All Episodes
Previous Next
May 20, 2025 - Dinesh D'Souza
55:35
TROPIC OF CANCER Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep1087
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Coming up, David Axelrod thinks we should not be insensitive and stop talking about Biden's problems or Biden's mental state.
I'll tell you why that's nonsense.
I also want to reveal how Trump's speech in Saudi Arabia signals a new turn in U.S. foreign policy.
And author Doron Spielman joins me.
We're going to talk about his remarkable new book on politics, but also on biblical archaeology.
It's called When the Stones Speak.
Hey, if you're watching on YouTube, X or Rumble, listening on Apple or Spotify, please subscribe to my channel.
Hit the subscribe or follow or the notifications button.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast.
America needs this voice.
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.
So we are now hearing from David Axelrod and some other Democrats that we need to back off from Joe Biden.
We need to cool it.
We shouldn't be denouncing this guy.
We shouldn't be mocking his mental state.
We shouldn't be talking about his record.
We shouldn't be discussing the Robert Herr transcripts and, in fact, the Robert Herr audio, where we can hear for ourselves the mumbling, bumbling fool that was and is Joe Biden.
We shouldn't be doing any of this because we have to respect the fact that the guy has Prostate cancer and an aggressive form of cancer that has spread to his bones.
Now, first of all, you remember just a couple of months ago when in his address to the joint session of Congress, Reagan had everybody turn and take a look.
At the 13-year-old young boy, I think his name was D.J. Daniel.
This was a cancer patient.
This is a guy who wanted to be at one of the military academies.
And if you noticed, the Republicans cheered for this guy, and the Democrats were sullenly silent.
Their view was, we don't care about D.J. Daniel.
We don't care about his cancer.
We don't care that he's 13 years old.
We don't care that he's black.
We don't care about any of this.
We are going to ignore this kid.
So the idea that if someone has cancer, they command immediate sympathy, respect, clearly the Democrats were not willing to show any of that.
Now, the disclosure of Biden's cancer is clearly strategic.
And I don't mean that it's somehow strategic for him to get cancer.
That's obviously nonsense.
But he has had cancer, and he's had it for a while.
And not only that, I mentioned that he had had it for a while yesterday, but it got me thinking about it, and it occurred to me he is most likely to have received treatments for it.
And how is that really possible?
The White House doctor came out and said, oh, the guy is perfectly fine, nothing wrong with him whatsoever.
They obviously did not disclose that he has cancer.
They certainly didn't disclose that he was getting cancer treatments.
It would be a little difficult to pull off these cancer treatments in the White House, but you know...
It would not be difficult to pull off the cancer treatments in Delaware.
You might remember that Biden would go regularly to Delaware.
You might remember also that they kept no logs, no records of who showed up in Delaware to see him.
So it is quite possible.
I'm not saying I know this for a fact, but think about it.
You're Biden.
You're the president.
You're getting top-notch medical treatment.
They know you have cancer.
They're not going to say, well, let's leave it untreated.
They're going to treat it.
And they're going to treat it somewhere.
And they're going to, in this case, apparently, do it while not saying anything about it.
So this is a very big scandal.
And neither David Axelrod nor anybody else can shut us up about it because the scandal doesn't go away.
And it doesn't make any sense to say to the American people, you have been lied to at a scale even bigger than you previously suspected.
Because this guy, this figurehead, this dementia patient, in fact, had an aggressive form of cancer while he's in the White House, and we decided that you didn't need to know that.
In fact, it would be better if we didn't tell you.
So this is, if true, and I can't see how it's not true, heads really need to roll here.
And it's now, look, we have a Trump administration, we have all these people that we've put in the cabinet, they have the power, we have a Republican Congress and a Senate, so there is no excuse whatsoever.
At not moving very swiftly to get to the bottom of all this.
Bring in the White House doctor.
Get him to fess up.
Either he's an incompetent fool, which is a possibility, but I suspect he knew.
I suspect many other people knew.
We need to know who knew, who made the decisions not to tell.
Did those come from inside the White House?
Was that delivered by Obama?
Did it come from the outside?
All of these, I think, are not only legitimate, but very urgent questions.
We shouldn't fall for the David Axelrod routine, which is essentially now trying to shut us up.
about seeking the truth.
The dishonest people have unloaded this on us so that they can continue to cover up their dishonesty, and we really shouldn't let them do that.
I've also noticed something that has caused a little bit of ambivalence on social media, but it's something I think that is worth talking about, and that is, should we engage in the familiar Kind of thoughts and prayers for Joe Biden at this time and extend to him a certain olive branch of at least well wishes.
I mention this because certainly a bunch of the January 6th people have been just ripping this guy mercilessly.
Here is Philip Anderson.
Joe Biden got cancer?
Good.
I look forward to seeing him suffer and die.
Biden was an effing dictator who wrongfully persecuted the January Sixers to the point of suicide.
There's another guy who said, hey, I have cancer.
I was denied cancer treatments in prison by the Biden administration.
And when I brought it up, they jeered at me.
They laughed at me.
And so this was the Biden regime's attitude.
So is it the case that when you have wounded these people, Grievously.
