All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 12, 2024 - Dinesh D'Souza
49:22
OUT OF CONTROL Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep746
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Coming up in preparation for the Supreme Court case on the Colorado ballot, I'm going to show you three ways in which GOP states can throw Biden off the ballot.
Debbie is going to join me.
We're going to talk about the chaos, the out-of-control border.
We're also going to talk about airline safety and who exactly was running the Jeffrey Epstein blackmail operation.
And I'll continue my discussion of friendship and see as Lewis's key distinction between this type of love and eros or romantic love.
If you're watching on Rumble or listening on Apple, Google, or Spotify, please subscribe to my channel.
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.
The 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which was passed in the aftermath of the Civil War, has a clause in it that says that you are disqualified in running for president if you have engaged in an insurrection.
Bye now.
I think, by the way, that this is the reason that the left, and this is how strategic and how cunning they are, from the day of January 6th, and they probably even thought of it before, right away they put out that word, insurrection.
Insurrection. This was an insurrection.
And they were setting up for what we have now, which is the attempt to disqualify Trump, throw him off the ballot because he participated in an insurrection.
Now, even if you could show that there was an insurrection on January 6th, it wouldn't follow that Trump did it.
It could follow that the insurrection was done by someone else or was spontaneous.
So the left has two heavy factual burdens, neither of which are met.
Number one, that there was an insurrection.
And number two, that Trump orchestrated or drove it forward or was an active part in it.
So they have no case.
There's nothing here. So what the left is doing in Colorado and in Maine...
Is they're relying on the, who gets to say what an insurrection is?
And their answer is, the term is not defined in the 14th Amendment, so individual states get to define it for themselves.
They can decide if they think it was an insurrection, and if it was...
Throw Trump off the ballot.
And when this issue is raised, that two can play at this game, Democrats always go, well, come on, Dinesh, you know, there aren't any other insurrections around Trump.
This is why they think they've got Trump.
He's the only one that they think can plausibly be connected, even if in a far-fetched way, to the actual word insurrection.
But this is not, in fact, true.
I think that Republican states should start, and do it now, throwing Biden off the ballot.
This can be done right here in Texas.
It can be done in other Republican states.
And all you need to do is to show, and again, remember, you don't have to prove it.
There was no proof that was advanced in the Trump case.
You simply have to say, to us, it looks like an insurrection.
And since the word insurrection is in the 14th Amendment, and since we get to say what an insurrection is, if it's an insurrection to us, we get to throw the guy off the ballot.
This will, by the way, also clarify the Supreme Court's thinking about this, because if the Supreme Court is inclined to go its normal way and break 5-4 or 6-3, it'll be down straight ideological grounds.
But I want all the justices to see what a Pandora's box has opened if you allow states, whimsically, to decide that they can disqualify their political opponents simply by chanting the word insurrection.
So here are three independent ways.
Here's way number one.
Biden participated in an insurrection by stealing the 2020 election.
I don't have to prove it. I'm simply saying he did.
It's our opinion that he did.
If he did, that constitutes an insurrection against our constitutional system of government, a usurpation of democracy.
You don't have to think so, but we think so.
And therefore, on that basis, since the word insurrection appears in the 14th Amendment, he's off the ballot.
That's way number one. Here's way number two.
Biden is engaging in election interference by trying to jail his leading political opponent.
Now, there's a lot of evidence that the Biden regime is colluding with Fannie Willis in Georgia.
They're colluding in the New York case.
They're involved in all the cases against Trump.
So there's an orchestrated effort by one party and its leader, Biden, to get the leader of the other party not only off the ballot but jailed.
That's an insurrection. That's insurrection number two, Biden's off the ballot.
And number three, the border.
The fact that you are flagrantly ignoring our laws, allowing potential terrorists and criminals to come across the border.
If you think about it, a nation is held together by its citizens.
And what you're doing is you're actually acting as if aliens...
Our citizens, in fact, you treat them in some cases better than citizens, there are automatic benefits available to them that citizens don't get.
This is an infringement of a country and its sovereignty, and it can reasonably be dubbed, you guessed it, an insurrection.
So I've just given three independent insurrections that are being driven by the Biden regime, and you don't need all three.
You need just one.
So you can allude to one, you can allude to two, or you can bring up all three, and the net effect is bye-bye Joe Biden.
Supreme Court, you now figure this one out.
