RFK made a BOMBSHELL announcement today when he revealed that not only was he dropping out of the race, but was also ENDORSING President Trump in his presidential bid — and vowed to go after big pharma if put in the position to do so by Trump. Did you trust the plan, anon?Show more The legendary Viva Frei joins us tonight to talk about all this and more on tonight’s NIGHTLY OFFENSIVE!
__
⇩SUPPORT THE SHOW⇩
➤ JOIN CENSORED TV: Watch this FULL EPISODE ad free + EXCLUSIVE content at https://censored.tv/ promo code “OFFENSIVE” for 20% - Keep free speech media alive!
➤ JOIN THE PRIVATE LIVE COMMUNITY: https://elijahschaffer.locals.com/
➤ NOTICER T-SHIRTS / MERCH: https://slightlyoffensive.com/
__
⇩ SHOW SPONSORS⇩
➤ RAMP HEALTH: Unlock your calmest and most confident self with the perfect blend of 6 natural, clinically proven ingredients - and start excelling in social situations INSTANTLY with Ramp Health’s B4. Feel like your BEST self for up to 5 hours with just one packet! Properly dosed and expertly formulated by a master biohacker, B4 comes in 6 delicious flavors, and is as easy as mixing into a glass or bottle of water - go to https://ramphealth.co/slightlyoffensive and use promocode OFFENSIVE to get 15% OFF!
➤ THE WELLNESS COMPANY: Be prepared for what is coming next! Order your MEDICAL EMERGENCY KIT ASAP at https://www.twc.health/offensive and enter code OFFENSIVE for 10% off. The Wellness Company and their licensed doctors are medical professionals you can trust, and their medical emergency kits are the gold standard to keeping you safe! Again, that’s https://www.twc.health/offensive , promo code OFFENSIVE.
➤ UNDERTAC: Get the best pair of boxers in America that are breathable, don't ride up, and last the test of time. Plus, they are battle forces tested. http://www.undertac.com
for 20% off with the offer code OFFENSIVE20. Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back.
___
⇩FOLLOW VIVA FREI ⇩
➤ X: https://x.com/thevivafrei
➤ RUMBLE: https://rumble.com/user/vivafrei
➤ LOCALS: https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/
___
⇩ELIJAH’S SOCIAL MEDIA ⇩
➤ X: https://X.com/ElijahSchaffer
➤ RUMBLE: https://rumble.com/c/SlightlyOffensive
➤ INSTA: https://www.instagram.com/slightlyoffensive.tv
➤ TELEGRAM https://t.me/SlightlyOffensive
➤ GAB: https://gab.com/elijahschaffer
__
➤BOOKINGS + BUSINESS INQUIRIES: [email protected]
__
⇩EXCELLENT RESOURCES FOR KIDS ⇩
Head to https://bit.ly/teach-freedom for a unique book series that introduces the important ideas that schools no longer teach. Show less
I want everyone to know that I am not terminating my campaign.
I am simply suspending it and not ending it.
My name will remain on the ballot in most states.
If you live in a blue state, you can vote for me without harming or helping President Trump or Vice President Harris.
In Red State, the same will apply.
I encourage you to vote for me.
And if enough of you do vote for me, and neither of the major party candidates win 270 votes, which is quite possible, in fact, today our polling shows I'm tying at 269 to 269.
And I could conceivably still end up in the White House in a contingent election.
But in about 10 battleground states, where my presence would be a spoiler, I'm going to remove my name.
And I've already started that process and urge voters not to vote for me.
So he is so serious about this that he said, hey, I got to step aside because by stepping down or stepping to the right, we might be able to guarantee a victory for Donald Trump and stop Kamala.
But why does he think she's so evil?
What's going on here?
I have a guest coming in the studio in just a moment.
Viva Fry, former lawyer, podcast host, a bit of a professional yapper like myself, and an expert on all things political and legal.
It is approximately 7:13 p.m. Eastern Time in the United States.
I've really come to appreciate the historical difference between America and Canada, which explains a bit of the current culture.
And now I knew, I've developed, or not developed, but I've been taught a new word, selection bias, which is people who participate in experiment will taint the outcome of it.
I knew the concept, but the bottom line to this is we have a history, a different history in Canada and America.
One fought for their freedoms from the red coats and the other one sought refuge with the red coats.
And over time, you know, the culture of Canada is polite, subservient, deferring to the authority of government and, you know, basically regarding rights as privileges, not as fundamental God-given rights, like in the States.
And the selection bias that that creates in Canada is people who move, who emigrate, go to Canada versus the States.
You say, do I want to go to a country that's polite, polite to our neighbors, subservient, or do I want to go to the crash brass, is it brash, crass, America?
And so there's sort of a selection bias as to who decides to go where when they leave their own countries.
But that's a long-winded answer of saying there is definitely a cultural difference between Canada and the States.
We're seeing it sort of play out now in real time in terms of the majority looking down at the states and saying, oh, fearful of Trump and all this stuff.
And then you're down in the States and half of America is still loving that freedom and still regards it as a God-given right and not a state-bestowed privilege.
Yeah, you know, it is a real stark difference is the mindset.
You know, because I think a lot of times people look at Europe and they look at the United States and they're going, oh, you know, the United States is so bad.
What they're talking about is black neighborhoods in cities.
And you know what?
Even black people that don't live in those neighborhoods realize that they're bad.
But America, most of America is a lot nicer than Europe, actually, a lot nicer than Canada and Australia because the people have this idea where they care more about their own value, their property, their family.
And this is my personal opinion from traveling around the world, is there's this sort of dignity that people have and in their identity.
And so they have guns.
They care about protecting their family.
They care about having ownership of all their own things.
In Australia, you can't even cut down a tree.
You can own hundreds of acres.
They won't even let you cut down a tree.
If you build a house without every permit, they'll literally come and knock it down.
Like they want to make sure that you know that there is no autonomy, that you are not on your own, that you don't have your own liberty.
And I think that, you know, people don't realize the value and the beauty that sometimes when you allow certain freedoms in your country, some people might abuse them.
But the thing is that most of us don't.
And the United States is the best country in the world, by the way, because also, fuck you, to everyone else in the world.
No, I'm kidding.
But it's genuinely, this is the greatest country.
And I don't know how anyone can think differently if they've traveled anywhere else.
I do agree that it's the, I mean, I feel guilty saying it because Canada is a beautiful country.
It just happens to have gotten ruined by the government.
But the governments ruin countries, not the people.
And the government ruins countries, not the geography.
America is, it's a very interesting country.
One thing I've never fully appreciated until I've come down here is you touch on it a bit with the, you know, the statistics, demographics of crime, crime neighborhoods.
And the thing that we do not have in Canada is that type of racial conflict, or at least the political correctness or political incorrectness of addressing certain issues, primarily because we don't have the same demographics in Canada that you have in the States, and nor do you have it in Australia.
I think the minority population of Canada compared to the white population is or the white majority is much different than the states.
And so the types of cultural or demographic problems you have in Canada are not analogous to the states.
What's amazing in the states is there's the impossibility of having honest and open discussion about it because it invariably leads to accusations of being called a racist or whatever, which makes it impossible to deal with the actual problems, which everybody knows, but become so verboten, so taboo that you can't have these honest, open discussions without it regressing into you're just a racist.
It's the biggest political speech of my life and you know I compared it to Obama.
Obama eloquent and said the right words and he has the right dramatic pauses and he's got a smooth voice.
Everything's perfect in delivery, except nothing in execution.
And he's an outright hypocrite in in reality.
You know, Nobel Peace Prize to the guy who didn't do anything to to promote peace and then killed a bunch of people and ran a bunch of illegal guns into the cartels, to whatever.
So you know Obama and I could address this and assess this and you know uh, acknowledge it gives a good speech.
He's slow calm demeanor, rfk in delivery, not so much people have to get past the voice it's beyond his control but substance wise, it was the biggest, most politically damning speech anybody could have ever given to tear the Democrat party a new butthole it.
He came out and said, look I.
I didn't want to do this, I didn't come to this decision lightly.
But the Democrat Party of today is not the Democrat Party of my assassinated father, my assassinated uncle the, the Kennedy Democrat Party.
It's a party of tyranny, big government, big pharma uh censorship, whereas once upon a time it was anti-big government, pro-free speech anti-war, anti-big pharma.
They've they've they've, full out reversed.
He says, look, they did this, not me.
And it's the, you know the same pattern we hear all the time.
Like I didn't leave the Democrat Party, they left me, or they pushed me out and kicked me and then pissed on me after they shoved me out.
So he's, it was just the most devastating speech for Kamala and for the Democrats, especially after their uh I don't want to say the uh honeymoon evening, but after their final day, the DNC where, you know, Kamala gets out and delivers a speech that's good on paper, that's good technically, that's good form, substance.
It's a bunch of lies and hypocrisy.
So after that bump in their whatever, Rfk comes out, says, I reached out to Kamala, she didn't even call me back.
I reached out to Trump.
He, you know, wants me to.
He'll bring me into the administration so that I can affect the change that.
I think God put me on this earth to affect, help kids, help the environment, stop World War Iii.
It was amazing, I mean, it was just amazing.
We're living through, I think, one of the biggest political moments in definitely in my lifetime, but arguably one of the top five in American history.
I want to look at a few of these clips with you for people that missed it.
Because guys, this is what.
Why this is important is like several reasons, but the, the first one being that Rfk might have been one of the first independent candidates that actually uh, maybe even had a chance to get five percent of the vote, so he, he maybe had a chance to be a very serious candidate.
Now, the reason why I care about that is because I don't like the two-party system, and this is a true thing.
I'm not a fan.
I don't like the fact that we get two choices and sometimes, in order to try to, you know, get the vote, people say well, you don't like Trump.