They are now expected to turn around and offer, quote, thoughts and prayers for you to, hey, we're sorry to hear you have cancer.
We hope that you get better.
The J6ers, at least some of them, are like, we're not going to do that.
This is a sort of a karma.
And this is actually a very bad guy.
And, you know, we are in the position of the Israelites.
And we see that Goliath is now stricken.
We're not sending thoughts and prayers to Goliath.
We're actually happy that Goliath got a blow to his head.
We're actually happy that Goliath is going to come crashing down.
And it is righteous for us to feel this way.
This is the issue I want to raise because it gets into the whole issue of forgiveness, of turning the other cheek, of how we should think about these kinds of issues.
And as I say, there's a bunch of MAGA people that are right out there on the warpath.
In fact, one woman, Cynthia Holt, she actually made me gulp and almost laugh out loud, but her remark is unbelievably harsh.
She goes, well, I guess we can now see that Hunter Biden is going to try to sort of start banging Jill Biden so he can get future access to crack money.
And I'm like, wow, I mean, that takes things to a whole new level.
And yet as I thought about it, I thought, you know, insane though that is.
That's a possibility.
I mean, that is actually within the character of Hunter Biden.
That's how he operates.
Notice what he did when his brother Beau Biden died.
He immediately started an affair, or he immediately started a relationship with Beau Biden's wife.
These people are morally depraved.
And by the way, I think it comes straight from the top down.
Joe Biden is morally depraved.
So, you know, you've got this guy, Joe Biden.
He's been corrupt his whole career.
So he's an old, wizened crook.
He's also a guy who proved in the last four years that he is a merciless...
A guy with a tyrannical streak.
And even if he wasn't always giving the order, other people were giving it, this guy was completely okay with it.
You notice that when he stood up in that famous speech where he clenched his fists and you've got the kind of red fascist or Nazi background, this guy was just reveling and calling his opponents, his political opponents, traitors.
He had no problem treating conservatives as domestic terrorists.
He had no problem locking up parents, Locking up pro-life activists for doing nothing other than praying in an abortion clinic.
He had no problem with, of course, incarcerating, often throwing into solitary confinement, long periods of incarceration for people who walked into the Capitol and were there for a few minutes peacefully, didn't hurt anybody.
So Biden basically was one of these guys who was a kind of a Nero, meting out draconian punishments.
And actually taking a certain sadistic pleasure in it.
And look, in politics, what goes around does come around.
So I suppose I would say as a Christian at some level, I don't wish cancer on anybody.
And of course, I recognize that in the obvious way, cancer doesn't discriminate.
It's not as if something as serious as cancer goes, well, that's a really good guy.
I'm going to leave him alone.
That's a really bad guy.
You get cancer, and you could have been the best person in the world.
In fact, I think Scott Adams is a really good guy.
The creator of Dilbert announced very recently he has not only cancer, he has prostate cancer.
So look, we can't decide based on the cancer what kind of a person you are.
But I'm making a somewhat different point, and that is that it seems utterly not only human, but appropriate.
To take a certain measure of kind of righteous satisfaction in the fact that, look, this guy who meted out so much injustice and harm, this guy was such a cruel, twisted, wicked man, and we saw it with our own eyes in so many areas.
This guy's now got some problems of his own to deal with.
So we're not judging his soul.
We're leaving all of that between Biden and God.
He'll face judgment the same as everybody else.
I'm just talking about the political response to the situation that we find ourselves in.
All right.
And I want to talk about something a little different, which I haven't commented on yet, and that is the Trump trip to Saudi Arabia, which netted a whole bunch of promised investment, not just from Saudi Arabia, but from other Arab countries.
And I think this trip was significant in two very big ways.
The first one is that Trump figured out a new way to deal with Saudi Arabia, a new relationship with Saudi Arabia, because the old relationship was, in fact, is obsolete.
So what's the old relationship?
Well, the old relationship with Saudi Arabia was based upon the idea of we need Saudi oil.
And we need Saudi oil at a reasonable price.
And so the whole so-called petrodollar system, basically it goes back to a deal cut between the United States and the Saudis in the middle of the 20th century.
But it had to do with the Saudis kind of working closely with the United States.
The Saudis essentially offer a reliable, reasonably priced oil supply.
And the United States in a sense offers Saudi Protection offers the Saudis that the great force of the US military will be brought to bear to protect you and to protect other US allies in the region.
So that was the old arrangement.
But it turns out that there are lots of other countries now that make oil.
The United States has not only oil, but a giant supply of natural gas.
We don't need the Saudis in that way.
And so the new arrangement is really based upon investment.
The Saudis invest with the United States, joint partnerships.
The Saudis put money into the huge areas where the, you can say, the world economy is moving.
Things like artificial intelligence, things like robotics.
All this cutting-edge stuff that puts the Saudis on the front line and on the cutting edge, and essentially it boosts the U.S. comparative advantage vis-a-vis China.
So the Saudis, in a sense, put their money, they bet on the U.S. horse instead of the Chinese horse.
And that is good for the United States, and it's also, of course, it's in other ways good for Saudi Arabia.
And then Trump also said something.
This is my second point.
Area of significance of this trip, and that is that Trump said, listen, we have a different view.