As we head into a presidential election year, one thing you can be sure of, 2024 will be tumultuous. So how will your hard-earned savings fare? You already see the impact of inflation at the pump, the grocery store, the dollar continues to lose buying power quicker than wages can increase. So how are you protecting your savings? Well, consider diversifying with gold from Bert's gold group.
For decades, gold has been the choice of investors and central banks to hedge against inflation.
Now you can own gold in a tax-sheltered IRA with the help of Birch Gold.
Just text Dinesh to 989898.
They'll send you a free information kit on gold.
No obligation, only information.
Then Birch Gold can help you convert an existing IRA of 401k into an IRA in gold, and you don't pay a penny out of pocket.
With an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, thousands of happy customers, including me and Debbie, you can trust Birch Gold.
Text Dinesh to 989898 for your free information kit.
Again, text Dinesh to 989898 today.
My friend Mike Lindell has a passion to help you get the best sleep of your life.
He didn't just stop by creating the best pillow.
Mike also created the Geezer Dream bed sheets.
They look and feel great, I love them, which means an even better night's sleep for me, which is crucial for my busy schedule.
Mike found the world's best cotton called Geezer.
It's ultra soft and breathable, but also extremely durable.
Mike's Geezer sheets come extremely durable. Mike's Geezer sheets come with a 60-day money-back guarantee and a 10-year warranty. They also come in a variety of sizes and colors.
And Mike has an incredible deal.
Sale of the year for a limited time, you get 50% off the Geezer Dream sheets. You can get a set for as low as $29.98. Go to mypillow.com. There you'll find not just this offer, but deep discounts on all the MyPillow products, the MyPillow 2.0 mattress topper, the MyPillow kitchen towel sets, the robes, the flannel sheets, and so much more.
Call 800-876-0227.
The number again, 800-876-0227.
Or go to MyPillow.com to get the discount.
You need to use the promo code.
It's D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
Debbie and I are ready for our Friday roundup.
And before we sat down, Debbie was comparing us to a Penn& Teller routine.
I don't know if you know, but just by way of background, Penn& Teller is this duo.
That performs in Vegas.
And I believe Penn is the guy who sort of carries the whole show.
Penn is the guy who's animated.
He's talking. He's cracking the jokes.
And Teller kind of plays the straight man and says, in some cases, for long periods of time, or is it the whole show that he says...
I think he just nods. He just nods.
Yeah. Doesn't say much.
Right. So you were saying that we're...
But who's Penn and who's Teller?
Well, I said I was Teller.
You were teller. And then you then tell me, no, I'm penning your teller.
I'm like, no, no way.
Well, when we do our roundup, because people hear from me all week, I kind of feel like, you know, I kind of let you spell things out.
And I react to what you're saying more than the other way around.
I will say this, you know, sometimes, not always, I read comments, you know, here and there.
And in one of the comments, it was like, Debbie, you interrupt Dinesh all the time.
You stop interrupting Dinesh.
And I'm like, oh, yes ma'am.
Well, we've actually, but we have also seen the opposite.
And in fact, I'm more conscious of it, that I would interrupt you and there'd be people like, Dinesh, let Debbie finish your point.
Yeah, but you know what? It's really funny.
Because this is how we are at home when we're chatting.
We talk over each other.
Yeah, we do. And so I think it's just natural to do it here because we're kind of in the same vibe as home.
Yeah. We both must feel we have, and I just did it again, interrupted you.
We both must feel we have indispensable points that have to be articulated now.
They cannot await you finishing your point.
I've got to jump in and lay out my point.
Yes. Oh, pretty funny.
I know. Well, one of the topics we've been discussing, at least a little bit, is you had a birthday two days ago.
A couple days ago. Yeah.
The Big 58. And then, of course, I've been talking about C.S. Lewis and different types of love.
So we were applying some of these categories to our own life and our own marriage and talking about how we have tried very hard to keep the romantic force that drew us together and keep that going consistently through our marriage.
And here we're closing in on our eighth anniversary and I've known you for 10 years.
So in fact you were 48 when I met you.
And so we talk about the importance of that but at the same time how a marriage has to be a lot more than that.
And this is actually a point C.S. Lewis makes.
He says that if you have a marriage and it's only one thing or only the other, it's missing something.
And in fact, you can see that it's missing something because if somebody told you, you can only have one but not the other, You would not want to give either one up.
So in other words, you have eros, romantic love, and then you also have affectionate love, right?
