No Agenda Episode 1814 - "Needle Drop"
"Needle Drop"
Executive Producers:
Aug
Sir Schwartz
Dame Kathryn
Associate Executive Producers:
Dame Astrid and Sir Mark - Arch Duchess and Arch Duke of Japan and all the Disputed Islands in the Japan Sea
Anonymous
Linda Lu, Duchess of jobs & writer of winning résumés
Christopher Ryan
Peace Prize:
Aug
Become a member of the 1815 Club, support the show here
Boost us with with Podcasting 2.0 Certified apps: Podverse - Podfriend - Breez - Sphinx - Podstation - Curiocaster - Fountain
Art By: Nessworks
End of Show Mixes:
MVP EOS A.I. Slop Song.mp3
Bonald Crabtree EOS fedpromo.wav
Danny Loos EOS In the Morning _ Boom Bap.mp3
Dick Cheney EOS Sha BOOM.mp3
MVP EOS 18 Years of Crackpottery and Buzzkilling.mp3
Engineering, Stream Management & Wizardry
Back Office Jae Dvorak
Chapters: Dreb Scott
Clip Custodian: Neal Jones
Clip Collectors: Steve Jones & Dave Ackerman
NEW: and soon on Netflix: Animated No Agenda
Sign Up for the newsletter
No Agenda Peerage
ShowNotes Archive of links and Assets (clips etc) 1814.noagendanotes.com
Directory Archive of Shownotes (includes all audio and video assets used) archive.noagendanotes.com
RSS Podcast Feed
Full Summaries in PDF
No Agenda Lite in opus format
Last Modified 11/06/2025 16:32:30This page created with the FreedomController
Last Modified 11/06/2025 16:32:30 by Freedom Controller
This is your award-winning Gitmo Nation Media Assassination episode 1814.
This is no agenda.
Sling and slop and broadcasting live from the heart of the Texas Hill Country in FEMA region number six.
In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
From Northern Silicon Valley, where we notice that Blue States, the Democrats win.
I'm John C. Dvorak.
It's Craig Bottom Buzzkill.
In the morning.
Notice anything?
In Blue States, the Democrats win.
No, I guess you didn't notice it.
But I notice.
That entire opening was AI.
Oh, it sounded.
I was going to ask you if you had pre-recorded it.
It sounded pre-recorded.
It didn't sound like AI either.
No, I know.
I know.
I sampled my voice.
It's a little flat, a little flat.
Yes, a little flat.
And I tried for hours, like, regenerate, regenerate.
Then you get like little bits, like, oh, that sounds like me.
And then, you know, because I trained.
It sounds like you.
Yeah.
Except it sounds like you, if you were a robot.
A robot.
Yeah.
I was like, you know, the troll room got it right away.
That was interesting.
Yeah.
And you, and you thought I was pre-recorded.
Okay.
Yeah, that makes sense.
That makes sense.
So our jobs are still safe then, I think.
Well, you know, the opening of something, it's just the reparte can never exist with AI.
That's the problem, except with the, well, let's take a deep dive.
Okay.
All right.
Here we go.
Yeah.
Yeah, with the mumbling in the background.
Uh-huh.
Uh-huh.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, that's good.
I'm very happy.
That means we will remain employed for at least another six months.
I hate to mention it to you, but we're not really employed.
That's true.
By the way, just as an aside, you know, we now have, for the first time, we have an AI song on the charts.
Did you know that?
No, I don't know this.
How am I supposed to know?
Well, if you didn't know, this is Zanaya Monet.
Hi, you guys.
It's AI generated, has a record deal reportedly worth up to $3 million and has made headlines for popping up on social media, streaming services, and music charts.
Now, Monet is the first of its kind to land on a Billboard radio chart for this song, How Was I Supposed to Know?
How is I supposed?
Monet has real musicians fired up too.
Joey Leneve DeFrancesco is with United Musicians and Allied Workers, an advocacy group in the U.S.
But artists were already so mad that they're already seeing next to nothing from their work online and their work in digital music spaces.
And they're seeing this as another slap in the face.
He says currently there's hardly anything when it comes to AI protections for musicians.
My organization, by the way, pushing this guy.
He sounds like he could just as easily be complaining about being misgendered.
Oh, totally.
With this voice he is.
He's not a great spokesperson for the performing musicians, but let's complete this report.
Comes to AI protections for musicians.
My organization is in fact pushing a piece of legislation in the U.S. called the Living Wage for Musicians Act that would create a new type of streaming royalty payments, and it would specifically only go to human creators.
But reportedly, there's a human behind Monet.
According to Billboard, a poet named Talisha Nikki Jones created the AI using software and her own lyrics.
But it's clear not everyone is willing to tune in to what this AI is putting out.
So this is clearly, I'm sorry for our humming representative there.
This is clearly a trial balloon from the publishing, the music publishing industry.
Otherwise, this would not happen.
You know, they've already told Spotify, get it all off, except for this one, apparently.
This is your future.
We are so getmodejams.com is alive, everybody.
Three times an hour, you get some AI slop from us.
We will be breaking artists in quotes on this show.
We have to consider something, which is that with ASCAP and with the royalty payments, it goes to the writers.
Yeah, the writers and composers, but there's a separate sound exchange.
There's separate streaming royalties that go to performers.
Yeah, that's for streaming.
But in so far as the...
Well, what else is there?
There's not people on the screen.
Well, I mean, the point is, is that this woman that does this character is the writer.
She writes the lyrics.
But there's also ASCAP BMI for streaming.
It's all in one.
There's a lot of royalties that get spoiled for streaming.
It just seems to me that I don't think they should make such a fuss.
She's writing the songs.
This is not all AI.
It's just the stuff behind it, which she's also programming using AI.
Whoa, she's programming now, is she?
Well, that's what I would call it.
What would you call it?
Prompting.
Okay, well, prompting is programming.
How's that different?
Wow.
Yeah, okay.
You just broke the heart of a whole bunch of dudes named Ben, but yeah.
Well, I guess so.
They agree.
At least they know that what they're doing largely, especially with the more advanced language models, is prompting.
That's what I'm saying.
It's the machine to do certain things.
That's called vibe coding.
Go to, you know.
Go to the hospital.
It's prompting.
It's nothing more.
Oh, man.
Yeah.
No, I mean, it was.
I can't push back on this.
No, but I'm just saying that this is where the industry is going.
We're going to see a whole new level of hits prompted and written.
I mean, our end of show makes.
Let's hope that the quality is better than that.
Well, if you want to be critical, I can be critical of the song.
I don't think the song's any good.
I don't like that song.
I know.
It's not a toe-tapper.
It's kind of mournful.
I'm feeling a new chart.
John C. Dvorex toe-tapping top 100.
I'm feeling a chart.
I'm feeling a chart coming here.
It doesn't sound, it's nothing you can hum.
I mean, there's a million things wrong with it.
Yeah, I'm with you.
You know, Taylor Swift stuff's no better, but that's beside the point.
Exactly.
I'm just identifying what's happening.
You know, for two boomers, I know how much you hate that.
We're on top of this.
There's a couple.
Hello, people.
There's a couple.
We're not like two slouches.
Okay, we'll come back to AI.
How do you use a barcode?
Barcode.
We'll come back to AI later because you bring it up.
There's something that we weren't really aware of when we received several emails about this.
And I want to read one of them because it's the shortest.
People, you can make your point in a shorter note.
And this is regarding the juice isn't worth the squeeze from the Tucker Carlson Nick Fuentes interview, which I think we both interpreted somewhat incorrectly, although I don't need people to say, I'm so disappointed in what you said.
You don't donate either of those people.
It's like, okay, just get to the point.
We don't know everything, obviously.
So here's one that I thought was reasonable.
I was listening to the Sunday show and just wanted to clarify something you and John were talking about when it comes to Nick Fuentes.
The juice not being worth the squeeze is a red pill concept, not an incel concept.
I don't think we tied it that way, but that doesn't matter.
No, we didn't.
I forgot what I said, but it wasn't about incel.
It doesn't matter.
Incel has fallen out of favor, but the issue that most older men have is they haven't been in the current date.
That's us.
They haven't been in the current dating market, so they think things are the way they have always been.
That's not true.
I don't think that's true.
I'm absolutely convinced things are nothing like they were.
You used to meet women in the museum.
Those days are over.
Woohoo!
Bring that back.
Hey, baby, what do you think of that painting?
Nice, nice piece.
It's intriguing.
What are some of the, well, stop.
What would some, what are some, because it could come back.
It could have resurgence.
Give us a couple of pickup lines for in the museum.
I'll pick up lines in the museum.
But the thing is, you have to pick up lines.
I've never been good at them because it's just like I always saw a casual conversation that either triggered something or it didn't.
And so you'd say something to say, what do you think of this piece?
Well, hold on.
How did you meet Mimi?
What was the first interaction?
He was at a party.
Yeah.
At a sock hop?
No, it was a party, a regular, like an industry party, you know, tech.
Oh, she was at a tech party?
Interesting.
Yeah.
She used to work for a tech contributor.
And he went, hey.
It was something like that.
Yeah, I forced myself on you, actually.
I can be pretty aggressive.
I love it.
I love it.
All right.
We continue.
You have been married three times.
John, once, I believe.
Incorrect, but that's up to John to explain.
The dating market.
Yes.
So between us, five marriages.
Yes.
The dating market isn't anywhere close to where it was even five years ago.
Women have rosters of men they date.
Both men and women ghost each other at the first sign of any trouble.
Yeah, that's true.
I believe it.
The juice not being worth the squeeze is the simple fact that the vast majority of men are treated like wallets, and the upside to dating is so small that most men don't make a healthy, who don't make a healthy salary, are tall, extremely attractive, and in peak physical shape, don't have a chance for even an average woman.
That's a five.
I am a Gen Xer that's been single for the past five years.
I date extensively, but fall victim to the same challenges that Gen Z and millennials face.
A date is a job interview for a man.
What do you do?
How long have you been there?
What degrees do you have?
All in the hopes of sussing out how much money I make and the chance of anything lasting longer than a few weeks is not in the cards.
You and John were lucky with your mate choices.
Well, not all of them, but for the rest of the men out there, it's not as easy as it used to be.
And you know what?
Thank you.
And I appreciate that.
And of course, we've seen TikTok videos of women talking like this.
And, you know, how much money does he have?
Six, six.
You got six figures, six feet tall, et cetera, et cetera.
And I'm really sad about that.
I think that's incredibly successful.
Well, this brings me to the Nick Fuentes clips I have for today.
Oh, no, you went back to the well.
Well, about this exact topic.
Okay.
Oh, whoa.
Brilliant.
I only took two from the segment, but they talked about dating, why, you know, Nick Fuentes has his opinions.
By the way, I'm going to preface this by saying that I saw, I've never seen Nick Fuentes' podcast, okay?
And I don't hate saying okay, because I listened to Candace Owens' podcast recently, and that's all she says.
But no, you're not doing it right.
And you say, okay.
Okay.
She says, okay, well, I don't notice the M so much, but she says after every phrase, okay?
Okay.
Well, she says it more like, okay, like if you question her, the hellfire will strike you down.
Okay.
Yeah.
So I've never seen Fuentes' material.
So I saw, instead of watching Fuentes, I listened to Ben Shapiro's rant.
About Fuentes with old men.
About Fuentes and about Tucker.
That was great.
That was great.
It was great.
It's fantastic.
This is taking everything he can out of context.
You have no feeling for anything because it's just these blips and blips and blips.
Well done.
He just took both Fuentes and Carlson to the cleaners.
Yeah.
Well, we'll come back to that.
Okay.
Well, I hope you have something.
Meanwhile, my take on Fuentes is what I saw on the Tucker Carlson interview, and that's it.
And I think he's entertaining.
He's when you see the clips that Shapiro plays, he's like a maniac, but it's different.
So let's play these two clips.
This is Fuentes on dating women and the whole problem out there.
But I'm always, I think I'm just too old or something.
I'm like, why is anyone married?
You tell me, why aren't people married?
Well, I mean, honestly, it's the women.
The women are extremely liberal.
No one talks about that.
Increasingly, they do, especially after the last election, there's a 45-point difference between men and women.
The men are extremely conservative, increasingly.
The women are extremely liberal.
What are they liberal on what issues?
Like, what does that mean, liberal?
Oh, they're very feminist.
Like, actually?
Extremely feminist.
Yeah.
They believe that, do they?
I think they do.
Really?
Really?
Absolutely.
Yes.
Gender roles are a construct that none of this is inborn.
Like, you'd have to be an idiot to think that.