Well, it's not even that.
It's just like.
If Trump wants more of the vote, what's his only other option?
It's to become more liberal, more progressive, to try to appeal to the other more progressive people, but if there's a larger moderate side or independent side that's looking for policy and ideas, maybe he can actually have good policies and convince them.
However, now RFK is not running.
The question is: will independents, will these moderates go for Kamala or will they go for Trump?
I want to open it up a couple of these videos here directly.
These are from Vigilant Fox took the time to cut these, which I think is really, really amazing.
And basically, what happened here is that RFK exposed the Democrat Party.
And this is not just being like Boomer.
And I know you know this.
I'm not just being Boom here.
Like, we're exposing the Democrats.
Like, you know, this guy, I mean, his family's been murdered, assassinated, many, many of his family members have been, or at least they've tried.
And who knows what they did to his voice?
And you can see by the way that he cocks sometimes, he's afraid for his own life.
If I ever am honored with an interview, I'm going to ask for clarification because there's rumors, but it's a spasm in the larynx which causes the tightness of the voice.
After all, the polls consistently showed me beating each of the other candidates, both in favorability and also in head-to-head matchups.
But I'm sorry to say that while democracy may still be alive at the grassroots, it has become little more than a slogan for our political institutions, for our media, and for our government, and most sadly at all, for me, the Democratic Party.
In the name of saving democracy, the Democratic Party set itself to dismantling it.
Lacking confidence in its candidate, that its candidate could win in a fair election at the voting booth, the DNC waged continual legal warfare against both President Trump and myself.
Each time that our volunteers turned in those towering boxes of signatures needed to get on the ballot, the DNC dragged us into court, state after state, attempting to erase their work and to subvert the will of the voters who had signed those petitions.
It deployed DNC-aligned judges to throw me and other candidates off the ballot and to throw President Trump in jail.
It ran a sham primary that was rigged to prevent any serious challenge to President Biden.
Then, when a predictably bungled debate performance precipitated the palace coup against President Biden, the same shadowy DNC operatives appointed his successor, also without an election.
They installed a candidate who was so unpopular with voters that she dropped out in 2020 without winning a single delegate.
My uncle and my father both relished debate.
They prided themselves on their capacity to go toe-to-toe with any opponent in the battle over ideas.
They would be astonished to learn of a Democratic Party presidential nominee who, like Vice President Harris, has not appeared in a single interview or an unscripted encounter with voters for 35 days.
This is profoundly undemocratic.
How are people to choose when they don't know whom they are choosing?
And how can this look to the rest of the world?
My father and my uncle were always conscious of America's image abroad because of our nation's role as the template for democracy, the role model for democratic processes, and the leader of the free world.
Instead of showing us her substance and character, the DNC and its media organs engineered a surge of popularity for Vice President Harris based upon, uh-oh, nothing, no policies, no interviews, no debates, propaganda, only smoke and mirrors and balloons in a highly smoke and mirrors and balloons is a kind of circus there in Chicago.
A string of Democratic speakers mentioned Donald Trump 147 times just on the first day.
Oh, who needs a policy when you have Trump to hate?
In contrast, at the RNC convention, President Biden was mentioned only twice in four days.
And the whole point is, how can you have a policy when your existing policy is basically predicated on fixing the problems that you've caused while in office?
I mean, I make the meme.
It's a Babylon B headline.
On day one, Kamala Harris promises to fix the problems that she's caused over the last three and a half years.
Oh, but it wasn't her administration.
It was Biden's.
Horse crap.
Biden Harris.
So Harris Walls is going to fix all the problems that Biden-Harris caused.
And she goes back to her experience as an attorney general to say, I went after price gougers.
So I'm going to go fix inflation as if inflation is caused by price gouging.
It's that was excoriating.
I mean, it's amazing.
Laying it bare, I'm just checking the Twitter verse as we're talking.
People are like, where can I see the full stream?
Because apparently all of the propaganda outlets cut it.
Yeah, there was a video of CNN, not CNN, sorry, Canada's CNN, CTV, as RFK's talking about how once upon a time, Biden criticized Putin for getting 88% of the vote, as if to say, that's laughable.
Nobody gets 88% of the vote.
And, you know, the joke being that Kamala got 99% of the online votes.
And then CTV cut it.
I mean, it's just, it's just, it's outrageous.
These media outlets, which are supposed to hold the government's feet to the fire, they're supposed to be the government watchdogs.
They've turned into the government lapdogs.
And they've turned into the propaganda arm of the regime, which is effective fascism in the literal sense.
Yeah, you know, and I was thinking about that because even when it comes to where I get the news, I have to go to literal just alternative media, you know, platforms because I don't even trust the media.
But also, I don't even trust our media a lot, too, because like I remember on the first night on the DNC, people were taking pictures before people had come in going, oh, there's small crowds or small crowds.
And so I'm just, you know, passing by, reading, going, okay, I guess it's just some small crowds.
But then I'm texting my friend Kaylin.
By the way, he's going to be on the show all next week, Lord willing.
He's coming in.
It's kind of a cool thing now.
We got a studio.
People are just going to come stay for the week, come on every show.
Like, first of all, what's the return on that investment?
If now I sound like Kamala Harris.
Return on investment.
What is the overburden?
But I mean, it just, to me, it sort of indebts you, or is that the word?
It creates a sort of debt where you arguably you might have to be answering to different demands once you're a million dollars in the hole.
You got to pay that off.
I like a camera.
I like the informal side of it.
I don't want to look like Fox News.
This I like just because I like the audio.
I like hearing myself.
I like the cameras, the depth of field cameras.
That's much better than my Insta 360 camera.
But I like the rougher, the more authentic, and the certainly less indebted to the equipment, which means that you might be a little freer and independent with the message.
But that might be my own justification for not doing what I know I need to do.
That's actually true, but that's kind of why the key thing is like right now, I mean, everything in here is like out of pocket.
And like maybe out of pocket, I think so far in the studio, maybe like 35 grand, 30 grand all in.
But like that's very reasonable.
Like, I mean, probably all in the studio will be maybe $60,000 when it's completely done.
But $60,000 you can save up for, you know, you could save up for that.
That's like, that's doable in the real world.
But when you, yeah, when you start going a million dollars, when you pay people salaries, then you owe people a lot of money and a lot of people want to get paid.
And so you need to take money from where?
Corrupt organization, big pharma.
Exactly.
And so like, I think with RFK, it's kind of interesting because even Cuomo, did you see that clip?
Well, Cuomo, I saw him at Patrick Bett David's Value Attainment.
We did a podcast together with The Unusual Suspects.
I feel like he's on the verge of a genuine sort of red pill transition, but he's not yet ready to make the leap or at least fully submit to the lies that he has been guilty of telling over the last years.
I say like the transition cannot be complete until Cuomo repents or atones for the wrong that he did because he did repent.
I mean, he's got to acknowledge it, which he hasn't even yet done.
Right now, he's acknowledging the corruption of the industry.
He was the industry.
He spouted lies.
And his defense is, well, it was the best knowledge we had at the time.
That's also, that's just a justification for the mistake.
People were saying things that he wasn't reporting.
People knew more than what he was even willing to learn.
But yeah, he's out there and he's like, this is all corruption.
They pay millions of dollars for these booths.
They are, I liked what he said, literally looking down at the people.
When I had a, we had one of our meet and greets at Chattanooga, Tennessee, Robert Barnes and I, it was amazing.
And Barnes, Robert Barnes on vivabarneslaw.locals.com, he took me on a tour of Chattanooga and he's like, this is where the working class people live and work.
And literally, you look at the mountains where the prime real estate is and they were literally being lorded over by the political elite, the financial, economic, political elite.
That's what you saw at the DNC.
It's sort of what you saw at the RNC as well.
I mean, there's the elites, the political elite, the media elite, and then there's the delegates, the regular people who are on the ground being lorded over by their overlords.
And I think speaking of that, I want to watch this.
Cuomo talked about this, right?
So this is directly from Cuomo.
Check this out.
Here's a Cuomo noticing, he's noticing just a little bit too much.
And by the way, guys, you know, as you know with this show, for the first hour, it's usually like pretty serious talking about new stuff.
The last 30 minutes is usually just funny video super chats and just talking about, you know, whatever.
But track with me here.
Watch this.
This is a guy who it's ironic.
If you've been around longer than one day, you would know this guy was pushing the vaccine.
So watch.
unidentified
A big theme here at the DNC is that they're going to go after corporate gouging and they're going to go after corporations, whether it's in taxes, largesse, loopholes.
The RNC, we heard the same thing.
They're going after the elites.
The two sets of rules.
Let me reveal a reality to you that has to be spoken to here, okay?
These are the soldiers.
These are the men and the women that go back to their constituencies and their communities and they fight.
They take time from their jobs.
They take time from their families.
Republicans and Democrats alike.
That's what they do.
They need to charge these people up.
They need to be able to get them on board.
But there's another reality that is literally looking down on them.
Greg, look at the ring of sweets, okay?
This is not unique to Democrats.
There is a game of money.
When people talk about Uniparty, we are strangled by the money reality in our politics.
Those sweets start at 500 grand.
You think there's like a teacher group up in there?
You think it's like the Cub Scouts of Columbia County?
That's why, like, when I watch this type of revelation, this seems to me to be born out of frustration of his own circumstance and not a sincere revelation as to the problems of the corrupt system.
So it seems to me like he's speaking out of a source of anger and resentment as to where he is and not anger and resentment because of the deception that he was part of.
He hasn't gotten there yet, but it's good to see it.
It's good to say it and it's good to see it because he's right.
They're being lorded over and these special interests govern politics.
Well, like, yeah, I mean, okay, this is kind of my personal frustration.