And the two come together. And if someone were to make us choose, like, okay, Dinesh and Debbie, you can have one or you can have the other, but you can't have both, we would be hard-pressed, right?
And that's Lewis's point.
His point is he's proving that those two types of love are both distinct, but he's also proving that Overall, you cannot just easily say one is better than the other.
Because frankly, if one were better than the other, you could easily choose.
You go, I'll take the better one.
But because you want both, and both are really important.
Well, I think we blend both quite nicely.
I call you my Chico, because that's affectionate, because you're my buddy, my friend.
So I think that we take that into our romantic relationship.
You know, encounters.
Right, right, exactly.
We don't want to give away, you know, it's TMI. We're not giving any details and stuff.
No, of course not. But the point being that, you're right, that in normal life, you don't do what Lewis does and sort of intellectually separate them out.
They just kind of go together and they form a kind of full relationship, which I think has more layers to it than that.
Exactly, exactly. All right.
He was saying he wanted to weigh in on the issue of airline safety that I brought up yesterday.
Yesterday, yeah. And the role of...
I mean, first of all, do you think that I was right in saying that this is not a function of like airline parts are antiquated, that there may be an element of the Gen Z factor, but probably the predominant element.
And I want to say predominant element because this is a conscious aspect of policy, the DEI factor.
Yes. Yeah.
Yeah. There was a belief that they needed to be attractive.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Right? And mostly women, right?
Mostly women. So now, because this is one of the things that I was very much like, oh, because, you know, as a little girl...
I emulated this woman who was a flight attendant.
Unfortunately, she was killed in an airline disaster in Venezuela.
But I thought she was just gorgeous.
She was extremely tall.
And I knew I was not going to be tall.
At least I was told I wasn't going to be.
And it turns out they were right.
They were right. But I could never...
With those requirements, I could have never been a flight attendant because I was too short.
The weight issue wasn't an issue for me, but the height was.
And then I remember later, I don't remember what year it was, I was almost hired by Continental Airlines as just a customer service agent.
But when they saw me, they were like, you know, you would fit really great into our flight attendant I guess job category.
Would you like to try to do that?
But my problem, and you know this is why I wear relief band when we fly, is I get airsick.
And I'm not afraid of flying per se, but I'm afraid to throw up on people.
Obviously, that's a big component there, right?
So they were like, okay. Yeah, they're like, okay, we get it.
We understand. You don't want to be a flight attendant because you might throw up on a passenger.
That's fine. We'll remove you from that category.
So what I was saying is I was happy at the time that I could have been because the height requirement was no longer a requirement.
Yeah. So it was just height proportionate to your weight.
Yeah. But I think the point you're making here is that if they want to be, quote, diverse, and they want to say, we want to have, let's say, more women, but I mean, it's not like there's a shortage of women in flight attendants, but your point is, diversity doesn't impose a severe cost.
Right. Not for that.
But in other areas, it does.
Yeah, so mechanical, if you're a mechanic that...
Basically fixes airplanes, fixes the parts of the airplane.
That is crucial, as is a pilot.
What about the air traffic controllers?
Well, the air traffic controller, the mechanic, and the pilot, those are crucial elements that a flight takes off and lands safely.
Without those three, I mean, you could remove one and you could have a disaster.
Right. I mean, so the point we're making, I think, is that in these areas, we should go absolutely with merit.
And who cares if they're all Jews?
Who cares if they're all Asians?
Who cares if they're all white or old white men or whatever?
The point being, if you pick the best people who are best trained for that job, you're going to have the best airline.
Right. And that is exactly right.
Like I was telling you, it would be the same thing if in the medical industry, let's say, you know, to become a doctor, it didn't matter if you were at the top of your class or if you were good at what you were doing or as a surgeon, if you had no idea what you were doing.
That's a life or death situation.
Do not put me or the patient in a life or death situation because you want to be diverse.
Okay? Don't do that.
The same thing with the airline industry.
It's a life or death situation.
You could kill someone or lots of people because in this case, you have 100 plus passengers, right?
So it's very important that you don't use the DEI requirement in these areas.
I think we're good to go.
Affirmative action and DEI in chemistry or in medicine because those things matter.
But let's just say you have DEI in sociology.
Who cares?
People utter all kinds of rubbish in sociology.
But I mean, if you're going to be making a distinction between, okay, DEI with this part of academia, whereas not in this part of academia, then you're just really watering down education as a whole.
Of course. No, I mean, the whole ideology is pernicious.
