seems to be an abuse of the medical industry.
In some ways, it's an abuse of educational practice.
And what are the politics in North Carolina?
And is this something that you might be able to achieve in your state?
Absolutely. I mean, our organization is chiefly responsible for something called the Youth Protection Act, and it will ban these sort of things under the age of 18, and that would include cross-text hormones, that would include puberty blockers and surgery.
However, the governor, the Democrat Governor Roy Cooper, vetoed that.
And we are right now waiting for a veto override.
I'm told it will happen next week.
But every day that we go without an override is a day that a child is preyed upon for purposes of social justice and money.
So we're asking for that to be done.
But you and I both know legislation is not a panacea for this evil we're talking about.
So enforcement is Would be 75% of the solution.
That means really for, you know, concerned citizens to put pressure on these oversight committees within the General Assembly to update them.
Investigative journalism, hugely important.
Just to see what's behind the kimono, if you will, to make sure that everything is up to snuff and that laws are being obeyed.
Excellent point. Hey, thank you very much for joining me.
This is Sloane Rachmet.
She's president of Education First Alliance, North Carolina.
The website, edfirstnc.org.
Very informative. Thank you very much, Sloane.
Love to have you back sometime. Thank you, Dinesh.
I saw a recent post on social media that claimed that the Democratic Party created the Ku Klux Klan.
The post really isn't new, but I hadn't seen it before.
And it not only says that the Democratic Party created the Klan, but it goes on to say, I'm now reading from the post, just so you know, the Ku Klux Klan's original purpose was to oppose the Republican Party's policies intended to establish economic and political equality for blacks Now, this post is 99% accurate.
And what I mean by that is that the Democratic Party officially didn't create the Klan.
The Klan wasn't started as a subcommittee of the Democratic Party.
But Democrats created the Ku Klux Klan.
Not only did Democrats create the Ku Klux Klan, but when the Ku Klux Klan was put out of business by Republicans through the Force Act, this is going back to the 1870s under President Grant, then the Ku Klux Klan was revived in the early 20th century by a progressive Democratic president, namely Woodrow Wilson.
And all of this is well established in the record.
But here's a politifact statement.
Looking at this claim in a post for PolitiFact, it's called, No, the Democratic Party didn't create the Ku Klux Klan.
Now, if PolitiFact went on to say, Well, listen, all we're saying is the Democratic Party officially didn't create the Klan.
Yes, it was Democrats and so on.
But no, basically, PolitiFact is trying to challenge the claim itself.
And I want to go through this challenge to show you how bogus these fact checkers are.
In this case, the fact checker we're talking about is Ciara O'Rourke.
She looks like she's 27 or 28, and she knows very little, as it turns out, about Democrats or about the Ku Klux Klan.
Here's what she says. She says that the group's founding is murky.
Well, all groups' founding is murky in the sense that until the group becomes large, not a whole lot is known about the original founders.
But it is known in this case that one of the early founders of the Ku Klux Klan was Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Confederate general who also happened to be a prominent Democrat.
In fact, he was a delegate to the Democratic National Convention.
That is conveniently left out of the PolitiFact fact check.
Now, she does go on to say, quote, historians generally agree it was founded by a handful of Confederate veterans in Pulaski, Tennessee.
That's true, but what was the political affiliation of those Confederate veterans?
Answer, they were Democrats.
And that's the point. You can't say, well, this guy says it's the Democrats, but it was really Confederate veterans.
Yeah, it was Confederate veterans who were Democrats.
So this is what PolitiFact acts like by calling them Confederate veterans.
They've somehow moved the responsibility over to Confederate veterans.
Now, I read on.
Okay, so PolitiFact has to backpedal here a little bit because they know that there's a close tie between the Klan and Democrats.
By the way, a tie that extends over like 50 years.
Okay. Many angry Southern whites during the 1860s and 70s were Democrats, and some joined the KKK. But then it goes on to say that the two parties switch sides.
Quote, the Democratic Party of the past is not the Democratic Party of today.
I want to stop right here, because I want to point out, and of course there's more here, the platforms of the two parties reversed each other in the mid-20th century century.
All of that is itself bogus, but it's a topic for another day.
But my point is not that it's bogus.
It's completely irrelevant.
If two parties switch sides, it doesn't change the origins of the Ku Klux Klan.
It doesn't change who formed the Klan, who built the Klan, and so on.
Let's look at an example.
If I'm If I'm living across the street from a serial killer, and all the crimes were committed in his house, and then by some peculiarity, we swap houses.
I buy his house, he buys my house.
So the two parties have switched sides.
But does that mean I now killed all those people?
Of course not. I didn't do it.
He did it. It doesn't matter if we switch sides later because the original crimes, which is what we're talking about here, were perpetrated by him in his house.
So this is the fallacy of somehow arguing that somehow the two parties switch sides and therefore supposedly the guilt of what the Democrats did with the Klan.
I mean, think about it. All the burnings, the lynchings, the blocking of black people from voting is now somehow mysteriously transmuted over to the Republicans.
So this is the sort of level of argumentation, or should I say sleight of hand, that is used by these fact-checking websites.
And therefore, we come to the preposterous conclusion here, which is context matters.
The anti-Black Democratic Party of yore.
Who talks like this?
The anti-Black Democratic Party of yore.
What is this? It's not the party of today.
Well, in some ways, yes, the Democratic Party has changed.
Issues have changed. Technology is different.
We're living in a completely different century.
So nobody's claiming that the Democratic Party is the same as it was at that time.
But the point is, the Democratic Party does have some of the same ideals.
It does have some of the same corruption.
It does have some of the same brutality.
So a party can change in some ways while retaining a certain immoral thread that stretches through time.
And thus we come to the preposterous conclusion.
We rate this statement false.
Now, very interestingly, if you take an almost equivalent statement that pushes on the other side, see, this is a side that puts the blame on the Democratic Party.
If there was a claim putting the blame on the Republican Party, they would be hasty and eager to rate it true.
They would have a few qualifications, but we rate the statement true.
So the same statement is true in one context and false in another.
And this is the sorry state of fact-checking in the country today.
▲
Export Selection