I'm sure a lot of people realize it too.
Not just the fact that people recognizing or realizing things a little bit too late, but I also want to remind you guys something really important.
You know, as I was talking about this, I was reminded that many of us out there are a little bit uncomfortable as we walk around.
Now, this is kind of like a shameless plug here, but basically, if you know about Undertak boxers, okay, everyone that I know basically has some of these boxers.
I don't know why everyone has them, except they all have their own reason.
Now, the reason why I have them is because they don't bunch up on the balls.
So a big thing for me is I really, really, really like to make sure that my boxers don't ride up.
I don't like boxers that ride up.
You know, you sit for long hours, it gets hot.
Plus, they breathe.
They wick away water and moisture.
And the best part is made with Modal, which is like cotton on steroids.
So they're super breathable.
I wear them at the gym.
Super nice to wear.
And right now, one of the craziest things is they're having this deal.
When you go to Sierra Whiskey Co. at undertak.com, so undertack, UNDERTAC.com, use my promo code offensive.
What you're going to get is you're going to get a dollar spent equals a entry into this competition.
So you spend $30, you get 30 entries, 60, you get 60 entries to win $30,000 in cash plus a $70,000 Jeep.
So it's $100,000 sweepstakes giveaway.
That's how good they're doing.
By the way, they were on this show when they were a brand new company like five years ago, and they've never stopped supporting us.
But the best part is they have stuff for women and for men.
They don't come in gay colors, which is a big thing.
They don't have gay models.
The guy even told me, like, why do you want to put, like, we're trying to sell the men.
Men don't want to see men in their underwear.
Some men want to see men in their underwear, but probably not you if you're watching the show.
If you do like to see men in their underwear, then why don't you get a mirror, buy a pair of these, and look at yourself because they're going to be that damn comfortable.
But anyway, if you go to Offensive Win, promo code OFF, E-N S-I-V-E-W-I-N, you can also get these wool socks.
They have these EDC t-shirts, extremely well-fitted, and everything is the highest quality and absolutely beautiful.
So check it out today.
Pick up a pair, pick up a spare.
They're cheaper than the competition, but better quality.
And remember, the competition, which I'm not allowed to say during the ad, canceled this show and didn't want to talk to us because I wouldn't censor one of my guests.
And one of my guests said stuff, and I wouldn't tell them to stop, and I wouldn't delete the episode.
What makes me angry and what I think is kind of funny is I noticed this thing that a lot of young girl influencers do on the internet where they just copy people's tweets.
Like, I'll see like four girls.
These are hot girls too.
And I'm married, so I'm not saying like in a bad way.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, because then I'd make fun of them.
I've always said, you know, being a fat woman is equivalent to being a man who's intentionally broke.
Like, it's like, it's like, you gotta, you gotta stay fit.
You gotta stay healthy.
We're encouraging good decisions here.
These are like hot chicks.
And sometimes I'll see them like write the exact same stuff.
Like, I'll see like some hot chick write the exact same tweet.
The next one writes it and kind of shares something different.
And I go, well, what's the point of ideas if you're not really going to come up with your own ideas or at least think for yourself?
And the same thing goes with the truth.
Like the truth is easy to say and to speak when it doesn't cost you anything.
And a lot of times like with the vaccine, you see a lot of people now being like, oh, yeah, you know, I didn't get the vaccine, but during the time when it could cost you your job or social connections or family connections, they didn't want to say, right?
It was their medical privacy.
You know, I'm just saying, like, there's a lot of people who are very brave today, like Cuomo or whatever.
When it finally affects them or it's convenient, it's like, you know, when I see Ben Shapiro tweet out, I don't care about the Browning of America, and then suddenly starts tweeting about, you know, the dangers of like replacement migration all of a sudden the other day.
It's one of the older controversies that I remember.
This was before I even was politically oriented.
I remember people giving Ben Shapiro a problem for saying that.
And the only, well, the issue does become not with the statement itself, but when it becomes mutually incompatible with other philosophies.
The problem, I appreciate the criticism of Ben Shapiro, where on the one hand, someone will say, I have no problem with the Browning of America, but also as a Jewish religious person, I'll only marry a Jewish person.
That incompatibility I can sort of appreciate people taking issue with.
The issue about not speaking until it's convenient to do so, I try not to hold people's feet to the fire on that because on the one hand, you don't want to punish people for getting there.
Courage is contagious and you don't want to deter people from coming around.
Flip side, people who espouse diametrically opposed views to what they held in recent memory, there's evolution and there's also just grifting.
Grifting and or hypocrisy.
Like if you change your core views too radically too often, you got a judgment problem.
And I do want to say one of the reasons why I like to have a different variety of guests on the show is because sometimes it's sort of like it's when it's good to take a day away on your own when you're married because sometimes you're like, oh man, I just want some time to myself.
And then after like a day or two, then you're like, oh, I missed my wife and I want to get back, right?
No, I was going to say, I was going to say, like, you know, like, meaning there's always like this yin and yang, there's sort of this balance in life.
And I think that having different guests reminds me of like, sometimes people be like, extreme, we got to, we got to kill everyone.
We got to, you know, shoot these traitors.
And then, you know, you have someone else a little higher IQ, a little more reasonable like yourself, a family man, has kids.
You understand the balance of life, own property.
And you're like, okay, let's be realistic here.
Because sometimes I'll be like, you know, reading tweets and listening to things.
And I realize, oh, these are a bunch of guys under 25 years old that aren't married and don't have kids.
So that's really, you know, biasing their perspective.
Like, I don't care if the election ends and I don't care if this whole thing's over and let's burn it to the ground.
And you're like, yeah, because you don't really have a stake in it.
You're just, you know, you're chilling, you know, but I, but I don't judge them, but I, I like talking to you and hearing that because I sometimes, I am kind of sick of it because sometimes these people who have the most influence don't use it correctly when it's the most needed.
And then when they risk losing their audience, whether it's a politician or a commentator, when they risk being irrelevant, and I'm not going to call anyone else out by name because I don't want to be, you know, I'm not trying to like take down our side or pick anyone apart.
It's like, like I said, like now all of a sudden they're talking about replacement migration and stuff when two years ago they would have called me a white supremacist for talking about it.
I like coming on to see, you know, to hear the opposing view.
I don't mind, first of all, once you get called a Nazi and Mossad in the same day, which happens to me relatively frequently, you stop giving a sweet bugger all about what people say.
I remember, I'm old enough to remember when replacement theory was called a racist conspiracy theory.
I wasn't vocal about it at the time because I wasn't into any of this.
When you don't, on the one hand, when you get called all the names under the sun and you see nothing happens, nothing happens.
Move on and be honest because to thine own self be true and don't bear false witness to yourself.
The replacement theory is a confirmed political strategy.
It was the Democrats who said Democrat, oh geez, Louise, it's destiny.
And when, I mean, we were told replacement theory is a racist conspiracy theory.
It's only racist if you presume that you're being replaced with a different race.
You don't need to be replaced with a different race to know that you are being replaced in the sense that your vote is being diluted to half what it was by virtue of the fact that your border is open.
I'm not even talking about the states.
I'm talking about Canada.
Did you know that there was a immigration goal of Canada to double the population by the end of the century?
To go from 40 million to 100 million by the end of the century.
You get Danielle Smith, who's the premier out of Alberta, coming out and saying, we need to double the population of Alberta.
You don't do it through natural birth.
So you do it through opening the borders and importing people.
Because obviously, you know, this is obviously happening in Australia as well, right?
They're literally increasing their population to such an extent that reminding people, I believe there still is less people in all of Australia than there is in the state of Florida with a landmass the size of the United States.
One hand uh I, when I say it's a, it's not a racial replacement, it's a political replacement, because you have a government that has basically uh, spurned might be the word or, you know, they've burnt their political ties with the existing population where they can no longer rely on them for the vote, so they got to import the vote.
Uh, on the one.
That that's what, that's one.
That's my theory.
The official explanation is, well, we don't have a.
We have a shrinking population and the infrastructure needs tax paying citizens.
It needs people who are going to pay into the system in order to care for the uh, you know, the elderly social, social programs, etc.
The only problem is, if you're not bringing in immigrants that are skilled labor that pay into the system, you're actually just exacerbating the problem.
The other problem is, as in Canada, we have a shrinking population, natural population growth is not working, primarily because you got a government that pushes birth control contraceptions, which I i've got no problem with that.
You've got a government that pushes, you know, reproductive rights, abortion.
Canada is the only nation on earth that has no criminal prohibitions on abortion at any stage of pregnancy.
Really now, as a matter of practice, you will never find a doctor to do it past a certain point.
But the problem is they, the government, implements policy that results in population shrinkage to then say well, we don't have enough of a population, so we got to open our borders and, lo and behold, import people right that are going to vote for us in the future.
And so you, you've screwed your existing populace and you've imported a a generation of votes in the future.
That is the end goal.
It's not.
It's not.
It's nothing to do with land mass.
It has to do with paying into the system.
You know uh, having having finances in the system to support the system.
But the bottom line is, why is the population shrinking?
Canada is top three nations leading the world in euthanasia.
It's no it's it's it's, it's Nazi level mercy killings.
That's what it is.
And they want to expand it to the mentally ill, to drug addicts to to, to mature minors.
I mean it's it's it's, they call it mercy.
But the bottom line, all to this diatribe.
They implement policy much like in the states, promote abortion, promote birth control uh, make it impossible for citizens to afford families and then say, population is not growing properly, got to open up the borders, and that's what they want to do in Canada.
That's what I want to do in the West.
Some people hypothesize it's just part of, you know, Agenda 23, 2030 and the uh One World Government.
Okay, I want to stay on the subject, because this is this is something that I have have uh hypothesized for a while, and what you're saying is one of the things that I think is true.