We're just looking to see where it has less of a catastrophic effect than elsewhere.
Right. It's bad everywhere.
It's bad everywhere. But let's just say Bloomingdale's is going to hire based on DEI. Okay, fine.
Customer service has gone out the window anyway.
So really, it doesn't matter.
So or Starbucks, I always joke about the latte being, you know, and some Starbucks because why?
Because I love making latte.
So I'm a very, very critical barista, because I consider myself a barista, right?
And so whenever I taste the latte, I'm like, yeah, they don't know how to make it here.
So, okay, that's not life or death.
It's just a bad latte.
You know, whenever I make these comments on social media, people go, well, Dinesh, you know, you're implying that everybody who's a woman or everyone who's black is somehow inferior.
And here's the key point.
I'm actually not implying that.
The implication is in DEI. It comes out of affirmative action.
And you can see this very clearly by applying it to any area.
Let's take, for example, shooting basketball.
If you tell one team that every time you approach the net, we're going to lower the net six inches, but not for the other team.
Well, people will automatically assume that the team that's getting this benefit is inferior to the other team.
Well, just take the WMBA, for example.
What if they got me?
What if they hired me to be their point guard?
Hello? Hello?
Not smart!
Well, this has actually become an issue with Mark Cuban because this guy owns the Dallas Mavericks and he's a big...
This guy, you know, he goes with the wind.
I think he's actually moderately conservative, but he wants to be cool.
And so after George Floyd, there he was confessing that he's a racist and, you know, basing himself in the most degrading way.
And I think for him it's a cheap form of virtue signaling because...
Oh, he loves that. Exactly.
He wants to be rich and he wants to be cool.
And so he's got that inferiority complex.
I think that's at the heart of it.
But nevertheless, people said, well, if you're so big on DEI, why don't you hire some short Asian-Americans to be part of the Dallas Mavericks?
And he goes, well, we're diverse as a company as a whole.
But nobody cares about the company as a whole.
Who are the frontline people?
Who are the people that make the Mavericks?
It's the players. So if you really believe that a diverse team is better than a merit team, put a diverse team on the court and let's see if you're right.
And they will lose every game, I guarantee.
And they will lose, but they won't just lose every game, they will lose in every industry and every competition.
See, the reason that this is never tested, because it could easily be tested, right?
Let's just take, for example, conceptual physics.
All right. You produce a diverse team that is selected based upon racial representation.
I'll give you 10 MIT top scorers, a merit team, and then you give them a difficult conceptual problem and you see which team can solve it.
Or you let two teams start a business and see who can run it better.
Or build a road.
Anything that involves...
Getting something done, a merit team, by definition, will succeed better than a so-called diverse team.
And that is the big lie of diversity.
They act like it can be done without a sacrifice of merit.
Just like now with the airlines are pretending, yeah, we can have diversity and safety, Dinesh.
We don't have to choose one or the other.
Actually, you do. Whenever you introduce non-merit criteria, you're making people less safe.
There's nothing worse than hearing about people living in pain.
That's why I want to tell you about Keith from Washington and his relief factor story.
After years of activity, from college football to running a martial arts studio at age 51, Keith's body felt like it was wearing out.
So he gave relief factor a try.
Keith says he now has, quote, little to no pain in my knees and highly reduced neck pain.
He's feeling so much better and We're good to go.
Visit relieffactor.com or you can call 800-4-RELIEF. Again, the number 800-4-RELIEF or go to relieffactor.com.
You'll feel the difference.
With each year that passes, the term health goals takes on more and more importance for Debbie and me.
In our younger days, feeling great, feeling healthy was just something we took for granted.
Now it's become an active goal in our life.
That means we do specific things to help us get there.
And one of the things we do is this, balance of nature.
We take it every day, fruits and veggies in a capsule, so easy to take.
Why did we choose balance of nature?
Well, many reasons, but probably one of the most important is that they are always made from whole food ingredients.
Have you ever started getting more serious about your health goals like we have?
I strongly urge you to check out Balance of Nature.
Whether you order online or call them direct, you need to use the promo code AMERICA. You'll get the special offer of 35% off.
So here's the number to call, 800-246-8751.
Again, it's 800-246-8751.
Or go to balanceofnature.com.
When you use discount code AMERICA, you'll get 35% off.
I'm back with Debbie for our Friday roundup and one of the topics we wanted to cover, the border.
And you were telling me about this troop of Republicans that went to the border.