They like the idea of it.
They, they like the, because, of course, I think all women naturally want strong men.
Of course.
They naturally want a Chad.
You know, they want like a tall, buff guy.
But they, I think they like the idea of none of them want to work either.
None of them actually.
That's what I'm saying.
That's what I'm saying.
Of course.
That's available.
It's always been work outside the home.
Right.
They don't have enough work at home.
That's a lot.
Right on, Tucker.
But no, I completely agree.
So that's why I question like they're feminists in what sense.
Yes.
And, you know, they like these vague appeals to equality.
We want a chance to work and we want respect.
And, you know, ultimately, I think the whole political system is just based around women never being accountable for any of their choices.
Ultimately, that seems to be what that's what abortion is.
Yeah, of course.
Because 99% of abortions are elective.
So they say it's an unplanned pregnancy.
You had sex out of wedlock with someone you didn't intend to have kids with.
So now we have to kill the kids in the womb.
Woo!
Nick Fuentes.
Yeah, nailing it.
Nailing it.
I can't say it any other way, nailing it.
Well, he's making his points.
You know, it's very generalized.
It's almost stereotyped, but it's of course.
Of course.
And anyone could have given that answer, even boomers who don't know what the dating scene is like.
It's not like, like, like, like, K.
It's not incredibly hard to come up with that.
But he said.
Okay, good.
But it's not also, you know, the number of women that don't fall into these categories is probably pretty high.
So let's, but let's listen to the better part, which is the second half.
This is actually, there's more stuff to yak, yak, yak back and forth.
I mean, very wordy, these two guys, but let's go to the end.
And, you know, these no-fault divorce laws.
These women get married to guys maybe they never intend to stay with.
And then when they're out, they're done.
And they want child support and they want half the stuff.
And I think a lot of men are looking at women and they're very liberal.
They're overweight.
They have a very high estimation of themselves.
I think people call it hoflation.
Hoflation.
Yes.
Their sense of their own looks and sexual value is very inflated.
And so a lot of people are looking at these like frumpy, obnoxious, loudmouth, liberal women who are also very promiscuous and saying, this is not actually appealing at all.
And I don't want to start a family at the person's office.
Yeah, it is.
Okay.
Okay.
So I thought that was worth listening to.
Just tell them, because I have a little series on Tucker.
Tell me what the Candace stuff is because it might be appropriate.
Is it about Israel?
Tell me.
And we have Candace stuff.
Candace debate theory here.
What is that?
Oh, this is about Mamdani.
Oh, no.
Well, hold on on that for a second.
Yeah.
No, I'm not pushing it.
I think I'm even trying to.
Okay, because you kind of led me right.
Okay, again.
I can't help it.
I've been watching it too.
Everybody, it's habitual.
It's a problem.
It's a real problem.
You have to like.
You got to shake it.
Got to shake it.
So I've been kind of obsessed is not the word, but I'm trying to figure out what is going on with all these podcasters going on each other's podcasts, talking about each other, sniffing each other.
And they're all going around and around.
It's like a circle jerk.
Yeah, sniffing each other's farts and like, what is happening here?
What is the point?
And is it still all about Israel?
But what is happening?
And earlier this week, I thought I saw a clue, and that was confirmed last night.
So I spent this morning clipping some stuff.
This is an op.
And I think it's pretty elaborate and sophisticated.
A good op is.
Which a good op is.
And in fact, a good op should not be identifiable.
We just happen to be kind of tuned into them.
Well, the best op is when the person doing the op actually tells you what the op is about and you just kind of accept it as part of the op, even though you don't know it's an op.
Does that make sense?
Well, we'll find out by your clips.
Okay.
So just to set the stage for a second.
No, actually, I'll go to this is the first clip kind of led me into it because there's a lot of people involved in this.
I don't think I know.
I know that not everyone's in on the op.
Fuentes not in on the op.
Candice is not in on the op.
Glenn Greenwald might be.
I don't think so.
And Dave Smith is completely not in on the op.
He is the willing idiot in the game.
And so Tucker goes on Dave Smith.
I'm like, what is this?
I saw this.
Why is he doing this?
What is the point?
Yeah, that's what I thought.
I didn't watch that.
You probably, I could only watch a few.
I couldn't take it.
I couldn't.
No, no, but I got lucky.
I got lucky because I needle-dropped into what I needed to hear.
But the first part, so people like, and Shapiro is on the other side of this, but he's completely fallen for the op.
He's the biggest moron in this.
Oh, Shapiro's terrible.
He's completely familiar with the people.
By the way, just stop you for a second.
One of those phrases we should put aside is needle drop.
Gen Z doesn't know what you want.
What's a needle drop?
So back in the day, you'd go into a store that had these discs, and these discs were black, and they were made of something called vinyl.
You might have pants made out of it.
And they were kind of flexible, but then you would put them on a turntable.
That's a rotating disc.
And there would be a needle, an actual needle in an arm that you'd put onto this vinyl disc known as a record or a long play album, sometimes a single of 45.
And it would pick up the little grooves in this vinyl and the vibrations would be sent back through an amplification and you would hear music.
So a needle drop that's exciting in different terms in broadcasting, but kind of the same in a record store.
You'd sit behind a long desk and you'd all have a pair of headphones and there would be a record player in front of you.
Sometimes the store would let you use it yourself.
They wouldn't always because you might scratch the record.
In the olden days, they did.
Yes.
Scratching the record later became a hip-hop art form.
Okay.
But scratching meant that you ruined the grooves.
So you do a needle drop just to listen to a track further on.
In broadcast, in broadcasting, we would, you know, a record promoter comes in.
Hey, man, I got this.
Is it great?
This is a hit.
This is the next number one.
It's a toe-tapper.
And so you'd listen to the intro and then you'd pick up the needle and drop it in the middle.
Okay.
Like, because you had no time to listen to it all.
So that's a needle drop, i.e. these days, fast-forwarding, two minutes, and checking it out and fast forwarding.
I'm sorry I asked.
Yeah, well, you did ask.
So I needle dropped.
And so Dave Smith, who was, you know, he's just Mr. Libertarian, anti-war.
Israel is the worst.
And by the way, I'm sorry if I'm interrupting you.
You're going to have to do it for an hour.
Dave Smith.
I can't watch him.
He is the worst example of the podcaster who can't stop talking.
To get to his first question with Tucker, it must have been five minutes.
He just keeps going over this.
Well, you know, and I want to ask you about this because it's something that I think is important.
I think you might have thought it was important too, because I thought it was important.
So you would probably think it was important, but I'm not sure that you thought it was important.
But I want to know if you think it's important because everybody else, in fact, I talked to some guys the other day.
They thought it was important.
And so I want you to tell me if you think it's important.
You do a very good impression of the Dave Smith.
And he's a comedian, by the way.
I tried to look.
I found one of his sets on Netflix.
I'm like, oh, you're not that funny.
You're funnier when I'm watching you stumble around like this.
So Dave Smith is not in the op.
Dave Smith is just delighted that he's got numbers.
He's trending.
Everybody is trending.
It's proof that he's right.
And what's his face?
Ben Shapiro, you know, he's a loser.
He's an idiot.
And he's yelling at us.
And so we're yelling back at him.
But meanwhile, we're winning.
We've got numbers.
We're the best.
But he sent me the episode of Ben Shapiro today, so I'm pretty pissed at him for that.
That's not a cool thing to do to a friend.
But I did watch a little bit of it.
And he's going, you know, he's like, he's sitting there and he's going like, you know, Tucker Carlson.
And then just completely like, you know, in a demented way representing your view.
Tucker Carlson, the platforming of Holocaust deniers and this and loving Nazis.
The American people hate that.
The American people reject that.
And meanwhile, there's just this amazing feature about, you know, the new decentralized media landscape where like we can all look at the numbers and we can see who's gaining in relevance and who's losing it.
And the fact is that like Nick Fuentes is ascendant.
Candace Owens is humongously breaking records.
You were the biggest show at cable news, got fired and got bigger after that.
Again, you can just look at the numbers.
They're all right there.
And Ben Shapiro went from being like the king of the online conservative guys to being very much a laughingstock and falling down in all these numbers.
So they want to sit here and try to convince you that what you're seeing in front of you isn't really happening, but we all know that it is.
So he's so self-righteous, Mr. Davis.
By the way, he's got a guest in front of him.
Oh, yeah.
He's back in a way.
When I, you know, it's like, I always thought interviewers should let the guest, the guest is there to tell you something.
No, you can always listen to the host.
No, no, he feels that he's on the same, he's on a team.
He's on the team.
Tucker's on the team.
We're on the team.
We're on the right side of America saving America.
America first.
This is all about, this is the thing.
America first, baby.
We don't want foreign wars.
We don't want foreign intervention.
We want America first.
I never hear them talking about SNAP because I learned that three weeks of SNAP benefits is equal to the annual amount we send to Israel in military aid, but okay, America first.
So that's what he's about.
And, you know, and you got that number?
Yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Three weeks of snap.
Three weeks of snap is equal to everything we said to Israel for a year.
Yes.
And then we get that money back from Israel in arms and arms purchases, right?
Okay.
Yeah, we don't get that with SNAP.
Well, we do get, we do sell food, though.
So we need to take that into account for a moment.
Now, just to reframe my thinking so people understand where I'm coming from, particularly Israel.
And by the way, I think that October 7th, it's very suspicious that we have, you know, this, you're in Tel Aviv.
You're 45 minutes from where this all took place, but it took seven hours for the military to do anything.
I think that this was in itself an op, not by the Americans, but by the Israelis.
And maybe it was a part of the whole Abraham Accord, let's settle this in the Middle East.
And, you know, they had the money, we don't, well, no, we don't know.
It's just suspicious.
But hold on.
There was the master plan, which was already started by the master plan's own admission of Witkoff and Kushner.
So this was in the planning.
I don't think it went the way they actually thought it would.
They thought that, you know, no, they'll kill some people, but it'll be good.
And they had hostages and it got drawn out.
And the whole thing was obviously a mess.
Or as Dave Smith calls it, genocide in 4K.
Okay.
All right.
I got it.
War is horrible.
So this kind of reignited the why are we sending money to Israel meme.
This is a very real meme.
We can't fight it.
The millennials, the Gen Z, even the Gen Alphas are very suspicious of all of this.
Then we got the Kirk murder.
Enter.
Candace Owens could not have been more helpful for pointing the finger at Israel.
And then you have APAC.
Oh, AIPAC, APAC, AIPAC.
Israel controls all of Congress.
AIPAC, AIPAC.
Now, I'm just going to reiterate our stance that Israel does not control America.
America has historically, since the 70s, go back being at .io and look at all the Michael Hudson videos.
He was there, the clips we have of Michael Hudson, how Israel is the aircraft carrier in the sand and meant to be our launching point there for all kinds of horrible things America has done, mainly for resources, et cetera.
So APAC is funded by the American Israeli Education Fund, which is mainly funded by the military-industrial complex.
So if you want to say APAC is a danger to America for control, I'm in complete agreement.
Ever since Eisenhower said and way before any of this, like 15, 18 years ago, we were talking about Eisenhower's message upon his leaving the presidency.
Be careful.
It's the military-industrial complex.
And yes, a lot of Congress is definitely controlled by APAC and the military-industrial complex.
And they are inherently bad because they always want war.
So this op that I think I can show to you is using the Israel conviction that people think that Israel is controlling us and we need to stop that to complete a very specific goal.
And I believe Tucker is completely, he may even be leading this.
I think he's really good at it, if he is.
And this was the clue during the Dave Smith podcast, part of the problem, I think is the name of the podcast, that made me start to think about this.
And then last night, I was totally convinced.
So listen to this.
Ben is like this.
Ben fears that he's going to get hurt.
It's like, I look at this and I'm like, I don't think, I think Ben's fine.
It's like, who's more likely to get hurt?
Me or Ben?
You know, it's like, not even really close.
But, but that doesn't matter.
He feels that way.
And a lot of these people who are throwing this Nazi stuff around, they're doing it for a reason.
Of course, this is part of a strategy.
You know, we got to clear the skeptics out of the Republican Party by the time Trump leaves or else we, the neocons will lose their stranglehold on the party.
That is the goal.
But I just want to say again, as they say these radical, really kind of crazy things, they convince themselves and they become dangerous.
You know, I think it's not about me.
It's about the future of the Trump movement after Trump.
That's what all this is about.
I'm just happening to be in this place.
I'm not trying to shirk responsibility for anything I did at all, but it's not really about me.
They're mad at me because I'm like basically sincerely a moderate guy.