We don't think that the prosperity of your region has been created by so-called nation builders, neocons, liberal non-profits, the World Economic Forum.
Those guys all like to go around talking like they're responsible for fixing the world.
They're not.
In fact, they're responsible basically for lining their own pockets.
So guess who built Amman?
You did, the Jordanians.
Guess who built the United Arab Emirates and the spectacular skyline of the UAE?
You did it.
Guess who built Saudi Arabia and converted it from essentially a desert, a Bedouin desert, to now a glittering society with spectacular cities and industries in places like Riyadh?
You did it.
And then Trump said, you did it.
So Trump here is praising, in a sense, you could call it true diversity.
He's saying there are a lot of things that different people bring to the table in the world.
The Japanese are really good at certain things, and so are the Filipinos, and so are the Asian Indians, and so are the Israelis, and so are the Saudis.
And guess what?
It's not our job to sort of sit in moral judgment of the rest of the world.
You didn't do this.
You didn't do that.
We're in charge.
You've got to listen to us.
Follow our way.
Trump goes, basically, those days are over.
The United States wants to be a friend and ally to everybody in the world who is peaceful, who's productive, who's trying to make the world better.
We want to have essentially trade, but fair trade, trade on even terms with everybody We're not going to be looking to boss you around.
We're not going to be looking to tell you what to do.
We're not going to take credit for your successes.
That credit belongs to you.
Most of us think Medicare is something to deal with someday.
That's kind of how I felt until recently.
Now, I'm 64, and the moment you hit that number, it begins.
You start getting junk mail, robocalls, TV ads with washed-up celebrities, and none of it makes any sense.
The more I looked into it, the clearer it became.
This whole system, this Medicare system, is meant to be confusing.
Why?
Because it lets big insurers profit from your uncertainty.
Now, in fact, the DOJ just filed a major lawsuit accusing some of the largest Medicare brokers of misleading seniors, steering them into plans that paid the highest kickbacks, not the best coverage.
That's why I turned to Chapter.
Now, Chapter is independent.
Their advisors walk you through every option.
They're unbiased, pressure-free.
They help you find the plan that's right for you.
and it's all at no cost.
So if you're turning 65, or even if you're over 65, do what I did, call chapter.
Here's how you do it.
Dial pound, 250, and then say Dinesh.
Don't let big insurance decide for you.
Take control.
Call chapter today.
That's pound 250.
Keyword, Dinesh.
We talked about this yesterday, but this July there's a global summit of BRICS nations in Rio de Janeiro, a block of emerging superpowers including China, Russia, India, Iran.
They're meeting with the goal of displacing the U.S. dollar as the global currency.
This is called the Rio Reset.
Now, as BRICS nations push forward with their plans, global demand for U.S. dollars could decrease.
Bringing down the value of the dollars in your savings.
While this transition won't happen overnight, the Rio Reset in July marks a pivotal moment when BRICS objectives may move decisively from theoretical possibility toward reality.
You need to learn if diversifying your savings into gold, like I did, is right for you.
Birch Gold Group can help you move your hard-earned savings into a tax-sheltered IRA in precious metals.
Claim your free information kit on gold by texting my name, Dinesh, to 989898.
Birch Gold has an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
Tens of thousands of happy customers.
Let Birch Gold arm you with a free, no-obligation information kit on owning gold before July and the Rio reset.
So go ahead, text Dinesh to 989898 today.
Guys, I'm delighted to welcome to the podcast a new guest.
It's Doron Spielman.
He is a former spokesman for the IDF, the Israel Defense Forces.
He is also the author of a remarkable book, which I've just read, and it's new, and you've got to get it.
And here it is.
I'm going to hold it up.
When the Stones Speak, with a very provocative subtitle, namely, What Israel's Enemies Don't Want You to Know.
Doron has worked for two decades at the City of David as one of its top officials, and he's also a graduate of the Churchill National Security Program, a senior fellow at the Herod Center in Jerusalem, a graduate of the University of Michigan.
By the way, you can follow him on X at Doron, D-O-R-O-N, Spielman, S-B-I-E-L-M-A-N, and the book, as I mentioned, When the Stones Speak.
Doran, welcome.
Thanks for joining me.
We had the privilege.
Well, we met in Israel.
In fact, we were at the City of David filming there, and you walked by with, and our friend Zev Ornstein connected the two of us.
So I'm delighted now to be chatting with you.
You're on your book tour.
The book is doing really well.
Number 10, I understand, right now on Amazon, which is remarkable.
Particularly for a book here that is historical, that's archaeological, also, of course, political.
Let's begin just with the title, When the Stones Speak.
What do you mean by that?
You know, Dinesh, first of all, thank you so much for having me on.
It's a really pleasure to be with you.
We found in the City of David, and for your viewers, the City of David is, in fact, biblical Jerusalem that was buried underneath the ground like Atlantis.
You were there and you saw how we are literally excavating this buried city.
One of the most incredible discoveries we made that led to the phrase of the book, When This Don't Speak, were the actual seals, the clay imprints of the signet ring of the people who tried to kill the prophet Jeremiah.