Yeah, about 60 Republicans went to the border.
Speaker Johnson, I believe, I don't remember who the other ones were.
Jordan, Jim Jordan was there.
Basically, they're saying, listen, Mallorcas and Biden, if you don't close the border, we will not...
Fund the government.
So the government will be shut down at the end of January, I think.
So this is, I mean, this always comes down to whether Republicans will carry through with these kinds of pledges.
Because in the past, they don't want to be, quote, blamed and blamed by who?
The media. Right. Blamed by the media for shutting the government down.
And so they wilt at the last moment.
They make a deal and they proceed.
And so you butt, you butt...
Look, I mean, what do you think is the effect of Americans?
Maybe they don't all see it, but I mean, it's all over social media.
It's certainly all over X, you know, the old Twitter platform, where you just see this really horrifying hordes of single males crossing over.
In some cases, you have U.S. defense people cutting the fence or letting them in.
And I can't believe that even ordinary Democrats are okay with this.
I think it's a good thing. Well, I think that it's twofold, right?
It's these dangerous individuals coming from China, the Middle East.
First of all, how is it that they're getting through Mexico, okay?
Right. From China.
So there has to be some kind of a coordinated effort to get these people in here.
And I think it's nefarious.
I think these people are terrorists.
I don't know why else they would be coming in single male from the Middle East and from China if it wasn't to do harm to Americans.
Okay, that's one aspect.
The other aspect is these families.
Hold on, I saw someone make a very insightful phrase about this.
They said, if you're running away from a war, Because a lot of these people say, I'm a refugee, I'm running away from a war.
If you're running away from a war, you take your family.
But if you're going into a war, you go alone as a single male.
So, I mean, isn't that very, like, what's happening, right?
So that's that aspect, which then goes to the issue of, why do we have TSA pre-check?
Why do we have TSA in the first place at an airport?
When we can't go in...
In other words, they're checking us, but they're not checking the outsiders coming in.
And it's almost as if they're sending an implicit message that the ordinary...
It's like with guns. The ordinary American citizen traveling from here to there is a greater potential threat.
It needs to be carefully scrutinized under a microscope.
Whereas the foreign guy...
With the Koran or maybe with the Red Book of Chairman Mao, no problem.
Go right in. We don't even know who you are, but you're fine.
Show up in three years for your court date.
So there's that. And then the other is the families coming in with their children and the spouse and everything.
And they are taking over some areas.
In other words...
You know, ambulance service, hospitals, doctors' offices, social services, schools.
I mean, this is really crazy.
I heard that in New York, they had to close high schools down.
And the kids that go to the high school, American citizens that go to high schools, had to do remote learning because they didn't know where to put these illegals because of the weather.
I mean, we've seen even press conferences with black guys out of Chicago because they've realized that the social services are coming straight out of what used to be allocated to the black community.
And so they've now realized that these people, these illegals, are being prioritized over American citizens.
And that is evidently the Biden administration's policy.
Exactly. I heard that more people, more illegals, are taking over the welfare system than American citizens.
This is catastrophic to America.
This is how America will cease to exist.
It is just unreal.
And as I've told you before, my cousin tells me, there's a lot of people coming in from Venezuela.
These are not...
The top, okay? They're not entrepreneurs.
They're not hardworking people who believe in the American dream.
They're used to getting handouts.
And when the handouts stopped in Venezuela, guess what?
Now they want them here.
So that's who we're getting.
And criminals too, by the way.
We're getting petty thieves.
We're getting rapists.
You name it. We're getting these people from Venezuela that are not good people.
So... This needs to be an issue really front and central.
I think in the 2024 election, it's right up there with the economy, and I think it's a decisive advantage for the Republicans.
Hey, speaking of criminals, let's talk about the...
There have been ongoing revelations this past week on the Epstein files.
Names popping out, Bill Richardson, the former governor of, what was it, New Mexico, who is the guy who is the billionaire from France who was just involved in the most sordid activities.
Of course, Bill Clinton is all over these files, and although they say, well, this is not proof that he did anything illegal, you have pretty clear statements of direct involvement by Bill Clinton, by the victims of Epstein, by the Epstein survivors.
Interestingly, Jack Posobiec pointed out earlier in the week on the show that although Trump's name is in the files, it's always in an exculpatory context.
So Virginia Giuffre goes, oh yeah, I saw Trump there, but no, he wasn't doing anything.
He wasn't involved in any sordid activity.