So when I hear this, I'm like, huh, could it be that Tucker has the assignment?
And remember, Tucker was at the Republican National Committee.
He was walking into UFC fights with Trump.
And then this stuff starts to happen.
And we had one truth social post from Trump saying, Tucker's gone nuts around the same time.
Elon is no good.
Notice how you haven't heard anything from the president about either of those guys in a long, long time.
In fact, quite the opposite.
The guy who was who Elon wanted to be NASA administrator suddenly is back and available and is up for nomination or approval by Senate when they come back to be the NASA administrator.
So Elon very likely is playing a part of this as well.
And if so, wow, long game.
Very, very impressed.
So last night, Tucker drops another episode.
He has an almost a 40-minute monologue.
And these are always good.
This is what he used to do on Fox News.
It's written.
He's just nailing it.
And I need to play some of this.
Most of these are pretty short, but they're all very relevant.
Here's how it starts off.
Good evening and welcome and happy anniversary.
Tonight is the one-year anniversary of Trump's second election to the presidency.
It was a year ago tonight that Donald Trump not only won, but won a majority of the popular vote.
And not only won a majority of the popular vote, but one with a coalition that was broader than any Republican coalition probably since 1984 with the Reagan landslide.
So a 40-year coalition.
And at the time, looking at not just how many people voted, but who voted, it seemed really obvious if you were interested in keeping the left at bay and the Republicans in power for, say, the next generation or two, you would copy exactly what Donald Trump did because no one else has done it in 40 years.
He created this amazing, not just landslide, not a landslide, but it was an amazing victory in an environment in which most people assumed you couldn't have an authoritative victory because the country is just too closely divided.
So it was an amazing thing that Donald Trump did a year ago.
So the election was a year ago.
That means the midterm election is a year from now.
The next presidential election, two years after that.
So it's probably not too early to start thinking through what comes after Donald Trump.
No respect to the sitting, disrespect to the sitting president, but of course there's going to be something after him because he can't run again.
Okay.
When I heard this, I'm thinking, all right, exactly one year.
This is the anniversary.
We've got to get ready for the midterms.
Something has to happen.
And we know that, and this is the second time he's saying, what happens after Trump?
What happens at the midterms?
What are we going to do?
We have a party that is filled with good people and bad people, and they need to be rooted out.
And leads to say people are thinking about that.
And not only are they thinking about it, they're already arguing and fighting about it.
There is what Politico is calling a civil war in the Republican Party.
And it's over, of course, identity, because the only wars we have in this country, the only sanctioned wars we have domestically are about identity, BLM, anti-Semitism.
Of course, it's not really what they're ever about.
These are proxy wars.
These are wars waged on behalf of people who aren't directly participating for reasons that are never openly stated.
And this war is actually about what comes after Donald Trump.
He keeps saying it.
This is all about what happens after Donald Trump.
Now, at this point, I agree with the initial sentiment in the troll room.
I'm like, wow, is Tucker going to run for president?
No, no, that can't be right.
No, he's going to clearly point out what this is about.
Does the Republican Party, the party that now has power and a lot of money, revert to what it was before Trump, or does it continue to evolve in the direction that Trump has steered it?
That's the question.
And on that question hangs a lot.
Well, control of the most powerful country in the world.
Notice what he's saying here.
He's saying this is about the Republican Party.
This is not about Trump.
This is not about Israel.
This is about the Republican Party, which Tucker seems to care a lot about.
The question.
And on that question hangs a lot.
Well, control of the most powerful country in the world, control of the free world, such as it is, the shrinking free world, and an awful lot of jobs for people and an awful lot of military power.
So there is a lot at stake in this contest.
So consider the two choices here.
You can go with the Republican Party as it was, which is basically neoconservative foreign policy, libertarian economic policy, the Republican Party of the think tanks in Washington of the Wall Street Journal editorial page of all the deep thinkers in the Republican Party, deep thinkers in the Republican Party, the ones who are always invoking the same three Reagan quotes and quoting Tocqueville incorrectly and doing their little queer erudite impression.
Or does it continue to become what it is currently becoming, which is the party of Donald Trump?
Well, what is that?
What is MAGA exactly?
How do you make America great again?
Well, Donald Trump, in his sort of signature way, which is to say never quite spelling everything all the way out, is not very ideological, but instead, sort of leading by implication and by action, the position of Donald Trump in the last election was America first.
There it is.
This is what everyone has been saying.
No, we want America first.
What Trump is doing is not America first.
Notice that Tucker is on the president's side here.
He is saying that the president wanted America first.
At this point, we have no talk about APAC or Israel or Epstein or any of this stuff.
It's all about rooting out the neocons.
And I completely agree that there are a bunch of a-holes.
We just lost one yesterday and Dick Cheney, who really were not good actors in the Republican Party who had a lot to do with controlling our country, specifically through the military-industrial complex.
So now Tucker will say, here's the other side that we have that we can look at.
On the other side is a return to the Republican Party that we had before, which is a party that has all kinds of other agendas, most of which are never publicly revealed, and that spends a lot of its time policing its own members.
Now, what does it attempt to achieve by policing them?
Well, it attempts to achieve silence.
It wants them to shut up about what is actually happening.
What is actually happening is that on the foreign policy side, which is the side that Washington cares about because it's got the most money and the most power, you can literally kill people, and there's no power greater than that.
Our foreign policy is not wholly dependent on the whims of Israel.
Of course, we have, you know, acting in lots of parts of the world that have nothing to do with Israel, but it is unduly influenced by the concerns of Israel.
And in some cases, the U.S. government has acted, and these are all well known.
The Iraq War, for example, has acted in ways that hurt the United States in order to help Israel.
It has put the aims of a foreign power above its own interests.
By the way, I disagree with him that the Iraq war was about helping Israel.
That was Halliburton's war, and that was a Bush family op.
They were mad at Saddam Hussein.
So I reject that part of it.
But there you go.
He's bringing it in.
And now he's going to tell us that Elon is in my storyline here that Elon was definitely a part of this op.
And that's immoral.
It's illegitimate.
It's extremely unpopular domestically.
And it just doesn't work over time.
That's not sustainable.
You can't, there's no way to justify that.
So rather than trying to justify it, they scream at people and tell them to be quiet and read them out of the movement and call them names and threaten them.
But ultimately, because it's not a winning message, it cannot win over time, particularly if people are allowed or somehow manage to describe it accurately.
And unfortunately, for the guardians of the old system, the old Republican Party, people have been allowed to describe it accurately, mostly because Elon Musk opened up X.
And, you know, when you did that, you get all kinds of filth and nonsense and lies, but you also get some truth, actually quite a bit of truth.
And one of the main things that people are telling the truth about that they didn't tell the truth about before is that our foreign policy really doesn't have much to do with what's good for the United States.
And once those words have been uttered, they can't be taken back and they change people's minds.
And the polls reflect the fact that they have.
People's views are different.
So now he gets into the attack mode.
And this is where it just blew my.
And I didn't look at the description of the podcast.
I just listened to this while I'm walking the dog.
I listened to it while I'm getting ready for bed, brushing my teeth.
And if you think about the true bad actors being those associated with the military-industrial complex slash AIPAC, cloaked under the guise of, hey, everybody hate Israel because they fund APAC and they control the Congress.
If you want to get those people out, you got to go for the head of the snake.
And he, Tucker himself is doing this now.
So, in the face of this kind of inevitable change of heart, collective change of heart in America, where both parties are like, wait, why are we doing this?
The people who are benefiting from the old arrangement, which only continued because it was maintained by threats and silence, those people are going absolutely bonkers.
And they have been a week and they're claiming it's about one thing, Holocaust or something like that.
But no, really, it's about who controls the Republican Party after Donald Trump.
That's what it's really about.
So, ignore the moral posturing.
This is a power struggle, as all political parties have from time to time.
And this one just happens to have a lot of emotionally unbalanced, hysterical people with no limits who have access to social media.
So, they're scaring the crap out of everybody.
But it's really kind of a conventional power struggle.
So, who are the players in this?
Well, some of them are in the pundit class.
The more ludicrous ones are in the pundit class, but some of them are actual sitting politicians.
And if you were to choose one who symbolizes what we're actually debating and the stakes of this conversation, it would have to be Lindsey Graham.
Lindsey Graham is a senator, senior senator from the state of South Carolina, one of the most conservative, reliably Republican states out of 50.
And he has been in Congress since 1994.
So that would be 31 years.
And he is running for yet another term as a U.S. Senator.
He's 70 years old.
He'd like to serve till he's 77.
And he has the support, not simply of the White House.
He has an endorsement from the president, but he has more donor support probably than anyone who's ever run in the history of the United States.
I mean, Lindsey Graham has so much donor support and donors, just as a numerical question, probably represent, you know, 100th of 1% of the American population, but have a great deal higher proportion of the money.
He's the most popular candidate they've ever backed.
He's like a higher IQ, less grading Nikki Haley.
So Lindsey Graham is the target.
Because he's the most well-funded senator, who funds Lindsey Graham?
That's actually quite easy to find out if you look at openseecrets.org.
Top four donors, Lockheed Martin, GE Aerospace, Boeing.
In fact, Boeing has their wonderful plant there in South Carolina.
And the Fleur Corporation.
So this is a strike against the military-industrial complex that controls idiots like Lindsey Graham.
Now, if you want, I can play the two takedown clips.
It's almost like a no-agenda greatest hit where Lindsey Graham is saying, yeah, that's best money ever spent.
We're killing Russians.
Yeah, you know, we're lowering your taxes and we're killing the right people.
The guy is clearly a ghoul.
Clearly.
I'm reminded of Matt Gates when he was in the Congress.
Commenting once on one of the big shows, he says, well, Lindsey Graham never met a war he didn't like.
We had that clip on the show.
Do you want to hear Tucker's takedown of him or do you want to?
Well, I just want to finish.
And within one cycle, Matt Gates was out.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, because it's incredibly powerful.
Incredibly powerful.
The military industrial complex, AIPAC, they control a heck of a lot.
And what I'm seeing here is Tucker is, he's the missile, and he's working on.
And he's point man at the behest of the president, who he's good friends with.
He texts with them all the time.
They didn't just fall out of love, but it's been very quiet between the two of them.
So I'll leave those.
They're longish and we've heard it all.
But Lindsey Graham, without a doubt, is a ghoul who likes killing people.
He loves the military and he cloaks it all under Israel, Israel.
He always talks about Israel, Israel.
It's almost like saying Kiev instead of Kiev, Israel, Israel.
And again, I had not looked at the description of this podcast.
And I probably should probably the last little bit of this Lindsey takedown here because he was talking about Lindsey.
Well, this is the second clip.
It's worth it.
But if you wonder like who Lindsey Graham actually is, what his gut instincts are, take a look at his first reaction to the death of George Floyd.
And in case you don't remember that story, it was Memorial Day 2020.
This convicted armed robber, home invader, drug addict former porn star tries to pass a counterfeit bill in a convenience store, like this poor convenience store owners in Minneapolis and gets arrested for it and then promptly dies of a drug OD.
That was all pretty obvious from day one, actually.
But that wasn't Lindsey Graham's view at all.
Here's what Lindsey Graham said about George Floyd.
The topic for the country is what to do after the death of Mr. Floyd.
And what does the death of Mr. Floyd mean?
Well, it's a long overdue wake-up call to the country that there are too many of these cases where African-American men die in police custody under fairly brutal circumstances.
Mr. Floyd's case is outrageous on its face, but I think it speaks to a broader issue.
I think this committee has the potential to reinforce things in society that will lead to better policing.
And hopefully one day, if you're a young black man and the cops pull up behind you, you'll be wondering if you were going too fast rather than you're going to get beat up.
It is liberal white women like Lindsey Graham who are the real problem.
So, okay, that's the setup.
We get it.
Lindsey Graham has to go.
He's incredibly powerful.
He has the biggest military industrialists behind him.
And here's Tucker's payoff.
With that in mind, Paul Dance is running against Lindsey Graham in the Republican primary, which is in June of next year.
We don't know a ton about him.
We're about to find out.
But that's all we need to know.
This is unacceptable.
Ladies and gentlemen, Paul Dance.
So how did you decide?
Let's just start at the end.
How did you decide to run against Lindsey Graham?
Well, I'm original MAGA.
You know, I kind of go back to even H. Ross Perot days, and we'll get in a little bit about how.
So you supported Perot?
Oh, I was a pro.
Pro is my first vote for president.
I came from a kind of a traditional ethnic Catholic family, working class.
My parents were the first to go to college, to actually speak English.