But on the other end, there's also this financial system, outside of the tax burden um, such as the housing market that you need to artificially inflate.
So I think about one percent of the world's gdp is stored up in in uh real estate in Australia.
If people don't know, it's the second most expensive place uh for real estate to live other than Hong Kong.
Um in general, it is insane um.
Even the rental like like to go uh get a rental for like a one bedroom.
You can sometimes wait, you know, in a line for an hour.
It's a queue.
Um, there's a famous uh politician there named Pauline Hansen.
Um, who you know made made this cartoon and she's making fun of how bad the housing prices are where uh, Steve Irwin's son comes out and he's like, oh, are we in the line for Dream World? which is their amusement park.
It's like, no, we're just like going to view a one-bedroom apartment.
And it's like cute, you know, like a, like everyone's getting ready.
Okay, this is bad.
But then they're importing all of these Indians and they just raised a threshold for the amount of money that you need to come in the country.
And they allow you this bridging visa so you can bring all your family.
So what they're doing is their housing price, their housing bubble was so large that I think it's like 17 times, 15 times the wage for just a normal two-bedroom, three-bedroom, one-bathroom house, reminding people that they don't live in opulent homes in Australia.
In a lot of these countries, the UK, they're very small.
I mean, you know, every country's got the big mansions and stuff on the lake, but the average person lives in, you know, small condos, apartment type stuff.
And they keep saying, oh, you know, the government's going to fix the housing prices.
They're going to fix it next year.
And then they go, you know, whoa, we don't even know what happened, but we accidentally just let in another 200,000 people from Southeast Asia.
Are they admitting foreigners on like sort of the buy into immigration?
Like if you come in with several hundred thousand dollars, you get some and then the question becomes on the one hand for just the bottom line question, why?
But then the bigger question is why can't Australians afford the houses in the first place?
You get foreign money coming in for whatever the reason, wealthy foreigners who come in and jack up the prices artificially.
We have a similar problem on the west coast of Canada, not to put a country on bias.
It just happens to be a known issue from foreign real estate investors, primarily from China and Russia.
And then they come in with the solution, which is to limit foreign ownership of properties.
But it's wild.
You open up the borders and then you talk about a lack of available housing as a result of a consequence of a policy that caused the problem.
Much like Kamala Harris talking about the problem with housing in America is lack of availability.
And even if that were the case, which I don't believe it is, you've just let in 15 million illegal immigrants over the last three years.
If it's a lack of availability, maybe implement immigration policy that doesn't exacerbate that problem.
Yeah, but see, what I'm saying about the complicated nature is when you talk about the financial system, that means that no matter where you live, because Australia doesn't have a limit on housing.
I'm using Australia, by the way, because it's been a monoculture.
It's been an ethno-state for a very long time.
It was founded on ethnocentrism.
The founders of Australia wanted to be a white country.
Up until 75 years ago, it was white-only, right?
This is what they wanted.
They wanted to be a white-only country.
And it was all white until like the last like 20 years.
So they, but they're like special needs kind of like, they're not like American natives.
Like they didn't have, they didn't invent the wheel.
You know what I mean?
Like, and they said they were here there for 80,000 years.
These people, the Aboriginals are like, if you mix like the lower side of a black neighborhood with the poverty of an Indian reservation and the social development of a retarded child, it's their society, and I'm getting this from living there, is so messed up.
They build them houses and then they rip the wood out from inside the houses and make like sacrificial like voodoo fires and then they burn the houses down.
They build them new ones.
And they're still, and then they prefer to just sleep.
They just go sleep in the bush.
And it's so bad that the military, I don't think I should be saying this, but like up in Darwin and stuff where the Aboriginals are, they tell you if you actually run one over in the street just to go straight to the base because they fall asleep drunk in the street all the time.
I'm just, I have a, I have a gripe.
Aboriginals threw a rock at me one time while I was walking and I can hear Seth screaming Viva.
No, no, no, the Aboriginals are, what I was going to say on the flip side is like, they're just, no, they're not competing for houses.
In fact, we would like, I think the Australians would like them to start living, most of them in houses, because they just, they, they refuse to integrate in society.
But on the flip side of this, with what's going on with this integration, is I'm saying this guarantees sort of like a global financial bubble.
So if I'm a rich businessman and I, you know, am working with like the Federal Reserve or the World Bank and we want to like secure finances in a diversity or in a diverse portfolio, we know that we can buy property in Australia and it's never going to pop because they've set it up in a 30-year plan that it'll only inflate in value.
So it sets up this artificial like fund for the world.
And I've been reading a lot about how bankers and people and internationally, they're just buying property and they're using it to sort of like hold their money, kind of like apartments in New York.
And I can't think that that's just an accident.
Like there's got to be like, it makes me wonder because it's either power or money or both, in my opinion, someone's benefiting from while they fuck us, you know?
And everyone likes to get fucked the good way, but not the way they do it.
I mean, it's exacerbated by immigration policies and it's exacerbated by interest rates now, especially, but it's exacerbated by the poverty of the population and not flourishing of the, let's call it the native, but of the Canadian population.
And it was a promise that Trudeau made back in 2015 to build more houses because they always thought it was demanded, then they never do it.
And then standards of living go down and down, and especially more so after COVID.
I don't know, you know, it's a problem to be dealt with.
All that I know is that the current solutions are only exacerbating the problem.
And I think one of the weirdest parts, though, and this is why I wanted to pick your brain is like, okay, let's go down the rabbit hole here for a second because people in the chat are going to get mad here because I'm going to probably hit on every group.
And I want to say that someone's going to get mad because I'm going to both validate you and not validate you.
I don't even have the right word for that.
It's like, sometimes I hear people pointing out a problem and they're not even lying.
It's completely true.
They're just looking at it through a singular lens of somebody maybe who hasn't traveled or seen the complicated nature and the amount of hands that can be in an issue, right?
So somebody may look at the world issues and just say, okay, it's the Jews.
Like that's the phrase.
It's the Jews.
And there's a huge camp of people that everything is just, it's the Jews.
First of all, you can't deny statistical overrepresentation when it's bad and recognize it when it's good.
This sometimes gets me in trouble because everybody growing up Jewish, everyone else is like, oh, look at all the Nobel Peace Prize winners who are Jewish, half Jewish, or from Jewish families.
And people like that statistical overrepresentation.
When you start looking at politics and the dirty games that are being played and you see similar statistical overrepresentation, I don't see the correlation to the Jew qua Jew versus the Jewish person doing something bad politically that other people see.
But you can't blame other people for noticing statistical overrepresentation.
Most, you know, they called the first impeachment the Juku.
I don't know if you ever heard that term.
It was the offensive term for calling the I like it.
Well, many, many people do.
And whether or not, you know, you can't deny the statistical overrepresentation of players involved in the first impeachment.
I mean, from Nadler, Adam Schiff, Vinman.
I mean, you can't blame people for seeing it.
I don't think any of these people are doing things in the name of being Jewish.
They just, you know, they happen to be statistically overrepresented in a number of fields, which results in statistical overrepresentation and a number of stuff, good and bad.
The bottom line, yeah, you can't blame people for observing what is a statistical fact.
It's just the conclusions that you draw from that and your behavior in light of it.
Well, yeah, that's where I, but I, but I understand what you're saying.
And that's where, like, because I want to hit on a few of the groups and I want to get your opinion on all this stuff.
Is I think that, yeah, there's validity in the fact that, yeah, 100%, a lot of what we see in the world and a lot of it is our Jewish people.
And a lot of it is, and some of it, I should say, is because they're Jewish.
Okay, some of there are certain groups of Jews who have like, you know, a blood libel against, you know, Adam or against, you know, they don't like the Palestinians.
They don't like the Amalek or the Amalekites.
You hear them talking about the Holy War.
This is about, you know, destroying Amalek.
And then, of course, with a lot of white nations, there's the blood libel of the sacking of the temple, right?
Going back to early AD, where they want the relics back from the Vatican.
And so there is a mixture.
But I was going to say, what I think is interesting here is there is a lot of Jews there, but you also need to make sure that you are looking at some of the other ends and what could be influencing things, which people never think about, which is like that could be a blood libel.
But remember, power and money are extremely corrosive.
And on top of that, it's not just power and money.
But I want to remind people that the Bible says that bitterness, it is most the most dangerous thing is to be bitter because it says that it poisons the root.
And you'd be surprised about the amount of things that bad that happen that are one, just due to ignorance and low competence, and two, are literally due for the fact that people are bitter.
They're trying to get back at someone.
They're trying to prove themselves to their parents.
They're just on a war path.
And so I think everything is true.
Like, Gavin will be like, okay, it's just incompetent.
The problem is that when it becomes the problem where people say it's the Jews, they're looking with those blinders to say, I'm looking for the bad Jews or I'm looking for the bad players who happen to be Jewish.
But it's very easy to find that connection given, well, say not the diaspora of Jews or the overrepresentation in certain fields.
It's always easy to find that connection.
It's like the two degrees of Judification.
I make the joke, like the six degrees of Kevin Bacon.
Take any event, there will be two or three degrees where you'll be able to find the Jew.
But you're funnier than I thought.
It's the reality.
But the problem is, is when people are looking for that with their blinders on, they don't look for the Jew on the other side.
And so in as much as you had, I can give you all the names, but overrepresentation in the first impeachment.
So too did you have overrepresentation on the side fighting the impeachment, Trump's lawyers, members of Trump's team.
And so it's where when you're looking for the confirmation bias, I want to find the bad Jew so that I can say it's the Jews, but then you ignore all of the freedom fighting, the, I would say, I'm going to say I get in trouble for this, the good, the Jews who are on the other side that disprove your theory of it's always the Jews.