The left is trying, and this is Jack's view, and I think he's right, that they love to throw Trump in, not just because it's sort of guilt by association.
Here's a photo of Trump with Epstein, but because the left knows that all these are their people.
Their people are the Johns.
Their people are the participators in this pedophile ring.
So they're hoping if they just go, Trump, Trump, Trump, we will go, okay, let's drop the whole matter.
That's their strategy.
Their strategy is to use Trump as a, not a battering ram, but a way to sort of deflect attention from the whole enterprise.
And the whole enterprise is that this is a cultural Marxist pedophile racket.
Right. Right, right.
And, you know, we saw the special, the Netflix special on Epstein and on Ghislaine Maxwell.
Right. Right on both of them.
Well, we knew we were going to be talking about it.
So we sort of binge watched.
We had to do that.
And it's very interesting that The Clinton people say, oh no, Bill Clinton never went to Lolita Island.
But one of the workers at Lolita Island, remember he quit because he saw what was going on and he said, you know what, I have two daughters.
I cannot condone this.
I cannot stay working here anymore.
He himself, who was very credible, saw Bill Clinton multiple times.
So that to me was like, yeah, we know...
What was that in Hillary's America?
Deny, deny, deny.
They love to do that.
And it's worked for them. I mean, because think about it.
Well, he denied the whole Monica Lewinsky thing.
He denied Lewinsky. And even when he was busted, they keep doing it because their belief, and so far completely justified, is like...
That if we keep doing this, the media will rally to our side and we will never end up in handcuffs.
And they haven't. No, no.
They haven't. And to be honest, you know...
And they probably never will. Even Maxwell, you know...
Gillen. Gillen. She said...
That she thinks that he was murdered.
Jeffrey Epstein was murdered, yeah.
He was murdered. And then, you know, there's all these conspiracy theories.
Okay, you know, yes, he was murdered.
No, he wasn't. He's not even dead.
He's, you know, living somewhere and, you know, things will come out later.
So, you know, this is just keeps...
It wasn't that Megyn Kelly said he was alive.
She alluded to it.
But we saw the almost, it looked to me like discolored body of Epstein.
So think of it. I mean, they would have, what did they substitute the body?
Did they have a clone?
Well, look. I guess these days you can orchestrate these things and you made the point to me that because you've actually been in morgues and you've seen cadavers and you're like, they don't look exactly like the person.
In fact, we went to a funeral recently involving your uncle and you were making the point, you're like, I'm not going to go up and sort of examine the body because that's sort of not my uncle.
It's not quite the same guy.
He doesn't even look the same. No.
They don't look the same. But here's the, like, if that did happen, if they, like, killed somebody else, switched the body, he left, I mean...
I mean, I find that a little far-fetched.
I mean, we're living at a time where weird things are time and time again proving that, you know what, that did happen.
Yeah. And most recently, for example, I just saw it today, I guess it was, but it was based upon testimony where Fauci now says that the whole social media six foot distancing was something that, quote, I think he said something like it just kind of showed up.
In other words, there was no basis for it.
In fact, a prominent medical figure named Gonzalez had apparently said that the six foot thing What he was advocating for was based on some New York Times report about something that they were trying out in China.
Again, the New York Times is reporting on something that they may or may not be doing in China.
Okay, this becomes the rational basis for an enforced policy across the entire United States with severe penalties for people who don't do this.
Cell phone geo-tracking being done to monitor people.
How far away they are from each other.
Yeah, we now realize that all of this was kind of based upon fraud.
So I guess what you're saying is that if the government can do something like that, they can pretty much do anything.
Right. Right.
And get away with it on a massive scale.
Yeah. They're able to get away with it.
I mean, what do you think happened to Epstein?
I mean, based on what we know, based on some of the things we've read?
Well, I think that Epstein was a pervert.
And it's pretty clear that so was Ghislaine from her earlier days.
You could see young Ghislaine.
Her friends were saying, you know, she was really a twisted person.
Yeah. So they were a good match for each other in that regard.
But I still think that they wouldn't have...
I can understand that they thought it would be cool to be able to be in a circle where they were able to draw these people into it.
But if it's an elaborate blackmail scheme, it has to have a purpose, right?
So, for example, in The Godfather, they blackmailed the senator from Nevada.
But that's because he's trying to shut down the mafia.
He doesn't want to allow them to own the hotels in Vegas.
So their idea is if he's found with a young girl, He's going to be in our pocket.