My siblings were the first.
My parents spoke Spanish and French at their households.
But, you know, my why am I running ultimately against Lindsey is for God family country.
I don't think we have a choice at this stage.
This is about the future of the movement, whether MAGA America First lives or dies.
We have to start thinking post-Trump.
And this is going to be the fight for the future of this country.
I was, you know, working in the trenches, if you will, for the last five, seven years, really, with the Trump bandman.
I was the architect of Project 2025.
And, you know, right now, this is, I believe God has a plan for us all.
And this is a calling.
But it's also that I have the life experience.
I cannot sit back and watch somebody like Lindsey Graham represent our state.
I live God family country.
This is it.
This is it.
Tucker is now kicking off the war to kick out all of the neocons and the military controlled.
I think not just Republicans, Democrats as well.
This is about the midterms.
It's completely about the midterms.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
After Trump, sure.
And I think President Trump doesn't give a crap.
He's like, hey, I got stuff to do in the next three years.
I'm probably going to choose someone to, you know, in fact, I have another clip from 60 Minutes where he's talking about the incredible bench they have, which is true.
JD Vance, Marco Rubio.
They've got a lot of interesting people who could totally be the next president.
Tucker is leading the charge here to get this is you're draining the swamp, actually.
This is what it is.
And it's cloaked under this clear movement of people hating Israel's so-called influence over the American government, which is really done through APAC.
Everything is, they need to register as Farah, blah, blah, blah.
Okay, fine.
I think that you're going to see this is how the frame, this is the frame I'm going to be using for the next couple of months to see what Tucker does, see how these podcast wars, so-called wars are used to push new people, the America first people, who already work for President Trump.
This guy has been in the Trump administration.
He was there for almost the entire first term.
Project 2025.
Come on.
That's exactly what Trump is doing.
And Tucker is the op.
Well, Tucker might be the point man for the op.
I've noticed that this is very similar to what Candace Owens is saying about the anti-Trumpers and MAGA joining hands and something she's not going to do.
There was some discussion about that in her last show, which was a huge hit, by the way.
And then there was Trump himself, who for some, I've never seen a president do this in my entire life, which is Trump himself and his team celebrated the first anniversary of the election, which is a bogus thing to celebrate if ever there was.
It's like, you know, oh, yeah, this is the third year we've been married.
Let's have a big party.
So month of this is not going to make it.
This is weak.
Oh, really?
It's not going to cut it.
Lindsey Graham is a pro.
He will shred these guys.
This guy has, I would put money on the fact that this guy who sounds like he has the charisma of a rock will be eaten alive by Lindsey Graham in South Carolina.
Well, that's very possible.
But he is the chosen one now to run against Lindsey Graham.
It's not going to not happen.
He's amazing.
Lindsey Graham is, he's really, he's a puffy face dude.
Like the power that he has is incredible.
He's a smart guy.
I mean, you know, he's a dummy in some sense, but he's also politically savvy.
He has a style all his own.
The people of South Carolina keep putting him in, and he's got the money.
He's got the money.
I mean, the combination of ingredients and he's got, and he's the incumbent.
And he can say to the South Carolinians, look, I'm in here.
I've got seniority.
And you, as you know, in Senate and House, seniority makes a big deal because that puts me at the head of a lot of committees and it puts me in a position where I can help the state.
And this guy, this 2025 guy, he's not going to be able to do Jack.
He's going to take him 10 years.
He had to be reelected two or three times to get as far as I am.
Why would you vote for him?
Yeah.
Well, Tucker has work cut out for him, no doubt.
He's got more than the work cut out for me.
This is futile.
Okay.
Well, I hope he succeeds.
I mean, this show has not been a fan of Lindsey Graham.
That's for sure.
No, no, we have not been a fan of Lindsey Graham, but there is a moment where you have to accept the fact that Lindsey Graham is a force in nature.
What could get Lindsey Graham out?
Anything?
Well, he lives at home with his mother, supposedly.
I mean, that's what I've heard.
He's obviously gay, but he doesn't, he's not out of the closet.
Get him on the gay card.
He should come out.
He could hang out with Bessons and the Agays.
I mean, he's played, he's doing it all wrong.
He's doing it perfectly.
And he, there's no, I don't know that he has anything in his claw, any skeletons in the closet.
I don't think so.
He's untouchable.
Well, anyway, I think that that's what this is all about.
Obviously, something's going on.
And I think you're right.
Tucker is always suspect.
Yeah.
And Ben Shapiro on the other side for the neocons.
That makes total sense.
Well, we have to always remember, we keep for, or we don't, but the public generally forgets, especially the Shapiro fans and the podcast fans, the podcast diverse or whatever you want to call it, podverse.
Podosphere.
Podosphere.
You have to remember that Ben Shapiro hated Trump.
Oh, yeah.
He was an anti-Trumper from the get-go.
Yep.
Yep.
And when he was writing for Breitbart, he's the one who set up the Phony Baloney scandal that made him quit in a huff over the girl who was supposedly molested by one of Trump's guys.
I forgot his name.
The guy's name starts with an L.
And he was, you know, he grabbed her to move her aside.
Oh, you hurt me.
And then, oh, this is terrible.
What was her name?
Oh, she was a journalist, wasn't it?
Yeah, she was a journalist.
And the two of them quit and formed the, you know, what they have now, Daily Block, whatever it is, the daily song.
What was that?
What was her name?
And that whole thing was a scam, and it was set up.
And there's a still, I think, during, even during that period, Lewinsky, not Lewinsky, that's not the name of the guy, but something like that.
Oh, no, no.
Corey.
Corey.
Corey Lewandowski?
Lewandowski.
That's it.
And so that, that guy was railroaded.
Do you remember that well?
Well, I didn't remember Lewandowski.
I didn't remember that well.
But Shapiro, that's when he made a big stink.
He started his own operation, started his podcast.
He got a little radio syndication for a while.
That disappeared because he couldn't.
Forgot all about that.
So Shapiro's suspect.
Hold on.
Let me see if we can find it.
Corey Lewandowski.
No, I don't see any clips.
It's Corey, C-O-R-E-Y.
But who?
They won't be named right.
Michelle Fields?
Yes, Michelle Fields.
Yes, Michelle Fields.
She was the reporter for Breitbart.
Yeah, that's who it was.
Here we go.
Is this, do we have audio here?
Oh, that's not here.
Let's get a report.
I think this is the report.
Lately, the past few weeks, past week and a half or so, there has been a lot more tension at these rallies, a lot more violence.
When Amorosa says that it's just one protester who's done this, or Mr. Trump says that it's just one, I mean, excuse me, supporter who's punched a protester.
I have to take issue with that because we've seen a number of occasions where protesters have been roughed up by Trump supporters.
So the idea that it's just one guy acting out of bounds is just frankly not true.
And I tried to press him on his tone and his rhetoric at these rallies.
And Jake Tapper did during the debate as well.
We have felt at times, me and the other reporters in the room, that we are on the precipice of something potentially very bad happening.
So it's not just one person.
It happens very frequently and it's happening even more so.
I also asked Mr. Trump, as you saw, about this Michelle Fields incident and his campaign manager, his campaign manager, has been extraordinarily antagonistic towards the press this entire time.
Clearly, he did not like that line of questioning.
So far, there has not been video yet to prove any of her allegations.
Yeah, remember she had, she was showing her bruised arm and everything.
Oh, man.
Good recall there, JCD.
Good recall.
Yeah, well, you know.
Don't get carried away.
It's just one.
It's just one set of things.
And this goes back, and this is when Breitbart was a dominant news outlet.
Yes.
They ended up getting kind of shadow banned by everybody.
They killed him.
They killed him with the red wine poison.
And then Breitbart himself was killed.
The whole thing is shady and this phony baloney era early on in the Trump campaign where there were violence.
They were beating up protesters.
And what were the people protesting about?
The whole thing is crap.
And Shapiro is right in the middle of it.
Yeah.
Wow.
Yeah.
So spy versus spy.
OP versus op.
Your no agenda show is on it.
And might as well play this little bit from that.
I loved watching the president in his 60 minutes overtime, which is the only 60 minutes you want to watch.
You want to watch the full interview.
Yeah, absolutely.
It's funnier.
It's much funnier.
They take all the funny stuff out of the real interview.
Yeah, and they put in clips and stuff.
Who needs that?
Give me the raw stuff, like a podcast.
Nora was very nice to him.
And here is the Nora.
Let me stop there for a second.
So in the early 2016 era, Nora, when she was on the morning show, she on CBS this, but she was an early girl.
They moved up to the news.
Early girl.
And she would, when Trump's name would ever come up, she would just grimace and she, you know, because she's pretty if she smiles and, you know, looks bright-eyed.
But she has an angry look, and she had it all throughout this interview.
She tried as hard as she could to be nice.
She's pretty good.
She did okay.
I don't think so.
So here's Trump explaining how he will be able to run in 2028.
It didn't get a lot of, but not the play I expected it to get.
There's been a lot of talk about 2028 and who will be at the top of the Republican ticket.
Can you set the record straight?
You're not going to try and run for a third term?
Well, I don't even think about it.
I will tell you, a lot of people want me to run, but the difference between us and the Democrats is we really do have a strong bench.
I don't want to use names because it's inappropriate, but it's too early.
People do like when you start talking about whether you like JD Vance or Secretary.
I do like JD Vance.
I like it.
Secretariat.
I like so many people.
We have an unbelievable bench.
We could run two people together.
We have a great bench.
So I don't want to start talking about elections.
It's too early.
One thing I can tell you: the 2020 election was rigged.
And a lot of people say, when it's rigged, you're allowed to do it again.
It was rigged.
And it's been caught.
And you see the same information that everybody else does.
And it's coming out now.
And so it's a lot of fun.
I love it.
I don't know why I missed that, but that's hilarious.
It's so good.
And she's there.
She's so flat-footed.
She can't do any reparte with him because she hates him.
What people say.
And she can barely keep a smile on her face.
And that is that right there.
Any good interviewer would have cracked up last year.
Of course, of course.
What people say.
The Supreme Court, the Supreme Court says, I think they nailed 11 or 14.
I can't remember.
It's probably 11 million viewers for that episode.
And I think they averaged like normally three or four.
Whatever the case is.
It was a ratings bonanza for 60 minutes, which Trump always is.
Of course he is.
And they just bugs him to no end.
They still hate him.
I think the hate is visceral.
It's apparent to me.
And it was there with Nora.
It's so good.
And I got a lot of people emailing me like, oh, was this the deal he made with Barry Weiss?
I said, no, Barry Weiss turns out to be pretty smart.
It's like, get the president to do an interview with someone who at least won't be like yelling at him.
Let him talk.
Let him say his thing.
And then you'll see that people like it and people want to watch it.
It's like, I'm impressed.
I'm already impressed with Barry Weiss.
Way to go.
Well, I think they, you know, the last thing she pushed was that the other interview that was on the show.
It was Witkoff and Kushner.
Yeah, Witcoff, right.
And it was boring.
Very boring.
It was boring.
Very boring.
He says those two guys are boring.
And they set her up.
They made the interview boring to prove that Barry Weiss is what she's doing.
It was also Leslie Stahl who did that interview.
And she's terrible.
She's too old.
She's not too old for a podcast.
No, she's too old for a podcast.
She'd be a terrible podcaster.
Yes.
You're fired.
You're fired from podcasting.
Said the podcast.
When you can't do a podcast, that's saying something.
So they set that up so it was a flop and it was.
And so then she came up with this idea, I'm sure, and they tried to make it a flop by putting Nora in, who hates Trump.
I mean, I like the way you think about it.
It's different, but that's the way I see it.
And it turned out because Trump is Trump, it got a big ratings hit.
Now, 60 Minutes, the team there is screwed because now they have to listen to Barry Weiss if she has more suggestions.
She got clout now.
All of a sudden, the Twinkle Toes Sky Dance is like, hey, we love you, Barry.
Good job.
Everybody listen to Barry.
We know how that goes in corporate life.
David.
One minute you're up.
Next minute, oh, we never liked her.
David Ellison does a memo to all, all at Skydance, all at skydance.com.
Hey, everybody.
Look at, we're so proud of Barry.
Good job.
And then President Trump got to do his peace president bit.
It was fantastic.
But I brought, I mean, just a little list of, I mean, just a little list of, look at this.
Wars.
How many did I solve?
Cambodia, this is.
I solved them.
Cambodia, Thailand, Kosovo, Serbia, Congo, the Congo, and Rwanda.
Pakistan and India.
That was going to be a beauty.