That's when you know you're looking for someone who's looking for a conclusion and not looking for truth.
No, no, I know this stuff, but I want your opinion on this.
You know, I used to have, I've had a real mental sort of like strange position on this.
And here's why.
So obviously I work in media and I've been friends with and worked with a lot of Jewish people, okay?
You cannot work in media and not work with Jewish people.
It's going to be impossible.
And like I'm fighting for this country.
I love the United States.
I'm just on a path of curiosity.
And around October 7th, when it was unpopular, when everyone was tweeting out, like, you know, the managing editor of Breitbart, Paul Lock and stuff, like, take Gaza and level it and turn it into a parking lot.
When I'm like, oh, calm down, dog.
You know, I was like, hey, I think this might have been an inside job.
I think there's no way they couldn't have detected paragliders.
This seems very suspicious.
And I took a lot of these things and I started asking questions and stuff.
And a lot of my Jewish friends have just completely stopped following me, have cut me off.
And because I don't really support Israel as the ethno-state, or I always tell people, if Israel's allowed to be an ethnostate and have that identity, then we should be allowed to have that too.
You can't, like you said, you can't argue the contradiction.
Like, what about them not working with me or cutting me off because we disagree on that issue?
I find a lot of Jews have cut me off or won't work with me because I'm not supportive of Israel's war or supportive of like the current government.
Again, can't speak to your personal experience or the people who have unfriended you.
Look, I'm one of the Jews who the day after October 7th, I was like, before anybody's going to, before I rely on the most sophisticated military to determine the reprisals, you've got to determine how the hell this happened in the first place.
You can't have the incompetent, borderline criminally negligent at best or something else at worst be the ones determining the response to their own abject greatest security failure in the history of the world.
I don't take Flackford and I don't care about that.
For every friend you lose because of your sincerely held beliefs, you'll meet another.
Well, yeah, like meaning like meaning I would like to think, OK, yeah, there's no like grand scheme or grand conspiracy.
And that's not what I'm pushing.
I'm saying, what do you think about the fact that it seems like a lot of the people that I've worked with are more loyal to their Zionist beliefs than they are to America?
Because meaning we could pair up together and fight so many incredible issues to save this country and to fight for this country.
But because I disagree with them on that issue, they won't have me on their shows.
They've unfollowed me.
And this is anything from like Ezra Levant with, you know, we're talking about with Rebel News, his journalists.
This is talking about independent journalists, the staff at Breitbart.
And I've seen internal memos, I've seen emails.
Because of my position, which by the way, turned out to be true.
By the way, my position turned out to be 100% true.
They decide with me and many other people, we will no longer work with you because you don't support Israel.
I mean a literal Zionist movement where it's Israel first above all else.
It's like what Shapiro said in his speech.
He says, okay, I'm going to stay here because I can do better here in the United States, basically for Israel.
And I wouldn't support America if it didn't support Israel.
Like a lot of Jews have that view where they're not going to support this country.
They support it because we're pro-Israel.
They support Trump because he's pro-Israel.
And if you're not, not only do they not want to work with you, but they call you an anti-Semite.
They deride you.
And they would call you a Nazi.
It's just been overplayed, overused.
And they won't even engage with you.
And it bothers me because I'm like, dude, so your organization, you have all this reach.
We could do stuff together.
And it's me and many of the people you want.
We love America.
We're fighting for the West, but because an Eastern country, we don't agree on a foreign policy directive, and we don't want their money, influence in our politics.
We don't want to be giving them money.
You will not work with people, and that issue supersedes the country you live in and work in.
I'll go broadly speaking because not knowing why they unfollowed you, what you said, whether or not it was not a question of the substance, but the form, or I don't know, whatever.
I can understand people saying, I don't want to be friends with anybody who says gay or retarded.
I mean, that's, you know, Luke Radkowski had a poster that he's been selling, and it says, in this house, we say gay and retarded.
He gave me one, and I'm like, I can understand that someone's going to say, Viva's got this, even though it was a gift, people.
Viva's got this.
I don't want to be friends with him.
But people say it for all sorts of reasons.
So I don't know why, you know, how relationships ended.
And I don't think it's really relevant or especially.
Well, when it comes to loyalties, and I've had this discussion, I take a little flack for it, but I don't really work with that many people.
Or maybe I'm just more eloquent and soft-spoken when I say it.
I've got an issue with people having dual citizenship being in government.
I mean, I understand the concern where people are going to say, where are your loyalties?
Is it to a foreign nation, whatever that foreign nation is?
I think some people might take issue with you.
You say, look, you're picking on the Jews and the Zionists, and I'm putting it in quotes, who are more loyal, who, according to you, say, I'm more loyal to Israel than to America.
I would take issue with that for whomever it would be.
Anybody living in America and saying I'm more loyal to my country, whatever that is, than the country in which I live, then go live in that country.
And I might be one of the not rare, but I support the existence of the state of Israel just as a matter of fact.
It exists, period.
Whether you like it or not, I don't expect it to end its own existence to placate the people who say it shouldn't exist.
I also had no problem with Quebec, the province that I'm from, being a French province, having laws that favor the French language, the preservation of the French language.
It's the history of the province.
If I don't like it, I can leave.
Now, I happen to have left, but not for the linguistic reasons, for the fascist Canadian reasons, and some fascist provincial law reasons.
I do believe that provinces could enact legislation to protect their identity, their linguistic identity.
I just say, as a matter of fact, it's not the best way to do it, because if it was, the laws that Quebec implemented would have been promoting French language and not seeing what we see now, which is sort of a deterioration of the prevalence of French or the quality of the French in Quebec.
So when it comes to Israel, that it's a Jewish state, obviously, as far as I'm concerned, has the right to exist as a Jewish state.
Then you get into the argument of, well, how did it exist and whose land did they take and whose land was it in the first place?
A discussion that goes nowhere.
On the broader question of loyalties to another country than the one you're living in, that should be a problem across the board, regardless of the country.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, 100%.
Now, the debate with Israel is a very complicated one because, on the one hand, you might have people doing things that they don't necessarily believe in because of the broader culture that's there that says these are the dogmatic positions that you have.
It's, you know, you cannot talk about the suffering on the other side without it being sort of an apologism for the other side.
And I live through that too, and it's why the discussion is not one that can be had flippantly, and it's not one that leaves room for much jokes.
And so maybe you said the wrong joke that pissed one person off, and I don't know.
But when it comes to that, the loyalty to another country is not Israel-specific.
Dual citizenship for any member of government representing a country is a valid cause for concern, whatever that country is.
France, Israel, Germany.
You serve the American government, you serve the American people.
And if I have to worry about whether or not you're making a decision that's more in the interest of the Ukrainian people, for example, than the American citizens, well, that's a problem.
So I don't see it as being a specifically Jewish one.
The emphasis, the hyper-emphasis on Israel in particular is where I see people saying, okay, well, you're focusing on Israel.
You're focusing on the Jews.
You're not focusing on the Irish Catholics in the banking industry.
You're not focusing on dual French citizenship.
I don't know if there's any more of that.
And so people can see it potentially as an obsession and not as a legitimate or broadly held political view at large that doesn't just focus on the Jews.
And I think I appreciate that perspective, and I like the fact that I don't think that you are disingenuous on this topic, right?
I don't think you are at all.
Okay.
And I've always valued the way that you approached this and a lot of discussions.
I just sense that a lot of the political establishment really truly, whether it's like again, we were talking about other groups that are involved that whether it's the corporate media and they're beholden to the pharmacological companies, right?
All these pharmaceuticals.
And so you always know they're going to be biased because Pfizer is the number one supporter of CNN.
So of course they're going to be biased about the vaccine.
And you just kind of have to assume an approach when you watch that like you're not going to get medically accurate information about products that these pharmacy companies want to sell because ultimately their products are more important than you getting the truth.
We know the FDA is in a similar way government bodies.
But I feel like the right-wing media is sort of the same way too.
Like we said, there's not a dual citizenship.
I feel like sometimes there's a dual allegiance inside of our country.
It is the irony you will notice of the people who are putting the hashtag of the current thing in their Twitter profiles.
I see a lot of people with the Ukrainian flag and the Israeli flag.
And I like to give them a good ribbing.
I was like, haha, you literally have the flag that has distinct, meaningful Nazi ties right next to the Israeli flag.
I don't think you've thought this through.
But it is, you know, you call it the focus on loyalty or the demonizing of the people and saying they're Zionists and they're favoring another country over their own.
A lot of the discourse is a question of political allegiance.
And we've been brought up with the, you know, our only friends in the Middle East or the only democracy in the Middle East is Israel.
And there's some truth to that.
Does that necessarily justify living in a perpetual state of war with Arab nations?
I'm sure there's some solutions to this, but it's probably more complicated than two of us musing here now.
And then you get the newly developed ones, which develop at hypersonic on steroid speed, like Ukraine, which nobody even, you know, few people knew where it was on a map before 2022.
And then you are forced to adhere to this dogmatic, they are our allies.
If you're not for us, if you're not for them, you're for Russia.
And you apply that mutatis mutanis to, if you're not for Israel, then you're against America.
You know, I see it causing some serious problems because you do have a lot of issues, a lot of problems in the country where the government is supposed to be serving the people, and they do seem to be serving foreign interests, whatever those might be, Ukraine aid packages to Israel.
And I can see how that builds resentment.
And you can't write it off as being anti-Semitic and whatever, but not knowing any of the nature of your personal relationships and why they ended.
Well, I think communism as a term might get a little bit more broadly used or overbroadly used where people mean statism more so than communism.
Unless you're referring to the Chinese Communist Party, in which case there's some straight-up Chinese Communist Party infiltration, especially in Canada.