Yuchal ben Shlamiah and Gedaliah ben Pashchor, two people that are actually in the Bible.
We found the imprint of their signet rings on the site.
And when this happened, a lot of people jumped on the excavation, both positive, Praising everyone who wants to connect with the Bible.
You have this place.
And, unfortunately, negative.
And the negative people that jumped on the site specifically challenged our archaeologist, Dr. Eilat Mazar, a blessed memory, who was at the forefront of this excavation.
And they said to her, how do you know it's actually them?
How do you know this is a palace?
How do you know all these questions?
And Dr. Mazar had a phrase.
She would say, you know, we can argue.
We can argue politics.
We can argue history.
But at the end of the day, Let the stones speak.
Let them tell the story.
And it cuts through everything.
And I chose that title, Denish, for the book because at the end of the day, with all the challenges of Israel being called colonialists and Jews and Christians being called outsiders and everything happened in the Middle East, at the end of the day, you know what?
We just have to let those stones tell their story.
And when we do, we get clarity.
That's beyond the headlines.
It's beyond fake news.
It's just the truth.
Let's put what you said into a little bit of slow motion because there's so much there.
I want to unpack it a little bit at a time.
You mentioned Dr. Eilat Mazar, her father, Dr. Benjamin Mazar, a renowned archaeologist from Hebrew University in Jerusalem.
The granddaughter followed in the grandfather's footsteps, became an eminent archaeologist in her own right, is also credited with, in a sense, discovering David's palace.
You mentioned the story about these two seals.
Now, one of them...
The seal, Jehukal, son of who?
Shlamiyah.
That's right.
Let's talk about that discovery.
Basically, you're digging in the city of David.
You find a seal.
These are clay seals.
And the clay is somehow preserved over time, in part because of fires that have kind of hardened the clay.
And the clay seal has a seemingly obscure name on it.
Talk about that.
Well, it began, Dr. Mazar actually called me.
First of all, we were sitting in my office when Dr. Mazar presented her discovery that she thought the Palace of King David was literally beneath the floor of my office.
This goes back to 2004.
And she had a diagram and a pillar that had been found from the Jebusites.
I'm sorry, from the Phoenicians.
And in the Bible, it says the Phoenicians built King David's palace.
So she asked us to take apart our office, and crazy enough, we did.
And she digs down, and she finds this palace underneath the ground.
Now, the seal, and she called me when she found it.
She first couldn't get the name.
She said, I have to very carefully melt down the dirt without destroying the seal, which is made of clay, like you mentioned.
Hardened, by the way, because of the fire of the destruction.
of the first temple by the Babylonians in 586 BC.
It was that fire that they lit to this house that actually burnt the seal into a hard seal.
And she called me the next day and she said, go grab your Bible.
So I grabbed my Bible and she asked me to turn to the book of Jeremiah.
And in the book of Jeremiah, Jeremiah is the savior of the orphans and the widows.
And he basically tells the king, which is the last king from King David, his name is Sedekiah.
He says, listen.
You're a Jewish king.
This is the Bible.
If you want to rule, your power doesn't come from man.
Your power comes from God.
He will protect you only if you protect the orphans and the widows, and you're not doing it.
Now the king's like, listen, I'm loaded, buddy.
I've got the wealth.
Get this guy out of here.
As they're pulling Jeremiah away, he says, the enemy will come from the north to destroy you.
So now we fast forward.
Five, six years.
And Babylon is descended from the north.
They've gobbled up the entire Middle East.
And now the king gets religious.
So he probably puts on his yarmulke, which he didn't have at the time.
And he sends his messengers to get a blessing.
And Jeremiah says, listen, you want a blessing from me?
Five years too late.
Give up.
They'll take over your city and eventually you'll be redeemed.
Fight and you'll be destroyed.
So the messengers come back to the king and they say, listen, the soldiers heard what he said to us and they're all fleeing the city.
They said, let's kill the prophet.
So he says to the head of the servants, he says, okay, go do whatever you want.
They try to kill the prophet Jeremiah.
God has him saved.
This messenger who ordered the killing, the assassination of the prophet Jeremiah, is Yuchal ben Shlomiah.
He is the actual seal we found.
And one of the other three people he brought with him to try to kill the prophet was Gedaliyaul, the son of Pashur, the other seal we found.
So the first time in archaeological history, Dinesh, We find two seals from the book of Jeremiah, chapter 37, in the same line next to each other in the same structure.
If that's not proof that the Bible is alive and that you can dive into the history in Jerusalem and on a very basic level that the Jewish people are indigenous to the land of Israel, pretty much like almost anyone is not indigenous to any land in the world.
I mean, we read the same language, same religion.
That is what the proof of Yuchal really showed.
There are many people, and this is really over the centuries.
It's not from the early centuries because I think that this skeptical attitude toward the Bible really began after the Enlightenment.
It gathered steam in the 19th century and the 20th century.
And there were a lot of people who said about the Bible, we don't have any independent evidence outside of the Bible for like King David.
Or Jeremiah, or Hezekiah, or Isaiah, or Zedekiah, the king that you mentioned.
So we think that either these guys are mythical, they were made up sort of the way that perhaps people would say the Greek mythology was made up, either that or...