They shut down seven planes.
Israel and Iran.
You've heard about that one.
Egypt and Ethiopia.
That's another beauty.
Ethiopia built a big dam where there's no water going to the Nile.
Armenia and Azerbaijan.
And if you take a look, Israel and Hamas, which is a rough little situation, but it's going to be...
I do want to talk about...
I mean, you have branded yourself the peace president.
Well, I think I did pretty good.
I solved.
Those are eight of the nine wars.
She walked right into that.
You know how I solved them?
I said, in many cases, in 60%, I said, if you don't stop fighting, I'm putting tariffs on both of your countries and you're not going to be able to do business in the United States.
Why isn't that working with Putin?
It is working with Prime Minister.
It is, I think.
What are you talking about?
It's working.
Can't work.
I did different with him.
By the way, that was a good question on her part.
And he had a great answer.
Yeah, he did work.
Well, because the problem is these script or these people that just read from a script and they're not fast on their feet because they don't do podcasting.
Can't think, can't think.
They can't think.
So they get Trump just, you know, circles them around, around and around.
They don't know what they're doing.
It's terrible.
For people, and we have a lot of listeners who don't like President Trump.
You are watching incredible history in the making.
Enjoy these three remaining years.
Really, enjoy it because you will never in your life.
Well, we won't, but you, even the Gen Zero.
I don't think anybody will.
I think this guy is a singular character.
You'll never see anything like this in your life.
This is your JFK, not comparing him to JFK, but what he is doing is, you know, all of the, so, and this will probably, this should probably lead us into Mamadani.
So you've got all of these Republicans who were running for governor and, you know, other, and of course, mayor in New York.
And they, and they, they are so stupid.
They didn't follow Trump.
He even said it, I think.
They didn't follow Trump's lead of saying, okay, look, we got the, we've got the border, the woke stuff.
That's not what people are interested in right now.
Now they want economy better.
They want to hear the economy's doing better.
What are we doing?
I can't believe that the New Jersey governor's race was lost to a Democrat when he literally has a deal like three miles from the New Jersey state line in Pennsylvania to build ships, South Korean ships.
He's brought in billions of dollars of deals and we're financing it with credit lines to these countries for South Korea, for Japan, for Argentina.
These are credit lines.
We are in control of the financing, not Wall Street.
Him and Besson got to give Besson props.
I'm not quite sure where this guy came from, but they are doing incredible things, which will work.
If they don't kill Trump, that seriously keeps crossing my mind.
He is going to turn the United States back into a country where you can get a good $80,000, $100,000 a year job working on building big, beautiful ships and other stuff.
He's pushing trade schools for everybody, pushing it.
This is really, it's an amazing moment to me.
And people who are all mad and sitting around, Epstein files, you're missing out on a great show.
You really are.
I think it's a great show.
What do you think, John?
What do you think of the show?
He's an entertainer.
He's a total entertainer.
Well, the reason that that woman kicked his ass in New Jersey is because he was, you know, he attached himself to Trump in such a way that he became associated with the stoppage of the building of that tunnel.
Oh, yeah, he screwed that one up.
He screwed it up.
He should have just divorced himself and said, we need to get that tunnel built.
Yeah.
And because that's a job killer.
And he screwed up.
It was just a massive screw up because he was a little too much of a Trump psychophant.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Or size.
I like to say psychants.
Psycho fans, yeah.
So then, you know, then we have, and I, did we talk about this?
I told you about, yeah, we did talk about the Flynn nonprofit, America's Future.
They had their little get-together and we talked about it.
Yeah, we talked a little bit about it.
Yeah, because this is the next thing you'll be hearing about.
This is so the next thing we all have to, and this is specifically for conservatives and Republicans.
Everybody, hair on fire.
We're going to be like Europe.
Islam is taking over.
I already saw fake videos of like, you know, Times Square.
Maybe it was real.
I don't know, but you don't know anymore.
Like, oh, we're doing prayer on Times Square five times a day.
New York is turning completely Muslim.
Not the same story in Europe as it is here in the United States.
Is there some danger?
Yeah, of course, there always is.
But even my friends and the men's text groups, like, oh, oh, no.
You know, New York forgot all about 9-11.
Now they've elected a Muslim.
Oh man, there's a big difference between what happened on 9-11 and this Jamoke, this theater kid.
And New York just let that happen.
Who was your friend who said, oh, your New York friend who said, oh, no, he's not going to get elected.
Who was that?
Didn't you have a friend who said that to you?
Yeah, one of an actress.
Right.
I guess she forgot to vote.
No, we got a Zed in New York.
She's like, yeah, we love it.
We love it.
He's fantastic.
We can't wait for it.
Cuomo's a sex predator, so we didn't want him.
You know, Sleewa, who cares about, don't even know the guy's name, really.
Well, there's no, by the way, a couple of things.
There's demographic changes in New York, which are extreme.
And they also, all the Republicans have left.
They don't live in New York.
They're either Florida or Texas.
Florida, or they're in Jersey or they're someplace else.
But they're not in New York and they can't vote there.
And some of them work there, but a lot of them live in Connecticut.
And so they're not voting there.
And you end up with, if you look at the numbers, it was 93% of all the votes cast in New York in those New York City elections was Democrats.
93%.
That is one party rule.
So you just need one guy who's charismatic.
And that he is.
He's very charismatic.
And I'm happy, by the way, because the next time the Gen Zer runs into some financial troubles, I'll just say, ask your boy Mom Donnie.
He'll take care of you.
So there were two analysis.
The best one was by, and I reposted it on Twitter at The Real Dvorak.
Again, I mentioned this before.
Have you gone down again?
What happened to my numbers?
Are you going down again?
No, it's just frozen at 100,009.
Yeah.
It's just you're in 99.
I can never, I cannot crack 100K.
That's because they have limiters.
You know how audio works?
Yes, I do.
99.2.
Hey, everybody, it's Adam Curry, 99.2 FM.
I'm never going to 100, ever.
You might, but somebody's got to change your number limit.
My limiter.
Some limiters, what it is.
And so it was Glenn Greenwald who took, actually, Candace Owens the day before ran this clip, which I'm going to play, which she claims is how the election was won.
It was won in the first debate because all these guys are a bunch of stooges and Mom Dami stood out like a sore thumb as a good guy.
And it was a setup question.
Glenn Greenwald, which is retweeted, you can go look at this presentation, takes it a little step further and analyzes it with some of his mom Donnie's videos and some of the stuff he did on social media.
He went out like a man on the street.
He was like the Johnny.
Glenn Greenwald.
Went out with a microphone and went float.
Sorry?
Glenn Greenwald did that?
No.
Oh, Mom Donny?
Oh, Mom Donnie did that.
Oh, well, yeah.
And then edited everything the way he wanted to.
Perfect.
Very smart.
Well, it was more complex than that.
And it was the stuff was edited in favor of Trump, of all things.
Oh, interesting.
So you'd have to watch the Greenwald presentation, but you had to watch the whole thing.
But he stole the basis from Candace the way I see it.
I could be wrong.
I don't think they thought of it the same way.
So Candace says that the whole thing was run one in the debate.
And the debate was begun with a setup question to try to trap Mom Donnie to make him look like.
Is this the Israel question?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Because the question, I have it here.
It's the first clip.
This is from the debate.
And the question is bullcrap.
It comes out the first question is, or this question that was asked during the debate was, you know, it's important that the mayor go visit foreign countries.
And it's always symbolic the first one they go to.
This bullcrap.
It's completely bullcrap.
The question was just bullcrap.
And it was designed to get Mom Danny to say he won't go to Israel, which he did say.
But he had a better answer.
And then he backs it up with, yeah, he had a great answer.
Everyone else is kissing.
These guys are stupid.
And Cuomo, it seems as if, because he argues at the end of this clip, trying to embarrass Mom Donnie.
It seems that the whole thing was set up to push for Cuomo, which, you know, was a setup.
It was a setup question.
The whole thing was rigged.
Backfired Mam Danny was totally.
He may have gotten the question.
His team may have gotten the questions beforehand.
We know this happens with Democrats.
I think he was, I heard this when it happened.
We even talked about it briefly on the show.
Like, this is an amazing answer for a New York mayoral candidate.
The first four visit by a mayor of New York is always considered significant.
Where would you go first?
That's right, the Sabbaths.
First visit, I would visit the Holy Land.
Mr. Cuomo.
Given the hostility and the anti-Semitism that has been shown in New York, I would go to Israel.
Mr. Tilson, where would you go?
Yeah, I'd make my fourth trip to Israel, followed by my fifth trip to Ukraine, two of our greatest allies fighting on the front lines of the global war on terror.
Mr. Momdani.
I would stay in New York City.
My plans are to address New Yorkers across the five boroughs and focus on that.
Mr. Mamdani, can I just jump in?
Would you visit Israel as mayor?
I will be doing, as the mayor, I'll be standing up for Jewish New Yorkers and I'll be meeting them wherever they are across the five boroughs, whether that's in their synagogues and temples or at their homes or at the subway platform, because ultimately we need to focus on delivering on their concerns.
And just yes or no, do you believe in a Jewish state of Israel?
I believe Israel has the right to exist.
Not exactly.
As a Jewish state, as a state with equal rights.
He won't say it has a right to exist as a Jewish state.
And his answer was no, he won't visit Israel.
I said that.
That's what he was trying to say.
No, no, no.
Unlike you, I answered the question very directly.
My goal would be to take my first trip to Israel.
My wife's life work in this area means a lot to our family, and it could coincide with my young son, Miles Bar Mitzvah.
Yeah, I think this theory is correct.
It is probably one of the few debate clips that made it into my timeline, my sphere, my email, whatever.
So it must have been the one that had the most virality that people saw.
And of course, it's almost like Trump America first, New York first.
It's a simple answer.
There was a setup and it blew right up, blew up in their face.
Yeah, they all lost their asses to this guy because of that.
Now, Candace, of course, goes off a little bit on it to ridicule the Israelis and the Jews and the rest of them.
So I have that little piece of it.
I don't have the whole thing because she is like Dave Smith.
She's talking and Kay.
And so she goes off.
But this little part is good.
But the greenwalled version of this is better.
And I'd recommend people go look at it on Twitter.
This is Candace.
This is our country, you guys.
That's it.
I will, I, you know what?
I'm going to take my 19th trip to Israel.
Oh, well, I'm going to take my first trip after my son's bar mitzvah.
Oh, I was planning on stopping over on the way for our honeymoon.
We were going to stop and just go to Israel and do whatever we could.
It's ridiculous and it's obvious.
And the way that the establishment comes down, if you don't peddle those talking points, he says something totally normal.
And we have to remember that Candace was a Democrat before the whole Kanye thing.
And I don't even know where she stands politically anymore, but she's right about this.
Of course.
Of course she is.
And again, the debate over Israel and America is over.
And I just want to accentuate this.
We got another note from one of our producers.
He has a millennial.
and a Gen Z.
I just need to share this because it's good information for you and for I. My two kids could not be more unlike each other.
They are eight years apart.
My millennial stepson, 26, who introduced us all to hypno-sissy porn, is mentally not doing well.
I know this producer because we've read other notes from him about the hypno-sissy porn.
He has held the job for about a year, which is great.
However, he requires that we acknowledge his greatness for holding his job.
He literally thinks that we should go to his place of work to witness his greatness in action.
His claim is that we no longer show him love and do not support him or take part in his life.
From our perspective, he is verbally abusive, brags about every little thing he does.
He's tolerable, one to two visits a month.
He thinks we should be hanging out with him and his friends.
Everyone I know with a kid that is 22 to 29 is effed up, confused about their sexuality, addicted to perverted pornography, unable to create careers, unable to create healthy relationships.
These kids all went to therapy and they are worse for it.
Our son's therapists have turned him against us and honestly played a big role in his drift into transgender lifestyle.
They created shame instead of helping him work through it.
These kids needed a pastor, not a therapist.
They will be remembered as the loneliest generation.
Now, my 18-year-old Gen Z could not be more different.
About three years ago, he was led to Christ through friends.
His entire friend group is from church.
Church is their social place.
When we were kids, we used to go to parties and get wasted.
They go to church.
He met a wonderful church girl that he has been dating.
He's attending Liberty University.
God has done really amazing things in his life.
I'm incredibly grateful as the church filled in some parenting pieces that his parents, we didn't think of.
He is not alone.
A large percentage of kids around his age are church kids.
He got me to attend a couple of times, and the number of kids from 15 to 20-year-olds was very surprising.
Liberty streams the twice weekly convocations.