There's straight-up Indian government infiltration in the Canadian.
The issue, I guess, where it becomes the problem where people see it as an obsession, where you go to Twitter and it's the Jews.
It's the Jews.
And even if you're talking about an immigration problem in the UK, it's the Jews.
If you're talking about Chinese infiltration in Canada, it's the Jews.
When they're, you know, the expression is a fanatic never changes the subject and never changes their mind.
There are obvious politics at play here.
There's obvious lobbies at play here.
You cannot deny that AIPAC is a powerful lobby.
I mean, they take pride in it.
You can't deny that the ADL is a powerful lobby.
You can't deny that they're Jewish.
You can't deny that other countries have a powerful lobby in America as well to the point where the American people, be they Jew, black, Asian, whatever, American, feel like they are second-class citizens to foreign countries, and that breeds problems, which is the broader problem.
Do I believe communist?
I believe a lot of what we see in the Democrat Party now is communist in nature.
Let's call it Marxist in nature, statist in nature, fascist.
I mean, it's you have government working with private enterprise for censorship, control of information, weaponizing all of aspects of government to go after ideological dissonance.
Call whatever you want.
There are more than one problem.
There's more than one influence.
It is the nature of politics.
And I mean, to be stupid about it, it's complicated.
No, no, I live with this question because I live with this question.
I also live with the, I call it the prejudice where like where people, when they like you, you know, they don't, they don't ever bring up when you do good, the people who want to go to the Jew accusation don't don't they ignore it.
You're one of the good ones.
The second you do anything, the second you take any adversarial position, it's because you're Jewish, regardless of which way it is.
And so, it's, but it's, it's a form of identity politics.
There's no question that there's a substantial amount of Israel government influence in American politics.
There's no question about it.
And there's no question that a lot of the resentment to the Jews in particular is as a result of the effectiveness of the lobby in America over other entities that have also lobbied for representation and haven't been quite as successful.
So there's that resentment.
There's the issue about whether or not Israel uses America for international policy or America uses Israel for international policy.
The focus on Israel, as opposed to Israel, Britain, Australian government, Canadian government, American government.
I mean, you might just have a bunch of countries that are working together, and one just might be more distinct because of its statistical underrepresentation in terms of numbers, but statistical overrepresentation in terms of influence.
When you get called the names for being polite and phrasing things properly, well, if you're going to get called the names anyhow, may as well deliver it the way I want it delivered.
But if you're watching this, don't forget right now as we go over there that this show is sponsored directly and supported by our good friends at Censored TV.
Censored.tv is an independent network.
We have our own servers, our own everything.
We have backups for our backup.
And you'll notice we have Gavin McGinnis, amazing stuff.
Anthony Kumia is classic.
You can never go wrong with the Kumia.
Plus, you have myself.
You have Owen Benjamin.
You have Isabella Reilly.
You have, I think Milo Yiannopoulos is now with us.
He's there.
You have Josh LaCash, wrong opinion, and so much more.
And guys, when you use my promo code Offensive, OFF ENSIVE, you get 20% off the membership.
And so a lot of you want to know, you know, everyone wants to start a podcast, but a huge way that you can help this show grow and bring people out because we're going to be flying, start flying a lot of people out and doing that because you guys support.
And so just so you know, when you're supporting, you're making this show better.
And you're helping build a studio.
You're helping build a family.
And it's an incredible way to just join the community and be there.
Anyway, for those that are watching, we'll see you in about two to four minutes over on rumble.com/slash slightly offensive or on censored and locals.
Plus, if you want to give your super chats, get them in there on locals, your Rumble rants and on censored or on locals.
We'll read them at the end.
Any questions you want to ask?
Remember, unless they break the law or directly, you know, reveal secret information about a guest or something, I'll read them all.
And we're just talking about what's going on here.
Like, what's the background?
Who do we blame for what's happening?
And I thought because you're not a disingenuous person and you know basically exactly what I'm talking about, who I'm talking about, the types of people I'm talking about, is who's really to blame for what's going on in the world in the country?
And I was saying that sometimes I think it's a little more complicated than some people know, including the fact that some people's motivations are not ethnic.
Sometimes it is money.
Sometimes it is power.
Sometimes, like, you might be right.
It might be Jewish blood libel, but somebody else may be working with somebody who has Jewish blood libel because they just want money.
And so it's someone who wants money with someone who wants libel.
So the blood libel, it goes back to blaming the West for the collapse and the sacking of their temple.
And these are hardcore, these are like the people who sort of orchestrated the actual founding and establishment of the state of Israel and continue to work to ensure its future.
One of the classic examples is when people want to say how backwards Judaism is and they go to the rabbis who physically suck on the penis after the circumcised thing and they say, look how backwards this is.
But they don't appreciate that within the Jewish community, 99.
Absolutely do not approve of that particular method of circumcision.
And so I don't know of the people that you're speaking of here, what percentage they represent statistically or in terms of political power.
So sometimes I wonder, this is, because I don't have an exact percentage, because you know, 63% of statistics are made up on the spot, right?
That's what they say.
And so I don't have a statistic.
What I see is that kind of like, I don't want to use the phrase deep state because it sounds stupid, but kind of like we know there's a shadow government in the United States that acts not on behalf of the will of the people.
But sometimes that shadow organized government can take advantage of the ignorance of the will of the people.
My example is like BLM, right?
You get a lot of black people.
Obviously, there's a lot of racial tension in the United States.
There's a lot of problems.
And you can get a movement that obviously accomplished nothing but cause more racial position.
But still, they got a lot of not only black people to join in, but a lot of ignorant and stupid white people with this whole white guilt thing, right, coming alongside of it and supporting it.
So, on one hand, I don't think like all blacks are behind some BLM movement, but sometimes I can think that there's maybe a few blacks who were trained by communists, they say, that are behind a movement.
But the danger is that they do get control of the black community and can do really a lot of harm in the country.
To me, that group of Zionists would be more of an elite, I would say, be like less than a percent of people, way less than a percent, maybe 0.1% of elitist families, individuals, and literal, you know, they orchestrate and decide what they want for their country and manipulate black male bankers.
But I would say that they use Jews, like a lot of Jews fall into the trap of calling people anti-Semites for calling out bad Jews.
I don't know where he comes from, but I mean, pretty much everyone in Israel, the vast majority, are going to come from somewhere in Eastern Europe or the Middle East.
I mean, that's just, that's how it was.
Very few, I guess, I don't even know what a native Jew would be.
You'd measure it to the last hundred years and not necessarily the last thousands.
I guess all Jews are native of Israel.
If you go back to the history, but everyone who came in on boats after the Holocaust were coming in from Eastern Europe or they were being chased out of Arab lands.
And I say this with no judgment for there was a war going on.
There was a battle for the state of Israel.
And I appreciate that.
But yeah, I don't know.
He definitely does not necessarily come from Israel proper, at least within the last recent memory.
Well, yeah, and I, well, because answering your question, though, about these groups, my whole point is like you said, well, who's doing it?
What I think is actually breeding a lot of these problems are that I don't think there's anything shameful of caring more about your homeland or your ethnicity.
I think it's just that people, I think it's my anger with some of this group of people.
I'm not even angry, is the fact that with every other country who sort of condemned this sort of practice, right?
Even in general, the right's kind of sick of Ukraine, you know, laundering our government for money and support and war.
We're kind of sick of it.
But when it comes to this topic, I think that a lot of people on the right and the left are bought out by big money.
I mean, you have Adelson already giving all this money or allegedly giving all this money to Trump.
Did he end up getting the $100 million from the gambling CEO?
Yeah, but then it's funny because then it's like the money comes from what?
From a Jewish person, and then it's what?
That got it from gambling, right?
And so a lot of people make these connections.
And so I feel like the conversations are hard to have because that's why I wanted to ask you a little bit about your thoughts on Candace.
These conversations can be hard to have because, like you said, about getting called the Nazi and the anti-Semite in one conversation, I actually, in my own chat, I have people there tonight saying I'm Jewish.
I'm just saying, but I'm saying me, I get called everything.
I don't really care.
I don't, if I'm, if you want to call me Jewish or whatever, I don't even care.
That doesn't bother me.
What I'm, what I think is hard is because people have taken such extreme sides on this camp, where if to one side, if you talk about Jews, then you're an anti-Semite.
And the other side, if you don't only talk about Jews, you're, you know, you're some secret Masad, controlled opposition, right?
I think they call Alex, they call Alex Jones Masad.
They call Tommy Robinson Masad, although Tommy Robinson is a very vocal supporter of the state of Israel, not necessarily the Netanyahu government, but that nuance is lost on everybody.
How it's been implemented and or how, not how it's been implemented, but how the government of England has catered to foreign interests or at least political correctness instead of enforcing their own laws as relates to the East Asian rape gangs that were going around unchecked and unprosecuted in England for decades.
And why was it?
On the one hand, he could criticize, I don't even think he criticizes Islam per se, but he certainly criticizes the absence of prosecution on the political correctness not to want to go after Muslims or East Asia, you know, Pakistanis in England.
And to that extent, blaming both, but only gets the criticism from the one end of the ism line of attack.
And we had this discussion together where we aligned on how the hell can our GP be telling us this is safe and effective for kids when it hasn't been around long enough.
unidentified
Yeah, even though I don't want to throw my wife under the bus, but you haven't seen a science.
Well, okay, so getting a couple facts wrong to me doesn't discredit somebody because I think number one, implicit bias is that when you're talking about the JQ or this, this stuff, right?
I think that sometimes there's like if you read about Stalin, it's like, oh, there's some relative in this and that.
And some people say he converted the two degrees of Judification.
And even when I tell her, like, just so you know, one day you might find a crusty sock and, you know, and you guys, she's like, I can, my little baby.