The Bible was written much, much later, and what it really did is it fictionalized these events.
I think what you just said blows both these theories out of the water because, first of all, let's just say that some guys 200 years later or 300 years later decided, let's just go back and make up a bunch of stuff with this guy Jeremiah and this guy...
They wouldn't know what names to make up.
They wouldn't know the kind of very minute details that it turns out now are verified in the archaeological record.
So in other words, I think that the kind of startling nature of these findings is something that did it dawn on you immediately and on Dr. Mazar that you're actually bringing to life, as you said.
figures that at least skeptical scholarship had considered to be like dead and buried, or as we now say, debunked.
It's such a good question.
I'll tell you, you know, when she called us and then we were sitting in the conference room looking at the discovery and debating how we were going to release it, at this time, didn't she have to understand, the city of David was a hole in the ground.
I mean, we were a group of 20 people that believed...
In the importance of unearthing this site of ancient Jerusalem.
But there were many people who thought this was crazy.
There were Arab homes and Jewish homes in the area.
It's dangerous.
And when she found it, there was an idea.
But it's funny, when you're in it, you don't notice.
I'll tell you when we notice the Danish.
That year, after Elat's discovery was announced, about 100,000 people came to the city of David, which was more than we had had all the years combined.
Watching these people come, and I don't mean religious people.
I don't mean people with yarmulkes in their heads and, you know, the Pope.
Average person coming through the site, and time and time again, they would look at the Bible that I had in my hand when I was guiding, and they would say, it's real?
And I became so affected by that, I realized that, like me, the Bible was on a dusty shelf.
The paradigm had been shifted for everyone who came to the site.
And yes, I think you're right.
What it did was it took the kind of Atlantis, the mythical side of the Bible, irrelevant, mythical, not real, and it put it on the table in front of us and said, this is true.
And for the state of Israel, Dennis, with everything we're facing, and for Christians and Jews and supporters of Israel throughout the world, I think, this really shows that the roots of America...
The roots of America are founded on, and the roots of Israel are real.
Isaiah was a real person.
We found King Hezekiah's seal, who was interacting with him.
We found a seal that says Isaiah.
Elat Mazar found one.
And when you hear these people on the Liberty Bell, we should proclaim liberty, and all these things, they're real events, and it just is an outstanding affirmation of what it is to be an American and what it is to be an Israeli.
I mean, I'll turn to the politics in a minute, Doran, but I just want to...
Push this idea a bit forward, right?
Let's say, for example, that you are an American Christian or an American Jew, and you've been for years, if not decades, you're going to church, you have pastors who are preaching, or let's say you're an American pastor.
You've been talking about this book, the Bible.
You lead people right into the Old Testament.
You start talking about the various stories there.
It's almost like, I think, You're talking about Santa Claus, right?
And pardon this sort of analogy, but it comes from my wife, but I think it works in this context, and I don't mean it, of course, in a trivial way, right?
And now, you suddenly have a bunch of scholars who tell you that, you know, we've been up at the North Pole, and we found evidence of Santa Claus.
In other words, Santa Claus is not just this sort of fictional figure.
We've met Santa Claus.
We have proof that Santa Claus exists and that these fairy tales, if you will, about Santa Claus, well, it turns out they're true.
What I think is the normal thing is for every Jew, every Christian, every church to be like shouting this information from the rooftops, which is, hey guys, you know what?
Hezekiah, here's his seal.
You know what?
Jeremiah?
There was a real Jeremiah.
And the reason we know is that the otherwise unknown guy who was trying to kill Jeremiah, here's his seal.
And that means not only is Jeremiah real, but so is Zedekiah.
And these events of the Bible are previously described as fictional.
Are now anchored in history and in reality.
And so our faith is resting on an archaeological, not just a logical, but an archaeological foundation.
And yet, to this day, we don't hear that.
Why is that?
You know, Dennis, you really hit the nail on the head, and I speak a lot about this in the book.
The story of the city of David was obscured.
Purposely obscured.
As we uncovered all these discoveries, Israel's enemies really saw this as an enormous, enormous threat.
And they did everything they could, Dinesh, to prevent this story from coming out.
And they were largely successful for a number of years.
Meaning, when we discovered these seals, a couple years later, I was on 60 Minutes.
And Leslie Stahl was the person who interviewed me, and she comes to the site.
And she interviews me, and she said to me, Daron, I brought my husband for the first time I've ever brought him anywhere to any excavation, because he wanted to come.
She said, show us where you found King David's palace.
So I'm showing them, and I show them pictures of the seals.
He's crying.
She's blown away.
The cameras go on.
It was like windshield wipers.
She became just a cold monster the entire 15-minute episode.
On the city of David, Dennis, she never mentioned the seals one time.
She took a Palestinian narrative, and that is what she pushed.
Only what did you not find?
How you're taking over the land?
It's a settlement enterprise.
And it was the attempt to obscure it, because if you really admit what you're saying, which is the truth, that you found the source of the Bible in the city of David, well then, the Jewish people are indigenous.
And if we are indigenous to the land, and if Christians, the story is indigenous to the land, Well, that deals a pretty big blow to all those who are claiming that that's not true.