I watched the convocations.
He says, these kids all watch Nick Fuentes.
They are all anti-DEI.
They are all skeptical of Israel.
They are skeptical of Erica Kirk.
They are anti-abortion.
Pornography and phone use are their big issues, and they are aware of the issues.
However, when we were kids, we had don't drink and drive and this is your brain on drugs campaigns.
They need the same to make these issues equally as scary.
That's, wow.
You know, there's someone boots on the ground who says this, yeah, the loneliest generation is the millennials.
And they're screwed.
And these Gen Z kids, when it comes to Israel, they're skeptical.
You're not going to convince them any other way.
So might as well use it for political gain.
And that's exactly what Mamdani did here in the right way.
Well, he I don't think the Israel issue was that front facing with him so much because I looked at a lot of his stuff.
He is mostly about, he pushed the affordability issues, and he also got 35% of the Jewish vote in New York City.
Yeah, that's amazing, isn't it?
And so there's that.
I don't think it, and of course, I wrote a column on this predicting all this, of course, nailing it.
Not to pat myself on the back.
Would you like an award?
We can do a special peace prize.
So the point is, is that we don't know how he's going to govern because he has no experience.
Oh, no.
Well, of course, it's going to be a group of people, just like they ran Biden.
It's going to be a bunch.
If he can put a team together that can govern it and advise it.
He's putting anything together.
He's already got a team.
Yeah.
He's already got a team.
And this is a bad sign.
He made a big point in mentioning that his transition team, all female.
Oh, no, it's going to be horrible.
He made an announcement that the transition team is all female.
And to do that is a bad sign.
Of course it is.
A bad sign for New York, but this is what they want.
This is a DSA, which, by the way, I did some research in a DSA.
It's not actually a party.
I mean, it's just a group.
They do have a website.
They have a website, but it's not a political party.
They're a group and they've got funding and there's unions in there, a lot of socialists and Marxists.
Mostly socialists.
And Islamists.
Yeah.
Yeah.
You know, like radical type people, not people who practice Islam or Muslim, but Islamist, serious, like, what are you doing?
And it's going to suck.
Of course.
It's going to be horrible.
And it will be great because we can all look at New York and say, we don't want that.
Yes.
You're kind of hoping it sucks.
Yes.
I think I hate to say that I'm hoping it sucks because I like New York and I've worked there and it's so good.
I live there.
Of course.
I love you.
Yeah.
And you live there.
So we don't dislike the city.
And it, but it does go through these phases.
I mean, I went to the first time I went to New York, that's when Dinkins was the mayor.
Oh, worst mayor ever.
Dinkins was bad.
He was really bad.
I was living and working there when Dinkins was mayor.
It was funny.
Yeah, well, sorry to hear that.
So I went there, and I will say that the change, then Giuliani came along, and the changes were so radical.
And fast.
And fast.
Yeah.
It was really fast.
So the town can turn on a dime.
But I do recall during the Dinkins era, and I don't want to get into any details, but the town was a lot of fun.
Yeah.
Well, yeah, Times Square was still dangerous.
It was great.
It was a fun place.
It was a fun place.
You had to be careful.
Yes.
Yeah.
You had to be very careful.
I had a rabbit fur leather coat, full-length leather coat.
I walked around Times Square like a pimp.
It was great.
There was, you know, dirty movies and hookers.
Oh, that 42nd Street theater.
The theater line of theaters was all filth.
Yeah.
And then which reminds me, by the way, I'm going to bring this up that you went to that mystery party and you had the hottie give the luscivious note to you that you read on the show.
Yes.
And we talked about this at Lurid, I guess was the name of it, I'd call the note.
At the dinner table?
You had a chat about this at the dinner table?
No, no, I was thinking about it.
No, I had a chat with you after the show about it, and there was a piece of information you left out that she conveyed that I thought should have been talked about on the show.
What part was that?
That all the women she knows.
Yes.
Well, that wasn't in the note.
Let me, I'll tell, I'm happy to tell everybody.
Hey, I got a lot of my mind, okay?
There's a lot a lot going on in this show.
So it's not like I withheld it, but yes.
No, I didn't say you withheld it.
I just said I'm going to, because it came in after the show, and I knew it wasn't going to come up out of the blue unless I brought it up.
She said that all the women that listen to the show, she says, of the women she knows that listen to the show, all feel that I am very mean to you.
Yeah, I think she's dead on.
And I said, the women are very observant.
Yes.
And she said, and we like it.
I mean, she said we like it.
She didn't say that.
You somehow have an incredible sex appeal amongst the 30 to 40-year-olds, female.
It's uncanny, really.
There's something, which, of course, is partially due to our lack of video on the podcast.
Yeah, because if you saw me, oh, I don't know.
I don't think so.
All right.
All right, well, there's an example of you being mean.
She's being mean, meaning he's nailed it.
There's a perfect example right there.
Subtle, but yet there it is.
You're, you know, you're one chance of being funny, and it has to be at my expense.
Of course.
Yes.
Well, as we say in the old country, vasich lip das nexi.
What you love, you make fun of.
Oh, that's a good one.
That's true.
All right, onward.
Yes, onward.
You're on Mamdani.
Do I have any more Mom Donnie?
Well, you've got Mamdani NTD clips, or you've got the acceptance opener.
You've got all kinds of money.
Oh, yeah.
Desperate acceptance opener.
I watched the whole 23 minutes.
This guy's like Trump.
I'm sorry.
He goes on and on and on, and he cycles.
He cycles.
He's very Trumpy in this guy.
Except for the fact that he's a socialist and he's going to screw up because he's going to have an all-women team or whatever.
How many of the women are black and how many of the women are?
They're all over the map.
You can count on being trans, black, you know, Hispanic.
There's probably not a white girl in there.
All right, perfect.
And so this is the, so he starts off.
His public speaking is so much.
It's the best Democrat speaker.
He speaks like an old in a long time.
Sorry, what?
The best Democrat speaker we've seen in a long time.
Better than Obama.
He is outstanding, and he's got writers.
This speech, this 23-minute ad-libbed acceptance speech was written months ago and massaged and massaged.
I only have a couple minutes of it.
And this is just the opening.
Later on, when he attracts, he attacks Trump and does other things.
It's all well structured.
And it's a little long.
He's boring.
This is a problem he's going to have because he's the Trump model.
Trump is boring.
I hate to tell you this, but I've seen him on these things.
He goes on.
He talks at least 10 minutes too long.
Sometimes he just goes on too much.
I mean, it's funny for a while and then you get sick of it.
This guy's going to be the same way.
He's going to talk you to death.
But listen to the poetic way he presents the opening of the speech.
The sun may have set over our city this evening.
But as Eugene Debs once said, I can see the dawn of a better day for humanity.
For as long as we can remember, the working people of New York have been told by the wealthy and the well-connected that power does not belong in their hands.
Fingers bruised from lifting boxes on the warehouse floor.
Palms callous from delivery by candlebars.
Knuckles scarred with kitchen burns.
These are not hands that have been allowed to hold power.
And yet over the last 12 months, you have dared to reach for something greater.
Tonight, against all odds, we have grasped it.
The future is in our hands.
My friends, we have toppled a political dynasty.
I wish Andrew Cuomo only the best in private life.
But let tonight be the final time I utter his name as we turn the page on a politics that abandons the many and answers only to the few.
Oh, man.
I never expected Debs to be the hero of today's socialists.
That's a good idea.
Well, Eugene Debs is code.
You drop his name to indicate you're a socialist because he's probably the most famous socialist ever.
He's in jail, I think.
He ran for the presidential job.
Yes, he ran in jail, wrote a lot of stuff in jail, very famous for being in jail.
He ran for president.
The socialists of this country, the communists, a lot of Democrats, the super lefties, if you say you even know who he is, they go nuts.
I got to say that.
Eugene Debs' code.
I don't think I saw a single M5M talking head even mention that he talked about Debs.
I did.
Oh, you did?
Okay.
Yeah.
I can't remember.
I can't tell you who.
Probably it was Fox.
Yeah, right.
Right.
Of course, but not on MSNBC or CNN.
No, no, no, no.
Nobody else would know.
None of that.
Which gives me, brings me to a point.
I don't know if I have any clips on this point.
Let's make a point.
I have a letter from a guy.
We were talking about, you know, Comey's been indicted and now they're going to go after Brennan, it looks like, and all these other things.
And it's based on a, I'm working on a column, and so there's a thought process here.
The Arctic Frost.
Yes.
Now, this came out of finding a bunch of burn bags in an obscure room.
Yes.
Outside of a skiff.
By the way, what's the point of putting it in a burn bag and not burning the bag?
Well, we have a note from one of our military insiders.
There we go.
Boots on.
ITM Legends.
Please keep me anonymous for the sake of low information.
Legends.
There you go.
Legends.
We are the legends.
I did get the right idea.
Yes.
Burn bags come back to the forefront with the Comey investigation, allegedly revealing troves of burn bags with classified material from them from years ago.
I'd imagine many people are wondering how could this even be possible?
The answer is absolutely.
I am a retired military officer who's done entire tours working in SCIFs, S-C-I-F, which stands for, I forgot. Secure communications.
It's a tent.
Basically, it's a tent.
It's a room.
It's a tent in the room.
You have a cubby outside the door that you put your personal electronic devices in.
You scan access card or enter a code and you go in for work.
You can only enter these spaces if your clearance will allow it.
Advantages of SCIFs are you can have open classified material and work on anything you need to without fear of prying eyes or any sort of security concerns.
These areas are typically have burn bags in which in most offices or cubicles.
There are also burn bags located by the approved paper shredded by the approved paper shredders in common spaces within the skiff.
So the bags are in there, just paper shredders into the whole thing.
The truth of the matter is that these burn bags rarely get emptied into the shredder and most of the time just get moved into some secure location, like a broom closet or supply room and forgotten about.
Most people just place their unwanted classified material in a burn bag and assume someone else will dispose of it at an appropriate manner according to the classification.
Wow.
Very rarely does this happen.
Wow.
Honestly, I am surprised that more incriminating material hasn't been found about more classified funny.
More classified operations in old forgotten burn bags.
I guess they're all over the place.
What's interesting, this is the final paragraph.
What's interesting is there's about six hours of required training annually, annually, on how to handle a transport, maintain, and dispose of classified material appropriately.
Clearly, most people don't pay attention during the disposal section of that training.
Hope this helps.
Wow.
So it's, oh, how typical is that?
It just sounds when it goes.
I worked for the government long enough.
I'm reading this.
Yep.
Government nonsense.
Yep.
Wow.
I put in the burn bag.
I put in the burn bag, Boff.
I did my job.
Yeah.
So there's probably a trove of material that they're going to go after Comey and Clapper and Brennan, all this stuff or the Arctic frost.
So I'm thinking, because I'm going to write a column about this, because none of the mainstream media is writing at all about Arctic frost.
None of them.
Right.
So if you recall some years ago, we had one of our contacts talk about how if you have a security clearance or you work for an intel agency, even if something's released that's classified and it's in public domain, it's on the New York Times.
You're not allowed.
You're not allowed to read it.
You're not allowed to read it.
Wait, because of some.
Don't we have the Cuomo kid talking about that?
Famous.
Somebody was talking about it, but it has also been, you know, it was brought up on the show.
We discussed it in detail.
So I'm thinking, hold on a second.
Why aren't the big newspapers and outlets discussing Arctic frost?
Because they're also so compromised that all their reporters are read in and they're not allowed to read it or talk about it?
Yeah, because they're all spooks.
They're all spooks.
Yeah, exactly.
Wow.
Yeah.
Because there's no reason.
This is a great story.
It is a great story.
It's a great story.
So here's now with the burn bag information.
Oh, my God.
Here's the it's about a minute and a half from the 60 Minutes interview edited.
This is Trump on Comey and Bolton, etc.
I want to ask you about another matter.
James Comey, John Bolton, Letitia James were all recently indicted.
There's a pattern to these names.
They're all public figures who have publicly denounced you.
Is it political retribution?
You know who got indicted?
The man you're looking at.
I got indicted and I was innocent.
And here I am because I was able to beat all of the nonsense that was thrown at me.
But you can't then accuse me of weaponizing government.
They were horrible human beings.
They went after the president of the United States.
They went after my children.
They went into my wife's drawers.
They went into my wife's closets.
They held the dresses up.
She came back.
She said, oh, what happened?
What happened?
Because she's a very meticulous person.
Everything's nice and neat.
These are crooked people.
These are dissenters.
So don't ask me about, did you go after Letitia James, in my opinion?