I was like, you know, he's going to grow older.
And I always tell him now, I tell my son, no, he doesn't really speak English because he's always trying to play with this Willie and he's always trying to look at his mom's boobs.
You know, he's always going after the boobs.
And I always tell him, like, dude, you know, playing with your Willie, going after boobs, it's just going to be a different type of plan, a different type of boobs, different set.
But, you know, you grow up and you stay the same.
And I really, what I'm saying about the circumcision, though, is like, yeah, unpopular with my audience.
I know people can be ignorant because I believe in circumcision.
I think it's a better, healthier choice.
I prefer it.
And there's this whole camp of people that call it male genital mutilation.
They get really mad and there's going to be some people in the chat now.
They're going to be like, I'm not following this show anymore.
I won't watch this.
You believe in male genital mutilation?
Oh, he's a zog.
He's a Jew.
Oh, this is a psyop.
When in reality, you don't even know how modern circumcision works.
It's like literally this little ring.
They don't, there's nobody sucking a penis.
There's no nice.
It's a very simple thing that just cuts off circulation.
It falls off and it's fine.
And people are against that.
And I'm not going to ask you to circumcise your kids.
If you don't want to do it, don't do it.
It doesn't bother me.
People don't do it.
I think it's healthier, not because of a Jewish reason, but literally because when I look at other countries and look at the stats of people that have infections and problems from the foreskin, I like think it's a healthier selection.
I mean, there's the whole, there's the whole idea that the entire historical reason for which Jews or people did it back in the day was to prevent disease infection.
I mean, I think that's widely accepted, but then the argument is with today's hygiene stuff, you no longer need to do it.
I get into this argument from time to time.
I was told I had to have an argument with Styx Hexenhammer about this.
But this is where you see the JQ, the Jewish question.
This is where you realize that there are people who harbor these beliefs.
I'm going to remember to say something after this.
People don't even know that I'm Jewish.
I don't talk about it very often because there's nothing that I say that I'm going to say, well, my view is now more legitimate because I'm Jewish or yours is illegitimate because you're not.
The second I say I don't consider male circumcision to be genital mutilation.
Oh, you're just defending because you're Jewish.
It's like, no, I'm defending it because I have my definition of mutilation, which is to impede the proper functioning of an organ.
And circumcision doesn't.
Then you have people say, well, it creates callus on the head, and so it doesn't feel as sensitive as if you don't have it.
Maybe I wouldn't call that mutilation any more than I would call working with your hands or rock climbing creating callous mutilation of your hands.
So this is where you realize sometimes the discussion doesn't go anywhere because people have these preconceived notions that your opinion is what it is.
I'm not even looking at the chat right now, but I can probably say about 95% of the people would be disagreeing with me and you and probably I'll probably lose quite a few followers.
Every time I talk about this, people are really shocked.
And it's like, guys, I've been really open about my support for circumcision and why there's a lot of reasons behind it as well.
Like personally, when you look at the amount of vitamin K and stuff and you look at the actual vitamin concentration when you're supposed to have circumcision, it is scientifically on the eighth day.
Again, people are like, people that get mad about this stuff, look, most of you that are mad don't even have children.
So if someone got circumcised when they were older, they would feel the difference.
They do feel a difference.
I'd love to watch a video on that.
Not of the circumcision, but a video just looking at somebody explaining what changed.
But I also think having a getting yourself circumcised as an adult to me seems only necessary if you lived in like a really poor country and you were trying, you were unsanitary.
It's like being kicked in the nuts over and over again.
And so the second time they fix it by going in, sewing one testicle to the side of the scrub so it doesn't twist around.
Then I had a testicular cyst, which they have to go into.
Very painful.
So messing around with that area for no, I guess not no better reason converting is a very good reason.
I would never do it in a million years as an adult.
And nor barring the strangulation, I forget what the word is.
When the foreskin strangles the head of the penis, when you get an erection, barring a medical necessity reason to do it afterwards, if you don't do it within like the first two weeks, I think at that point it's you've you've made neural, you've made connections that are going to be very painful to you.
So, I don't know if you're like, no, but first of all, everyone I grew up with was circumcised because I guess in the late 70s, people were being circumcised for religious reasons and for not for hygiene or just practice reasons.
The bottom line, I can understand someone's moral objection to it.
I can understand why they think it's wrong.
If they've ever seen a circumcision, I'm sure they would find it barbaric.
And I think that is important because you know what also, too?
I think this is one of those conversations, like you said, where it's really hard to explain where your brain is at or what you've learned and what you understand and why you think it's important because there's a lot of, I think there's a lot of the right wing who really is upset with the way that the country has gone.
And there's a good portion of the right wing that even will make fun of guys who are considered pretty hardline right, like Nick Fuentes and stuff, for even being Catholic, because they'll be like, oh, well, you're Catholic.
You've gone away from the pagan religion.
Like you are not pagan.
You've gotten the Jewish God and the Jewish strict.
Like there's a whole side of the right wing that even thinks Christianity is like a Jewish psyop to get white men to reject their God.
These are real people and they're not retarded.
I am, but they're not.
And they have some pretty good takes on life and they have a pretty good understanding.
What they see is like not even being pagan is sort of a psyop.
So the way I look at it is a lot of times, you know, about the extreme 8% is what they call it.
The people who are the most vocal on any issue are the most extreme 8% on the right and the left.
Everyone knows on X, it's actually an even smaller number.
I think isn't it like 1%?
Isn't it like 1% of the accounts make 90% of the tweets?
But I meant still is saying like, you know, on X, it's like, oh, there's, you know, hundreds of millions of users or whatever, you know, but then it's like really only like a couple million people are the ones tweeting.
I think this view on the right, I think sometimes in the trying to correct the issue and make sure that we're not having APAC influence or that, you know, we don't want the Federal Reserve owned by a private family type of thing.
You know, we don't want private families involved in any of our money or our currency.
People go further and further and further and further, and it becomes like its own religion of how right-wing can you be?
And it becomes a purity test.
Well, if you like circumcision, or if you support circumcision, it's the same thing of people that won't work you for Israel.
If you veer on one issue, there's a portion of the right wing that will be like, you're a Shaboskoy.
And that's if you break it down to the actual, but the bottom line, let's, I say like this, let's just operate on the basis that there was a Jew coup for the for the impeachment.
Okay, how is that going to impact how you deal with an individual who you meet on a daily basis that happens to be Jewish?
From a policy perspective, yeah, you could say, look, we don't want anyone with dual citizenship in government.
And I understand that.
I think from a policy perspective and from a criticizing the foreign interest, you want to adopt a Thomas Massey perspective and not a Nick Fuentes perspective.
Or at least, yeah, I'll keep it at that.
You want to adopt the Thomas Massey perspective and form of expression and not the Nick Fuentes.
One is focusing on the policy, the other is focusing on the people.
And so maybe I'm being unfair to Nick Fuentes.
I don't think I am because first, I don't find him as offensive as everybody, not everybody.
I don't find him as offensive as a lot of people find him.
That might be because I'm way too callous because I've been on the internet for too long.
When people say certain things like, no foreign wars, but also down with Israel, you're having mutually incompatible thoughts in your head.
For Thomas Massey to come out and say, it's not Israel.
It's not Ukraine.
It's any foreign conflict.
We should not be influenced by foreign interests into foreign conflict.
You can disagree with that, but you would not be able to call that a bigoted perspective because it's focusing on the policy and not on the people.
And I mean, that's the bottom line.
The issue is a lot, and it does also just tend to be that a disproportionate amount of the discourse for the people who I think focus on the people, not the policy, is all identity politics driven.
And it always focuses or disproportionately focuses on the people and not the policy.
Whereas Thomas Massey, you would be hard-pressed to say that he's focused on one specific target, one specific viewpoint.
And so then that's why Thomas Massey still gets called an anti-Israel, anti-Semite, but it's not because it's not focused on Israel per se.
It's focused on the broader policy at large, which is where I think some people cross the line, not in an offensive way, just in terms of a credibility way.
And by the way, I just want to mention with people while you're explaining this, you guys also, I've had a lot of guests on at the same time, and people said they wanted some one-on-ones with one guest at a time, which is why I listened to your guys' feedback, by the way, and I was really happy you were able to come on.
If people are wondering why the show's on earlier on Friday nights, I mentioned we're going to mostly be doing our shows at 10.30 on Fridays, but we'll sometimes move them to 7 like our other shows, if and when guests just can't make the later time, because that's more important that we get the content specifically.
We're content focused, not time focused.
So it's like to get the right people, the right conversations is more important than just going live at a certain time.
But anyway, we have a few thousand people watching live, so I'm glad you guys were able to show up.
Were created as the Jewish attack dog to kill the followers of Jesus who knew John wasn't a metaphor and named Yahweh.
The thing is this, call me crazy in terms of being too tolerant of ideas.
None of this really bothers me.
My line in the sand is violence, like overt violence and overt threats.
I've had a discussion with Flat Earthers, or at least Mark Sargent of Flat Earther.
And I'm not sure that I believe that he is entirely sincere in his beliefs, but I'm sure there are people who are entirely sincere in these beliefs who are otherwise good people.
The internet is something where it allows people to be much looser with their fingertips or their tongues.
But none of that really bothers me.
you can't write off anything as being too crazy to be true.
This one says, Cocteau said, when I watch in Glorious Bastards Now, I watch to the part where the SS shoot through the farmhouse floorboards, then skip to the end credits.
But this is also why I don't avoid these discussions, period.
I don't find they're productive because nobody who is already firmly embedded in their belief is going to change, period.
And then it just becomes a question of tropes and throwing out the who can get the wittier, the nastier comment.
And that's what it typically descends into.