And there was a purposeful rebearing, an attempt to rebury the city of David by Israel's enemies.
I want to turn to that in just a moment.
I've been looking at some of the archaeological descriptions, Doron, of some of these stunning biblical discoveries.
And what I find really downright crazy about them is that They miss the whole import of the story.
They focus on what you would only have to regard as massive trivialities.
And so, for example, just to take a good example, you find the...
I'll use an example which we visited in Israel recently.
The childhood home of Jesus.
And on top of that, the early Christians built a church.
That church was destroyed.
And then later, the Byzantines built a church.
And then the Crusaders built a church on top of that.
So now imagine that you find the childhood home of Jesus and an archaeologist writing about it.
And he goes, you know, notice the Roman style of these particular artifacts.
And now we want to draw attention to the way that the Byzantines and blah, blah, blah, and look at the columns and look at the capitals and look at the color and the mosaics and so on.
And you're like, wait a minute.
The only reason that these people built here is that they...
We're building on top of what they believe to be a sacred site.
And so, this is a pattern I'm describing.
I'm just giving a single example, but I think you know what I mean.
It's kind of like the archaeologists being secular are almost embarrassed at the discovery and have to give you archaeological gobbledygook instead of saying, guess what?
King David, look at these huge columns.
Look at these huge pillars.
No ordinary person lived here.
This stuff has been dated to the time of King David.
This was King David's palace, for God's sake.
And I think this is part of the reason why it's obscure.
It's almost like both from the scholarly community, and of course you mentioned the other reason, from the political community, there are motives to hide the truth, aren't there?
Absolutely.
And in the scholarly community, you're so correct, there's a school in Israel that are called the Minimalists, and the head of this group, which really didn't want to use the Bible as an archaeological record, his name is Professor Israel Finkelstein.
And just to support what you're saying, he said, when I hear people go on the stage and speak about the Bible, I want to die from embarrassment.
And that's an exact quote.
This secular ideology that threw away religion and the Bible all at once, when they are confronted exactly with anything like this, they dig down into these details and...
It really obscures the truth.
And it's taken a long time for them to realize that you can be comfortable with the Bible.
You don't have to be afraid of the Bible.
And part of the reason is, honestly, is because of the American Christian community and Christians worldwide who don't have this fear complex, kind of of the Jew in kind of the ghetto.
You know, it's this ghetto mentality.
We don't want to be too sure.
Maybe they'll hate us.
No.
Christian people come to the site.
Non-Jews come to the site.
People as yourself, they say, this is incredible.
And now I've seen a transition where even Tel Aviv University, which was the leadership of the school you're talking about, has now said that the pendulum is swinging back.
And I quote them from Yovagodot, that the time period of the Bible is once again what we are finding in the city of David.
And I am seeing that they are beginning to love what they're doing.
It's so important what you're saying, because Israel's enemies are going to go back there.
I'm sorry to go back there, but they so proudly speak about a story, oftentimes it has no basis.
Some of it has a basis.
And on the other hand, we have these archaeologists that are talking about the minutiae.
But I'm seeing a transition, and this show and what your people are doing, and also my book, I hope, that was one of the reasons for writing the book.
This is the most amazing story, maybe for the last 500 years.
The Bible is alive.
It's actually happening.
You can come and touch it.
Dora, I think the political implication of what you're saying couldn't be more clear and is in fact encapsulated in the subtitle of your book, What Israel's Enemies Don't Want You to Know.
What is it that Israel's enemies don't want people to know?
They don't want us to know that the Jewish people of today are indigenous to the land of Israel.
There's been an eighth front to this war that we're all seeing.
It has been the calculated erasure of Jewish and Christian history by certain leaders of the Palestinians, Hamas, and the Muslim Brotherhood.
And I'll give you an example.
On the Temple Mount on Fridays, the chief Imam, Ikri Masabri, constantly says, any stone you overturn in Jerusalem, not a single one of them has a Jewish marking.
This was a mosque, is a mosque, and will be a mosque.
Even a few weeks ago, you've got Mahmoud Abbas who said if there was a temple, it was in Yemen.
This kind of calculated denial of our history is because they wanted to cut the idea that the Jews are indigenous to the land of Israel and established a caliphate, that there's always been a caliphate here.
And what the city of David does is it shatters that myth.
shatters the myth of the Palestinian originality as if there was no Judaism or Christianity, because when they went after that, they went after saying Jews are not indigenous, while they went after Judaism, the Bible,
The reason why we say what Israel's enemies don't want you to know is they did everything to try to silence the story because they realized if we admit that the Jews were here, how can we ask us to give up our biblical homeland?
Call us How can you be a colonialist or a settler in your own historic land?
And that is what this book really sets out to show with the beauty of the archaeology.
Because when you let the stone speak, that's the story that they tell.
And I think Christians should realize the startling consequences of buying into the anti-Israel narrative.
Because let's put it this way.
If the Jews weren't there, then the Hebrew scriptures are untrue.
And if the Hebrew scriptures are untrue, then the Christian scriptures, which are built on top of the Hebrew scriptures, are untrue.
So what is at stake here is not merely Israel's political identity, but the very status of the Jewish and the Christian faith.