And I only say in my opinion, because I guess the lawyers would prefer that I say that, because I have a much stronger opinion.
She's a total crook.
She's a low life.
Comey's a dirty cop.
Bolton actually helped me a lot because he was crazy.
He's the one who wants him and Cheney, a couple of people got Bush to go out and blow the hell out of the Middle East and then take it, you know, then leave.
And actually, Bolton helped me because every time somebody saw Bolton standing behind me, foreign countries, they conceded.
You know why they conceded?
Because they said, Bolton's a nut job.
Trump is going to take us to war.
But I don't listen to people that are stupid.
Oh, this is fabulous.
Bolton's a nut job.
Now, I want to mention the people out there who don't know this because they keep bringing this Bolton thing up.
The Bolton investigation began during the Biden administration.
This is nothing new that Trump started.
Right.
Right.
Okay.
If you don't mind, I asked Rob the constitutional lawyer about the Supreme Court tariff decision.
I have some clips.
Yeah, you want to play your clips first?
Yeah, maybe then you can add some color, maybe.
You can do the clarification.
I can try.
Yes.
What do we have here?
You have Supreme.
Oh, yes.
I have it unfortunately spelled Foupreme.
Yeah.
It's okay.
I speak Dvorak, so it's not a problem.
So the Foupreme coup tariff.
How did you even get to F from this D is in the middle of the future?
I'm looking at F and F.
The F and the S, they're two keys apart.
I have no idea.
Okay, but it happened.
It happens.
It's okay.
The Fupreme Court.
The Trump administration saying it's optimistic after attending the SCOTIS arguments on President Trump's global tariffs, and the president speaking to business leaders in Miami today, reacting to last night's election results.
We now go live to NTD's Washington correspondent, Mario Otsu, at the White House.
Good evening, Mari.
What is the administration saying about the president's tariff case?
Tiff, good evening.
Treasury Secretary Scott Besson, just a little while ago, is saying that he's, quote, very optimistic about the Supreme Court case that's considering the legality of President Trump's global tariffs.
And Besson, who attended the arguments today, says that the Solicitor General presented what he calls, quote, strong persuasive arguments.
And he says that the plaintiffs fundamentally misunderstood and misrepresented President Trump's trade goals.
Take a look.
It gives him the ultimate negotiating authority.
Sometimes the best tariffs are the ones that never get enforced.
Every camera, every iPhone here would have been subject to a Chinese patrol because he had the ability to threaten 100% tariff.
He was able to successfully text you on foreign policy.
Okay.
I'm glad you have these because this is all positive.
Yeah, I think they say, well, NTD, you know, they think.
Of course.
They hate China.
So Fu Prem good.
They don't like Trump.
China bad, Fupreme good.
President Trump has repeatedly emphasized that without his tariffs, there would be no national security.
And meanwhile, President Trump today is reminiscing about his election victory exactly a year ago while lamenting the results of last night's election.
Take a look.
I'm a very modest person.
I would never say this.
The single most consequential election victory in American history.
President Trump celebrates the anniversary of his 2024 election win and proclaims the golden age of America.
November 5th, 2024, the American people reclaimed our government.
We restored our sovereignty.
We lost a little bit of sovereignty last night in New York, but we'll take care of it, don't worry about it.
While reacting to Republican losses on election night, by the way, it's even better.
So I'm always misspelling tariffs because I always do double R1F.
Just it's like it's hard to get it out of my system.
So you have tariffs spelled correctly, but you have fuprem kut.
It's even better.
You don't even have the R and R. If I get closer to the screen, it might help.
I do have the tariffs analysis clip, which is this one that's standalone.
It says the Trump administration Solicitor General defended the president's power to impose global tariffs on Wednesday before a skeptical panel of Supreme Court justices.
Skeptical.
On April 2nd, President Trump determined that our exploding trade deficits have brought us to the brink of an economic and national security catastrophe.
He further pronounced that the traffic of fentanyl and other opioids into our country has created a public health crisis, taking hundreds of thousands of American lives.
President Trump has declared that these emergencies are country-killing and not sustainable, that they threaten the bedrock of our national and economic security, and that fixing them will make America a strong, financially viable, and respected country again.
A handful of small businesses in 12 Democratic states have accused the president of overstepping his authority by imposing global tariffs where the law doesn't allow it.
They maintain that only Congress has the power to regulate tariffs.
Tariffs are taxes.
They take dollars from Americans' pockets and deposit them in the U.S. Treasury.
Our founders gave that taxing power to Congress alone.
Yet here, the president bypassed Congress and imposed one of the largest tax increases in our lifetimes.
Many doctrines explain why this is illegal, like the presumption that Congress speaks clearly when it imposes taxes and duties and the major questions doctrine.
But it comes down to common sense.
It's simply implausible that in enacting IEPA, Congress handed the president the power to overhaul the entire tariff system and the American economy in the process.
The court is not expected to make a ruling today, but it appears that the justices are concerned about the Trump administration's regulation of tariffs globally, with several justices questioning whether he properly interpreted the statute in question.
Oh, that was kind of middle of the road.
That was NTD.
And they kind of got the main talking point, which came out, interestingly enough, within 30 minutes of the three hours that this took.
It was supposed to be, I think it was supposed to be 90 minutes.
They went for 180 minutes.
But right away, within 30 minutes, which was the opening questions, and they were grilling the administration's lawyer, the Solicitor General, I forget his name, who has a very, very unfortunate voice.
And so Bloomberg.
And so Bloomberg comes out with this.
What's not your attention in these arguments today?
Well, I think I would agree, I think, with most commentators so far that it does feel like the justices as a whole are leaning toward the plaintiffs away from the government and really challenging the government on their interpretation of the statute on the delegation issues.
Did Congress give this power, which is a congressional power, to impose tariffs to the president?
We had Justice Barrett asking a lot of really pointed questions about the words in the statute, their meaning, and whether they encompass this authority.
And here is MSNBC and the Stephanie Rule Show.
They, of course, took it to the expected conclusion after the first 30 minutes of reports were in.
You wrote about today's arguments for Slate, and you called them a bloodbath for Trump.
Well, I mean, I think it's pretty clear that the Supreme Court is going to strike down these tariffs.
And explain why a lot of people were not tuned into that.
So at least three conservative justices, John Roberts, Amy Cooney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, they came in gunning for Bear.
They were not remotely convinced by the Justice Department's arguments.
They said, you know, look, this is a statute that, as you just said, Steph, doesn't talk about tariffs, taxes, duties, imposts, anything like that.
It's been around since 1977.
No previous president has ever even attempted to use it for tariffs.
And now Trump thinks that it gives him the power to impose any tariffs he wants against any country he wants for as long as he wants.
This Supreme Court spent four years of the Biden administration saying, look, if the president wants to do something big and bold, he needs to have clear congressional authorization for it.
That authorization does not exist here in this statute.
And so at least those three justices, plus the three liberals, I mean, they were being consistent.
They were saying, we just don't see in the law that you're showing us anything that looks like authorization.
I love this guy.
Look, I'm telling you, this is a bloodbath.
Okay, fine.
So a couple of terms that are good to understand.
IEPA, IEEPA, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
In peacetime emergencies declared by the president, IEPA gives the president the power to regulate any transaction in foreign exchange by means of instructions, licenses, or otherwise.
This is where it gets all kind of a little crazy.
It was basically, forgive me, Lord, ant fucking over language.
This language is often described as capacious.
So the question is.
Are you reading from the lawyer's brief?
I am.
It was not clear.
Yes, I'm sorry.
So how capacious can it be under the Constitution?
Then we have the TWEA TUIA, the Trading with the Enemy Act.
By the way, the ant-fucking term is mine.
During times of declared war, TWEA gives the president the same power because we're not in a declared war situation.
TWEA doesn't apply here.
But the statutory language received attention during the oral argument.
Then you have, these are interesting, the non-delegation doctrine that says one branch of government, usually Congress, can't delegate its powers to another branch, but there are many exceptions.
See our entire administrative state.
Yeah.
And then see Chevron deference as an example.
The major questions doctrine is related to non-delegation.
It says that courts won't read a statute to empower the president to determine a major political or economic questions unless the statute makes it clear and explicit.
To quote the late Justice Scalia, Congress doesn't hide elephants in mouse holes.
So this whole thing really comes down to language.
Now, the first hour, this is where we have the Secretary General with a very unfortunate voice, and he is being hounded by the justices.
And Rob says, and I thought this was interesting, he says, We lawyers sometimes hear the adage that if judges are leaning toward one party on a controversial issue, they'll direct the toughest questions to that party just to make sure they're not missing anything.
Now, I thought that was interesting because that is clearly what was going on here.
I'll play a bit of it.
Justice Gorsuch.
General, just a few questions following up on the major questions discussions you've had.
You say that we shouldn't be so concerned in the area of foreign affairs because of the president's inherent powers.
That's the gist of it, as I understand it, why we should disregard both major questions and non-delegation.
So could Congress delegate to the president the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations as he sees fit?
Pay and collect duties as he sees fit.
We don't assert that here.
That would be a much harder case now.
In 1790.
Isn't that the logic of your view, though?
I don't think so, because we're dealing with a statute that was a carefully crafted compromise.
It does have all the limitations that I just talked about.
You're saying we shouldn't look, we shouldn't be concerned with, I want to explain to me how you draw the line.
Because you say we shouldn't be concerned because this is foreign affairs and the president has inherent authority.
And so delegation off the books, more or less.
Or at least what would prohibit Congress from just abdicating all responsibility to regulate foreign commerce, for that matter, declare war, to the president?
We don't contend that he could do that if it did.
Why not?
Well, because...
So that's the kind of grilling he got.
Very, very thorough.
So then we have now it comes down to the language of otherwise and licenses and tariffs.
Because it's called tariffs, it seems to be the big issue.
So Justice Gorsuch, our position is not that regulate can never mean tax or tariff.
Our brief at page 15 gives you an example.
A president may regulate cars coming in to the city, and then if it adds by charging tolls or something like that, absolutely.
In context, it does.
Here, the context you're referring to, story and so on, says nothing about this case.
That is the constitutional context about Congress's use of power.
But it's part of how we understand language is used, and it's relevant for that purpose.
And then when you've got licenses, which are economically the same thing as, would you agree they're basically economically the same thing as tariffs?
Sometimes they can be regulated.
Okay, so you've got something that's economically identical to a tariff authorized by this statute.
Where does that leave you?
So let me take the question in two parts.
One is about the word regulate, and the other is about licensing.
With respect to the word regulate, when it's used in the constitutional sense, it's very different than the sense in IEPA that my friend is asserting.
When we're asserting IPA, we're talking about a statute that is granting the president massive powers.
And so the relevant context that I think you look at in asking the question, what did Congress mean in 1977?
The best context, the most natural context is what does Congress say every time they grant the president power?
And then there's just one other point on this.
Constitutions are read totally differently.
Story and Madison are talking about the constitutional phrase.
And as Chief Justice Marshall said in McCulloch, a constitutional expounding, the prolixity of a legal code is the opposite of the way you read the Constitution.
I do follow that argument.
Okay, so it turns out you read words differently when they're in the Constitution versus in U.S. law.
Then Kavanaugh comes in, and he's now talking to the prosecution, which is a wine importer and some Democrat states who don't like this.
And this is interesting because it turns out the president does have this power, but he doesn't have it in a certain way.
They call it the donut hole.
And I want to pick up on Justice Barrett's question because your interpretation of the statute, as she pointed out, would allow the president to shut down all trade with every other country in the world or to impose some significant quota on imports from every other country in the world, but would not allow a 1% tariff.
And that leaves, in the government's words and spries, an odd donut hole in the statute.
Why would a rational Congress say, yeah, we're going to give the president the power to shut down trade?
I mean, think about the effects, but you're admitting that power's in there, but can't do a 1% tariff.
That doesn't make, but I want to get your answer, have a lot of common sense behind it.
I think it absolutely does because it's a fundamentally different power.
It's not a donut hole.
It's a different kind of pastry.
And on that power, even Kavanaugh thought that was funny.
That's a good one.
On that power, though, and you've said this many times, and Mr. Cattiel, too, and look, I get this, obviously, but the court has repeatedly said a tariff on foreign imports is an exercise of the commerce power, not of the taxation power.
So, you know, this whole idea that the Supreme Court was skeptical, I disagree with.
I think that they really saw the issue here.
And it comes down to, are you calling it a tax?
Because that's what we hear Rand Paul call it, and of course the entire Democrat caucus of, oh, it's taxing the American people.
But no, it's called raising revenue and it's foreign-facing.