We can blackmail him. He will cease to be our opponent.
He will basically do our bidding.
We own him. So again, there's a rational motive, corrupt motive, but a rational motive for why the blackmail is occurring.
Well, what's the motive for why Ghislaine Maxwell, English socialite, and Jeffrey Epstein, up-and-comer in the United...
Why would they want to run an international blackmail ring?
For what? I don't know.
So that is the best argument for saying that if there was a blackmail ring of this scope involving Prince Andrew and involving heads of state and Hollywood moguls, somebody else was running it using Epstein.
And who that was remains, I think, unknown.
Are you ready to lose weight but not sure where to start?
Well, I understand. Debbie and I were right there where you are a year ago.
Let me tell you why we chose PhD weight loss and nutrition and I recommend their program highly.
First, Dr. Ashley Lucas has her PhD in chronic disease and sports nutrition.
Her program is based on years of research and is science-based.
Second, the PhD program starts with nutrition, but it's so much more.
They know that 90% of permanent change comes from the mind and they work on eliminating the reason you gain this the reason you gained this weight in the first place.
There are no shortcuts, no pills, no injections, just solid science-based nutrition and behavior change.
And finally, and probably most importantly, I lost 27 pounds, Debbie 24 pounds.
You can see it. We haven't gained the weight back.
That's because PhD Weight Loss and Nutrition has a lifelong maintenance program.
So if you're ready to lose weight and keep it off, Call 864-644-1900 to get started.
Or you can go online to myphdweightloss.com.
Again, the number to call, 864-644-1900.
Do what I did, what hundreds of my listeners have done.
Call today, 864-644-1900.
I'm discussing the second of C.S. Lewis's four types of love.
We're talking about philia or friendship.
And Lewis makes the observation that friendship is the least natural of all the loves.
Now, in some ways, I think we can say that the fourth type of love, which is agape, agape, charity, charity, We're good to go.
The first one and the third one are, well, almost biologically grounded, aren't they?
Let's look at Storgi.
It comes out of human sociability, out of human familiarity.
You're going to live somewhere, so you're going to have a neighbor.
You're living around humans but also animals, so you relate to dogs and cats.
And sometimes birds, maybe fish.
You have family, and children, of course, can't be raised automatically on their own.
They're raised with their parents, and so you have the storgi, the affection between parents and children.
So this is a biologically grounded survival need.
And similarly, says Lewis, romantic love, although it takes on all kinds of Drapery, all kinds of ornamentation and kind of cultural expression.
Nevertheless, it's grounded in a biological desire.
It's the human desire of the male for the female and vice versa.
It's grounded in the kind of biological necessity of reproducing the species.
And so Storgi and Eros have a foundation, you might say, in nature and in human biology and in human need.
Friendship is a little different.
It's not biologically grounded in that sense.
In fact, you can be produced or reproduced as a human being.
You can grow up in a community.
You can relate to other people in the storgy or affectionate sense.
And you can have no friends.
And the human species would survive and it would continue.
So friendship is sort of an add-on.
It's a, in some ways you could call it the unnecessary love.
And Lewis says that precisely for that reason, the ancients thought it was very special.
It was very unique. Why?
Because you don't sort of need it.
It's not just something that comes out of, well, we're human.
We're kind of like the animals.
Animals travel in a herd.
They have storgi.
We have storgi. Animals have to reproduce.
We reproduce. So human eros is just a modification of that animal sort of desire or sentiment.
And the ancients said, but what about friendship?
Animals aren't really friends.
I mean, they can hang out together a little bit and have a certain camaraderie, but that never rises above Storgi.
It's not really philia, at least in the conventional understanding of the term.
So there's a certain kind of...
So, I think?
And then Lewis, in a sort of a strange twist in the chapter, it came at least for me reading it as a surprise, is he talks about friendship and he realizes he's falling into a kind of an all-male vocabulary.
He's acting as if the only types of friendship are among men, and he's aware of this.
So, he doesn't get to the question that's the question at the heart of when Harry met Sally, which is, can men and women be friends?
He doesn't go there. But where he does go is he says, you know, if two people are really good friends, he goes, in the modern era, there is always some suspicion that they might be homosexuals.
So, he goes there.
And he says, well, people don't necessarily have to say that, but it crosses their mind that, quote, this is, quote, what's really going on.
And for Lewis, this is not only like strange and even a little offensive, but more importantly, Lewis goes, the people who say that have sort of no understanding of friendship.