Wouldn't you agree?
Absolutely.
You encapsulated it.
Precisely.
That's exactly what they are out to destroy.
And therefore, when we...
Read, and when we understand, I tell people, they ask me, what should I do?
I said, don't only buy a book.
Read the book.
Tell the book.
Share the story that you're saying, because at the end of the day, it's our children.
It's our friends.
We need to represent the truth.
It's a mission, I think, for every single person, because if they just talk and there's no interruption, they take over campuses, then we're all at risk.
It's time to stand strong and say, no, the Bible's true.
Our faith is true.
We are all indigenous to the land of Israel.
Don't try to just erase our history.
Guys, great stuff.
I've been talking to Doran Spielman.
I've read the book, It's Awesome, When the Stones Speak.
Doran was there.
I mean, Doran, you were in the pit.
You were part of these digs.
You had direct interaction with the late professor and Dr. Elliot Mazar.
And the book tells the story, I think, in a very engaging, readable, and as we've tried to discuss, both political and religiously significant way.
Thank you very much, Doran Spielman, for joining me.
Thank you, Dinesh, and thank you for all of the work you do for us, for humanity, for always speaking the truth.
As you guys know, our friend Mike Lindell has a passion to help everyone get the best sleep of your life, and he didn't stop by creating just the best pillow.
He created also the best bedsheets ever.
They look and feel great.
I love them.
It means a better night's sleep for me, which is crucial for my Busy schedule.
And Mike is offering the best deal on these Geezer Dream bedsheets.
Any size, any color, just $49.98.
Wow, that's right.
You can get queens or kings, split kings, cal kings, any size, any color, just $49.98.
Order now because when they're gone, they're gone.
Also, for a limited time, when you order over $100, you get $100 in free digital gifts.
So time to move on this.
Call 800-876-0227.
The number again, 800-876-0227.
Or you can go to MyPillow.com.
You need to use the promo code.
It's D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
So make sure you use Dinesh's promo code.
You get the amazing offer, $49.98 on the Giza Dream Sheets.
Any size, any color.
If you'd like to support my work, the best way to do it, check out my Locals channel.
Consider becoming an annual subscriber.
I post a lot of exclusive content there, including content you won't find anywhere else, so content that's sometimes censored on other social media platforms.
On Locals, you get Dinesh Unchained, Dinesh Uncensored.
You can also interact with me directly.
I do a live weekly Q&A every Tuesday.
So tonight, 8 p.m. Eastern, no topic is off limits.
I've also got a movie page up on Locals with a bunch of films, documentaries, feature films.
2,000 Meals is up there.
Police State, Vindicating Trump.
I recently added Trump Card.
And a wonderful political thriller, a feature film.
It's called Infidel Starring Jim Caviezel.
Hey, if you're an annual subscriber, you can stream and watch this movie content for free.
It's included with your subscription.
So check it out.
Go to dinesh.locals.com.
I'd love to have you along for this great ride.
Again, it's dinesh.locals.com.
Drawing on my book, Ronald Reagan, How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader, I am talking about Reagan moving into the great campaign against Jimmy Carter to assume the presidency.
This is the 1980 presidential election.
Now, as I mentioned last time, there were a number of people who prepared the ground for Reagan.
One of them was Jack Kemp, the congressman from New York.
By his own description, a supply-sider, supply-side economics.
And supply-side economics was a kind of maverick movement that arose in resistance to Keynesian economics.
Keynesian economics was all about manipulating aggregate demand.
Aggregate demand is essentially the demand side of the economy.
For example, people demand food.
They demand cars.
The demand side is what comes from the consumer.
The supply side is what comes from the producer.
And essentially, supply side economics is the argument that what matters is not so much to add up everybody's consumer demand, but to try to see how you can create incentives for producers to make more, to make better things, to make cheaper things.
How do you motivate?
How do you incentivize the producer?
How do you generate the right kind of competition that produces better products, more products, cheaper products, better options for the consumer?
So the writer Jude Winisky, who worked at the Wall Street Journal, had published a book, The Way the World Works, kind of an immodest title, to be sure.
So this was the supply-side movement, and Reagan knew about it.
Reagan himself wasn't really kind of a supply-sider in that Reagan wasn't deep in the weeds of economics at all.
But Reagan knew certain key things.
One is he knew that when you have inflation, it not only makes you pay more for things, it also pushes you into higher tax brackets.
Because remember, when you have inflation, not only do prices go up, but so do wages.
So let's just say prices go up 30% or 20%.
Over a couple of years, your wages go up 20%, so you feel like, hey, I'm in the same position.
But no, because before that, you were making $30,000 and you were paying, let's say, a 15% or 10% tax rate.
Now you're making more and you've been kicked up into a higher rate.
So Reagan knew that without, through no fault of their own, people were being pushed into higher tax brackets.
Second, Reagan knew that when you cut taxes, you give people more of an incentive to produce.
Why?
Because they're giving less of their profit to the government.
And so this was, for Reagan, a little bit of a no-brainer.
But you have to realize that the idea of tax cutting was, in fact, not only unfamiliar to the Republican Party, but the Republican Party in terms of its establishment.