The bottom line, if we're summarizing it, you cannot blame people for making certain observations.
And it's something I grew up with.
My crowd knows the anecdote.
I was at a casino once with my dad, and there was a Hasidic Jew who's playing at the table and was drinking too much and was not behaving properly and rude.
And not because they were Jewish, but they just happened to be identifiably so and noxious, toxic.
And my dad says to me loudly, but talking to me, he's like, you know, son, you represent 5,000 years of people.
And so when you behave badly, it reflects poorly on everybody.
And the guy next to me obviously knew my dad wasn't talking to me.
And he goes, what are you talking about?
I was like, oh, no, no, I'm just talking to my son.
The bottom line is everyone, whether you're identifiably Jewish or Jewish, whether you're identifiably minority of anything, if you misbehave, whether you like it or not, people are going to draw broader conclusions of the group as a whole.
And so you have a moral obligation.
People might not like this idea.
And maybe it's like the apologist.
Everybody has the obligation to act properly in as much, you know, and as a good person, because we do represent various groups.
And when we misbehave, people will draw broader rules.
That's how the human brain works to connect patterns.
And this is why I laughed because I mentioned how I'll get called like, you know, I'll get called the Jew apologist and then tomorrow someone will call me a Nazi.
It just, you know, I try to just be fair in conversations.
And one of the things is, though, that I feel becomes one of the more difficult parts is that, you know, the right wing has no problem blaming China infiltration, but they won't talk about AIPAC.
And then they have no problem saying liberal white women are going to be the end of this country using literally a race or like an ethnic group, right?
You're saying white women are the problem.
But if I said Jews are the problem or Jewish women are a problem, it's like, whoa, whoa, whoa, don't say that.
They'll intentionally close the door on the elevator so that you can't get in.
That's how they do this.
And I've talked to Chinese people and I was talking to expats while I was there.
I was in Shanghai and I found an expat bar to go to because I was like tired of just being like, mehaw, you know, so I was like, all right, I need to go, need to go talk to some of the boys.
And it was a lot of Brits, right?
Because I was working abroad and Australians.
And they all agreed, dude.
These people are real shovey, pushy.
They don't have like personal space.
And driving is scary, man.
It is, it is.
Have you ever read accounts from Indian people who moved to Canada and then moved back to India, aka Jung?
Yeah, it's crazy, but they say that Indians can't form a queue.
They can't form a line anywhere.
They can't form an ordered line.
That's kind of how China can definitely, China can actually form lines too well.
So I don't know what their problem is driving because they're the most synchronized society I've ever seen in my life.
And they're just like literal robots.
And that's also a weird situation where you said the difference between America and Canada.
When you go to an Eastern country and you spend time working there or whatever, and you see how people don't have like individual thought that everything's about honor, right?
Yeah, well, I mean, look, there are definitely cultures and there are definitely countries with various practices, which can be explained due to history, due to governments, due to geography.
Speaking of medical tyranny, my mother was pressured and coerced into slicing up my cock, but she saw through the wicked doctors and denied them of my flesh.
Thanks to her, she didn't cuck me and turned me into a dicklet.
But I don't know if it's because I'm a lawyer or obsessive, compulsive, neurotic.
I can have the debate with myself.
I say, okay, it's the parental autonomy they get to do within the realm of what's legal, what they think is in the best interest of their kid.
But then I would not also empower that parent to authorize their kids to take gender, so-called gender-affirming care because I consider that to be genital mutilation, where I don't consider male circumcision to be genital mutilation.
I don't think my views are incompatible.
I think they're quite consistent.
And I have this debate with myself.
I don't even need other people to give me the hard time to challenge my own ideas.
I think if I'm going to do the wide shots, I should always have, we should probably just get another wide lens because the depth of field makes it like the set look better.
I like that.
It's very cool.
Plus, also one thing we're doing too, which is irrelevant, is I have to wait for more of the anchors, but we have some colored lights will be hanging to add some different color depth.
You're supposed to be kind of colored a little bit, so we can give you some color in your hair.
And so, yeah, if you have anything or you want to hang out, plus, you know, I'd love to have you on some panels in the future because we're going to be doing some like, you know, getting people to discuss stuff like that.
No, but people, people, well, people often ask the question also because they want to either affirm the beliefs they have or one way or the other, for good or for bad.
So if they like me, they hope that I answer the questions, you know, the way they want so they can continue to like me.
And if they don't like me, they just wait for that one thing.
Like, I knew he believes that because he's a Jew.
The bottom line, I do my absolute best not to let any element of identity politics influence my views or cause me to undermine or, you know, what's the word I'm looking for?
Lend less credence to other people's views on the merits of the ideas independent of the person.
I have no problem with Nick in terms of hearing the ideas.
I mean, sometimes I think he does deliberately, well, come close to crossing the line.
The time when he ran into problems on Rumble, and then, you know, it was the statement, if they want to fight the Holy War, we will make them die in the Holy War in reference to Jews.
You know, I think at some point people do fall victim to their own propensity to not antagonize, but to try to push the envelope within what they know to be the limits.
But from an idea perspective.
I know that he had the debate with Robert Barnes and then Barnes, and everyone says Barnes famously blocked him on Twitter afterwards.
The problem is I've never, I understand the utility of blocking people on Twitter because otherwise it's very easy for groups or brigades to come and hijack a reply section with distractions.
I know who I believe had the better of that debate.
And I think I know where Nick Fuentes goes wrong as an individual sometimes.
I know where people want to forgive him and see past it.
But there's not a realm of acceptable thought.
There's a realm of acceptable discourse that cannot be subject to misinterpretation, even if it was of good faith in the first place.
So that might be a little confusing way of saying that you can disagree, but then sometimes the rhetoric gets deliberately provocative and deliberately incendiary.
You know, and I think speaking of that as a father, sometimes I'll have those nights too.
It's kind of why I changed the shows to be a little bit earlier because I was finding myself being sort of like just tired and dead at like 11 o'clock, you know, by when the show was going.
And so like, you show me like a feminist and all of a sudden, but after 10, it's like, you show me this?
I hate all women now.
You know what I mean?
Like, it just goes from just being like, oh, I can talk about this, this woman in this video to like, ah, fucking women, you know?
Like, geez, like, I was just getting tired on the issues.
Like, you know, I need to like make sure it's a little bit earlier because obviously I work a lot, do a lot of things, and I need to make sure that my mind is sharp and I'm giving my best foot forward for the show because I think it's, you know, we lost a lot of this discourse.
And I've always invited people from all over the intellectual, you know, field on the show.
This is always meant to be a gateway drug, slightly offensive.
It was never meant to be conservative, right-wing, or to be that edgy.
It was always meant to be a gateway drug.
I've always said the show was supposed to be an olive branch between the dissident far-right and the establishment right.
And it's done a pretty good job.
We've had a lot of Congress people on the show, you know, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gates, different people have been on the show.
And then, of course, we've had like Nick Fuentes on.
We have Lucas Gage on or, you know, Jake Shields and people who aren't completely considered more dissident.
We tried to do it the last time he was in Florida.
Another individual where you can see in real time, the problem becomes when it becomes not just a discussion on a subject, but the only discussion, the only subject, and a borderline obsession.
And I understand how people rationalize it to themselves.
It's an existential threat to the U.S. if we don't take care of certain, if we don't address certain political issues.
But like a Jackson Hinkle type, when it becomes the defining element of the individual, when it becomes the brand, I think you have gone from meaningful discourse on an issue to dogmatic diatribes and only that.
And so Jake, I knew him from when he was a fighter, and I've seen the transition and it becomes something of an obsession where it becomes all about and only about one specific question.
And that's where people begin to discredit the person or just ignore them.
And I think, you know, whether or not Nick Fuentes is there, I think he may have gotten there.
I mean, it certainly seems to be dominate the discussion.
Jake Shields, it dominates the Twitter feed.
And it ends up, I think, discrediting the person.
And I think that's where Candace Owens sort of has gotten now.
But I've got, I mean, I have no aversion to having a discussion with anything about anything, anyone about anything.
The only issue is that sometimes it becomes just brigading of not necessarily the individual, but those who support them.
Yeah, like single-issue people to where, like, the reason why I don't follow a lot of political media, even though I have a show, is because I don't like, like, I can get exhausted from politics.
And this show, particularly, we like to keep it more culturally based.
Like, I don't like to talk about the Democrats or Democrats or Republicans.
We don't take a bipartisan approach like that.
It's more just looking at what's going on in the day as a perspective, as a dad, as a friend, or talking about people about their lives, what they believe.
I just think this question isn't going to go away anytime soon.
And then the question becomes, you know, one person, one group says historical persecution.
The other group says, why does it keep happening?
And, you know, I know the memes for crime statistics.
I know the memes for Jews expelled from 139 countries.
At what point do you say it's maybe it's me, not them if it happens over and over again throughout history?
But then from the flip side, you say, it happens to us throughout history because either they hate us for our success is one of the typical replies of people of the book who've distinguished themselves.
The bottom line, you get to a certain age.
You've had these discussions multiple times with multiple people over decades.
It's always the same discussion.
It's always the same spiral.
It never goes anywhere and it gets tiring.
And then people accuse you of avoiding the discussion because.
And so that's, and I say this, like, you know, having the discussion with Nick Fuentez, fine.
It's not, it's not a discussion I haven't had with people not necessarily on air, but definitely privately over the last 20 years.
This, this recent flare-up of violence in Israel, I'm old enough to have lived through two intifadas.
It's always the exact same cycle, circle of violence, of discourse.
And I mean, it just repeats.
And so when you get to be, you know, you get to a certain point, you say, okay, it's never going to go anywhere.
I'll avoid it and talk about the stuff that I can actually have an impact on.