And that's why they say it, because to them, this friendship is so mysterious and so bizarre that the only way to understand it is to look at it through the lens of the other loves.
And so if it's not Storgi, it seems to be sort of too close to, these guys are really Or these women are really good friends and they seem to be soulmates in a certain sense.
They've got to be gay.
In other words, philia is really another version of eras.
And then Lewis gives a beautiful analogy or a word picture that blows this idea out of the water.
He says, let's think about two friends and let's think about two lovers, two people who have a romantic relationship.
And he goes, you have to picture them in a very different posture.
So here are the lovers and there are countless...
Movies and memes and stories.
And this picture is instantly recognizable to us.
Two people sitting on a riverbank staring at each other.
That is the picture of Eros.
It is that I am focused and devoted to you.
You are focused on and devoted to me.
And that is Eros sort of in a glance.
Well, what is friendship in a glance?
Lewis says friendship in a glance is two people And he goes, At least in the pure sense of the term, it is at the thing that has drawn them together as friends.
And that thing can be something specific.
It can be that, let's just say, for example, a mutual love of American history or even medieval history.
And that's the topic that they always talk about and that's what brought them together.
But their friendship is yoked by this third thing.
The third thing could be broader.
It could be that... The two people are both serious evangelical Christians with an interest in, let's just say, apologetics.
And so that's the topic that brings them together.
That's what they talk about all the time.
But the point about friendship is that it's not that you are there, quote, because of your friend.
And this is kind of why, when I said earlier...
That C.S. Lewis denies this whole notion that I'm going out sort of looking for a friend because he says you can't go out and look for a friend in that way.
It's not the same as saying, you know what, I need to get married, I'm reaching that age, I need to go find someone.
You can do that because you're looking for a person.
But in friendship, you're actually not looking for a person.
In fact, says Lewis, and he gives a sort of very...
Interesting idea. He goes, it's almost like in certain respects we all see ourselves as alone in the world.
And we have certain thoughts and interests that are just ours.
And we say to ourselves, wow, you know, I'm sort of the only guy who thinks like this.
And I almost feel a little weird because I don't...
I don't see other people, at least in the normal run-of-the-mill, I don't see other people sharing this particular outlook or this particular interest or this particular angle on the world.
And then I meet someone, often very casually, and initially it's all storky.
It's like, hello, how you doing?
And yes, you know, you know so-and-so, or you live across the street.
But over time you realize, wait a minute, This guy is just like me in this critical respect.
That in this one respect in which I thought I was kind of a loner or a weirdo, I suddenly realized, no, there are other people who feel this way.
And says Lewis, that even though I'm really happy to have a friend, and the friend is united with me in this common pursuit...
What is unique about friendship is that it's not discriminatory.
It's not in that sense like eras.
In eras, it's like, okay, I've got to go find somebody who's right for me.
But it's only that person.
And no one else can be right for me because this person is right for me and no other.
And that's why in marriage, forsaking all others.
You don't admit a third person into the circle.
And if you do, the circle is broken.
But, says Lewis, that's not the case in friendship.
In friendship... Two is great.
Three is even better. And four is even better than that.
And so, for example, if you find a group of people who are all interested in a common pursuit, you can all become really good friends together.
Friendship doesn't mind addition.
It's not looking for that kind of exclusivity.
So you can see here that in two separate ways...
One is that friendship is not, as an eros, two people looking at each other, but two people looking in the same direction.
And second, in the way that friendship is kind of multiplicative.
I want to have a friend, I'd love to have more friends.
Now, I don't automatically get friends simply by joining a group, because a group is too broad to represent friendship.
Let's just say, for example, I joined the Republican Club.
Well, there are a lot of people who are Republicans like me, but they're not all my friends.
We do think in similar ways about certain things, but out of that group, I might find one or two or three, and I realize, wow...
We have a lot more in common.
It's not just a we're on the same side of the aisle, but we have the same way of looking at the same kinds of issues.
And in fact, if we're watching, let's say, a presidential debate, we all have sort of not...
Identical, but similar reactions.
We think the same things are kind of weird and that's disgusting and I can't believe that he said that or she said that.
And you go, wow, well this guy is more like me than the run-of-the-mill people who are by and large on my side.
So out of the larger club, the larger community, I identify one or two or three who are actually eligible to be my friends.
Hmm. Subscribe to the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast on Apple, Google, and Spotify.
▲
Export Selection