Let's remember, Reagan ultimately created a new establishment, but before him there was an old establishment that went back to Ford and Nixon and Eisenhower.
And the Republican establishment at that time regarded tax cuts as a bad thing.
This seems almost outrageous and shocking, but by and large, the Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility.
The idea being, hey, Democrats, you want to raise taxes to pay for all your welfare programs?
Guess what?
I'm sorry, you want to spend money to pay for all your welfare programs?
Guess what?
We need to come together and raise taxes to pay for all that because we don't want to be fiscally irresponsible.
So this was the dividing line between the two parties.
The party of Santa Claus.
I'm using now Jack Kemp's analogy.
And the Republicans were the party of Scrooge.
Santa Claus wants to give everybody goodies, presents.
Santa Claus is the likable guy.
Everybody's excited to see Santa Claus.
Scrooge is the guy who goes, wait a minute, who's going to pay for this?
That was the Republican Party.
And so you can see right here, is it any surprise that Republicans had been losing elections for 50 years?
Going back to the 1930s with this kind of, whatever you think about this economically, it's political idiocy, isn't it?
Which is sort of like, you be the good cop, I'll be the bad cop.
And then we'll go and see which of us is more likable.
Which of us has a better popularity rating?
Well, obviously it's going to be the good cop.
And so the Democrats had the Republicans sort of just where they wanted them.
The Republicans, in a sense, would be digging their own grave politically.
We are the party of tax cuts, of economic growth, of motivating the entrepreneur.
And the Democrats are the party of, you could call it, group interests.
Who are the groups?
Well, there are the unions.
There are the feminists.
There are the blacks.
All of these groups make these group demands on the Democrats.
And the Democrats are, well, it's not so different from now.
The Democrats are still the party of group interests.
They think of it more now in terms of identity politics, but it's the same general idea.
And Reagan countered that by saying, well, we, the Republicans, we're not the party of group interests.
We're the party of shared values.
Shared values.
Now, Reagan specified what these values are, and they were specifically five.
Family, work, neighborhood, peace, freedom.
And so notice that Reagan here is not coming out as a kind of radical individualist, because what is family?
Well, family is a kind of network.
What is work?
Well, you generally don't work all by yourself.
Mostly.
What is neighborhood?
Hey, life is not just about me, but guess what?
There's a guy who lives next door, another person down the street.
And so we live in neighborhood and community.
Neighborhood is a kind of synecdoche or a representation here of community.
Peace.
We want to live in peace.
We want to have security.
That's another word for peace.
And freedom.
So Reagan...
He laid out the foundation stones, I think, of conservatism and of the new Republican Party that he was in the process of creating.
And Reagan also wanted to...
His campaign of 1980 was based on three very clear pillars.
What were they?
One, let's increase defense spending.
We have to stop the Soviet Union in its tracks.
We have to achieve peace through strength.
This has been straight picked up by Trump, and peace through strength has been a slogan that we've been hearing now really since Reagan.
It was echoed by George H.W. Bush, also by W, and it's also echoed by Trump.
Second, Reagan said, across the board tax cuts.
And the key point here is across the board, because Reagan realized, if I give a tax cut to this group or that group or this guy or that guy, Other people are going to say, what about me?
So the fair thing to do is to give everybody a proportionate tax cut, not an identical tax cut in terms of dollars, because rich people pay more, so they're going to save more when you cut taxes.
So a 30% across-the-board tax cut is what Reagan pushed for.
He also said we need to have government policies that affirm traditional values, common sense values.
And this is the cultural conservatism that was a new thing in the Republican Party.
If you had talked to Eisenhower about cultural values, he would be like, what are you even saying?
Eisenhower's conservatism was foreign policy and domestic policy.
Same with Nixon.
Foreign policy, domestic policy.
Now, Nixon had certain cultural...
He didn't like the hippies.
He was for law and order.
But the idea of having a social and cultural agenda that identified specific issues, pornography, prayer in schools, the idea of the traditional family.
Opposition to abortion.
All of those kinds of specific things knitted together in a cultural agenda.
This is a product of the Reagan years.
And Reagan basically was replying to Carter, who had talked about a malaise in the country.
Reagan's basically saying, yeah, if there's a malaise, it's not a malaise on the part of the people.
There's nothing wrong with the American people.
There is something wrong with the American government.
There is something wrong with the failure of leadership, and particularly of presidential leadership.
And the Carter people, by the way, were not impressed by any of this at all.
I'll dive tomorrow into the actual campaign, but it should be noted that from Carter's point of view, the Carter people were just excited, elated, that Reagan was the nominee.
Why?
Because they thought he's the weakest guy in the Republican field.
Any of the other guys would be stronger.
And the Carter people thought, listen, we don't need to defend our policies.
We don't need to explain stagflation.
Why?
Because if the best experts can't solve it, the problem is basically insoluble.
Certainly, Reagan's not going to offer any kind of a solution.
They said, let's just make Reagan the issue.
What do we know about Reagan?
What can we say about Reagan?
He's a washed-up actor.
He has no experience.
He doesn't know what he's doing.
He doesn't know what he's talking about.
▲
Export Selection