We're really getting into the weeds here.
Yes, sure.
The tariffs are a tax, and that's a core power of Congress.
But they're a foreign-facing tax, right?
And that foreign affairs, a core power of the executive.
This is a Lido.
And I don't think you can dismiss the consequences.
I mean, we didn't stay in this case.
And one thing is quite clear is that the foreign-facing tariffs have in several situations.
Right, and we are quite effective in achieving a particular objective.
So I don't think you can just separate it when you say, well, this is a tax to Congress's power.
It implicates very directly the president's foreign affairs power.
And then the final clip, which I think is really what this will hinge on, is if this is a war situation, of course the president will be allowed to do this.
You say that this is not.
This is Alito.
Sorry, it was Roberts before that.
This is Alito.
This case does not.
These executive orders do not address an unusual and extraordinary threat.
I understand that argument.
Suppose that the facts were that it was indispensable.
Suppose that there was an imminent threat of war, not a declared war, but an imminent threat of war with a very powerful enemy whose economy was heavily dependent on U.S. trade.
China.
Could a president, under this provision, impose a tariff as a way of trying to stave off that war?
Or would you say, no, the president lacks that power?
It couldn't do tariffs, it could do quota, embargo, all of those things.
Could do all those things, but the president could not impose a tariff.
There's one thing he couldn't do.
There's a category shift between a tariff and the other eight powers in IEPA because it is revenue raising.
So it's not a difference in degree or something like that.
That's why, you know, I don't doubt tomorrow.
Even if the purpose of this has had nothing whatsoever to do with raising one penny, the president didn't want to raise one penny.
The president wanted to deter aggression that would bring the United States into a war.
He would say, no, can't do that.
Yeah, Justolito, I think you've said many times the purpose isn't what you look at.
You look to actually what the government is doing.
And if you disagree, if you think we're, you know, if you think if you ruled for us and the president says, I need this power, he can go across the street to Congress tomorrow and get it by a simple majority through reconciliation.
But if you vote for them, this power, as Justice Gorsuch said, as Justice Barrett said, is going to be stuck with us forever.
The power to change.
So I think that's why Trump is pulling out the hedge on this.
I think that's why he's saying, hey, use a nuclear option.
We need to have, you know, just get rid of the filibuster for the end this shutdown because he might need that in case.
No, he just said it takes a simple majority from Congress.
He doesn't have to do that.
Okay.
Okay.
I don't think the filibuster thing's going nowhere.
There's a couple of things that caught my eye.
It's like they gave him an out on one.
Licensing's okay.
Yes.
So, you know, because here's what in the back of my mind when I'm listening to these clips is Besant, who came out a couple of days ago and said, don't worry about it.
Whatever happened doesn't make any difference.
We have alternative ways of doing this.
We have our ways.
Six ways to do this.
We have our ways.
Six ways to visit doing this.
And we can make it.
We can make it hurt very much.
So the alternative ways would be one, embargo.
No.
No trade.
Yeah.
He can do that for sure.
That's what he said.
That's what the justices said right there.
And also licensing.
Just change the tariff to a license.
Yes.
Yeah.
Right.
I don't see this being a big deal.
No.
Rob, the constitutional lawyer, says he views the odds as not bad, which is lawyer speak.
Yeah, but not bad is better than listening to MSNBC.
A bloodbath.
It's like, but how can people listen to that network?
So he said that the tariff, so the main argument is that the tariff opponents say the president can issue licenses as long as they don't involve fees that generate revenue.
SCODUS will spend a lot of time scrubbing this out.
And ultimately, you're right.
And if that's all that the president is left with, he'll say, okay, embargo, no trade.
Or license, you know, and the license will depend upon you giving us rare earths or whatever.
By the way, President Trump did get a one-year extension on that deal on rare earths in time, you know, for some other alternative avenues to be ramped up.
So that was, he's definitely done something good there.
So I think not bad.
Yeah, sounds about right to me.
Yeah, he also encouraged Australia and other places, including here, to restart processing these things.
He says it's going to take a year or two.
Yeah.
Yeah.
He said that in a CBS.
It was a mistake.
And you saw this years ago.
The rare earth situation was not going to, it was not going to be good.
Well, it was 10 years ago that we still had a processing plant in California.
The Molly Corps.
Yeah, there you go.
And I have clips.
We should probably take a break.
I have clips of that.
Before you take a break, I have the perfect intro to the break.
Okay.
Let me guess.
Does it involve something from TikTok?
Yes, it does.
And it's a clip.
It's a bonus clip.
Ah, yes.
Okay.
Yes, the bonus clip.
Yes.
I got you.
Got your bonus clip.
You want to set it up?
The woman who hates men and thinks the vote should be taken away from them.
I think that we should just repeal a man's right to vote.
It's kind of what I'm thinking about.
It's kind of what I've been mulling over recently.
Because I know there's been a lot of chit chat amongst evangelical Christians, particularly stemming from the voices of men, which is classic, honestly, that they want to repeal the 19th Amendment.
And I think that really what should happen.
Because, I mean, look at every empire that has existed under a man's rule.
What has happened to it?
Right, right.
So what I'm kind of thinking of, you know what?
I think even more so, we should just take all men and put them in cages, particularly a straight white man, particularly a straight white, a straight white man with a podcast.
Those have got to be the first to fucking go.
That's good.
We're out.
We're done.
We're in cages.
We're done.
We should be grandfathered in somehow.
I don't know.
That doesn't sound fair.
And with that, I want to thank you for your courage.
Say in the morning to you, the man who put the sea in the Fupreme Court.
Say hello to my friend on the other end, the one, the only Mr. Johnson.
Yeah, in the morning, you're a creator of ministers.
He built your graphic theater.
So I'm just the one of the names of the nights out there.
In the morning to the trolls in the troll room, let me give you a code here.
Don't stop moving around.
There we go.
And we're inching our way back.
1743.
That's not too bad.
Yeah, we're good.
Welcome, trolls.
They're listening at trollroom.io, or they could be listening on one of those modern podcast apps.
And I have news about the modern podcast apps.
Five years ago, Dave Jones and I started the podcast index.
We created the namespace.
People said, no one cares what you're doing.
Who knows what it means?
You created no more features.
You know, I like you doing that voice, but I have no idea what you said.
What were they bitching about?
They said, because we said, hey, you know what?
Apple doesn't own podcasting.
We can create as many new features as we want.
And these modern podcast apps, they will do it.
And people will use, you know, people use Podverse more than any other podcast app to listen to this show.
I think Fountain is number two.
We've got Podcast Guru.
And then you, and we're not even on Spotify by design.
So there's all these cool features.
And transcripts was one.
Oh, I guess Apple adopted transcripts earlier this year.
And two days ago.
So you're actually trying to tell me that people complained about having more features?
Yes.
No.
No, you have to understand the podcast industrial complex, they don't like anybody rocking any boat for anything.
And quite honestly, they find me annoying because I'm like, hey, what?
Yeah, I'm sure they just find me annoying.
And, you know, the podcast index, we said, you know, we said, hey, you're not going to get deplatformed from this.
And then people went, yeah, but you know, Alex Jones, you shouldn't be on the podcast.
You understood that.
Alex jokes.
And there were several podcasts, not the biggest ones, but a big one, a podcast hosting company, who said, nobody cares about what you're doing.
We're not adopting any of your features.
Podbean?
Nope.
No, Pod Bean is actually progressive.
They are forward-looking and forward-leaning.
And two days ago, Apple Podcast adopted another one of our features, which is the cloud chapters.
And so now, and I think they're smart because you should get an award.
An international award.
Send you a peace prize.
I want a peace prize.
So, you know, that's a big win.
And that shows that Apple is looking at what we're doing.
They're considering what we're doing.
We have moved the needle on a very big company.
And it's good for podcasting.
And I think it's great.
And it's because a lot of people are using these modern podcast apps.
Apple's like, we're losing market share.
We lost the whole percent to those guys.
A percent's a lot for them.
For them, a percent is a lot.
But it's also the way we're moving it.
And it's not me and Dave.
It's an entire orchestra of misfits who are doing this.
And I want to congratulate them for moving this a little bit forward.
And of course, in 10 years from now, it'll all be Adam Carolla's idea.
And, you know, yeah, it already is, by the way.
So as long as I get my International Peace Prize, that'll be fine with me.
So go to podcastapps.com.
You even see Apple now listed in that list because they have three features that are new.
So congratulations to them.
They are good people over there.
It's a behemoth of a company.
So I'm glad that they're able to move the needle.
And by the way, I think that the next tag will be the funding tag, which the modern podcast apps have.
If you look in any of the aforementioned podcast apps, you'll see a button that you can press that button and it will take you right to the donation page of the No Agenda Show.
It's amazing.
It really is quite helpful.
So you're listening, you hear like, hey, you can support us with a donation, value for value.
You just go to your podcast app.
You don't have to remember anything, even though noagendadonations.com is not that hard to remember.
You just press the button.
You press the button, boom, you're there.
You make a donation.
You've helped your favorite podcast.
I believe that Apple will do this next.
And then you're going to see things happen.
And I need to mention something about value for value.
Tina has been inundated with people asking her for information.
She has a form email now about the crowd health crowdfunded insurance.
It's not insurance, but crowdfunded health care.
What is the right word for that?
There's got to be a word for it.
Meta share.
Yeah.
Meta share.
And I just wanted to explain how it works.
You pay a very low amount monthly.
I think it's $99 for the first three months, but she pays under $200.
The first $500 is for you.
And then if you have an emergency or something happens, it's going to be more money than that.
You tell them.
They immediately go to work.
They negotiate directly with that provider.
They negotiate it down.
It's like 30, 25 cents on the dollar.
They tell you exactly what to do, what to say, what to sign, what not to sign.
And then they go out to the community, which is quite big at this point, and they say, okay.
Who is this operation?
CrowdHealth.
Where are they located?
I think they're in Texas, but they're nationwide.
You can use them anywhere.
Because it's just, it's just a crowd.
It's actually value for value.
That's the thing I wanted to explain.
So from time to time, like every couple of months, Tina told me, she'll get a request to support someone or someone's.
They sometimes bundle it, say, okay, we've got a pregnancy.
We've got three people with cancer.
We got this going on.
We got a broken back.
And then it says, will you help support?
So you're paying this low amount.
And then, okay, I'm going to provide some value to the system.
And it's like $100 or maybe $150.
It's never, it's not a lot of money.
It's every two months.
So you're still way under your $2,000 of nonsense that you're paying for nothing.
And then when it's your turn, you get a value for value credit check.
It's like, hey, this person supported it.
So when it's your turn, when your turn comes around, they say, hey, look, this person has always supported everybody else.
We're now going to support you.
And Tina can explain all that code Bongino.
But it's, it's, unfortunately, once you hit 65, you're out of the system because then apparently you've got Medicare and you're on your own.
Medicare is not bad.
No, I know.
I know.
That's why I keep telling you.
Don't worry about it.
What do you think it costs a month?
Nothing.
No, it costs money.
You're under a misassumption.
What does it cost a month?
About $180.
Right.
Don't you have some donut hole you have to fill up because it doesn't take care of some things?
Drugs.
Drugs.
Okay.
Well, President Trump is getting those prices into check for us.
It's a scam.
It's a scam.
It's all a scam.
Drugs are a scam.
Anyway, so, but I find it a very interesting value for value type of proposition.
It's a lifestyle.
It's a new international lifestyle.
Live it if you want to.
If not, then pay those bankers $2,000 a month for nothing with your $8,000 deductible.
Good luck with that.
So we have lived by value for value.
We know it works.
And we don't have any credit checks on you to see if you donated.
Although we do notice that a lot of people.
I don't.
I don't have.
Well, I do nothing to check.
Some nasty note comes in and a guy comes on and he says, I'm not going to donate anymore.
I'm sick of you guys.
I usually check.
And?
They're never donating.
They never have donated, never will.
This reminds me when I was a magazine writer.
You know, I'm going to cancel my subscription.
They have no subscription.
If you have access to the database, they don't have a subscription to begin with.
It's bullcrap.
Well, that's interesting, isn't it?
There's some things just always stay the same.
And it's also uniform.
Well, that's what they think is leverage.
Yes.
Well, I was talking to Pastor Jimmy yesterday.
Pastor Jimmy.
Pastor Jimmy.
By the way, this is the joke at the church now.
Pastor Jimmy and the five Brians.
This is a very Pastor Jimmy and the five.
There's only four, but it makes it funnier to make a funny.
People like this a lot.
No, he said the biggest people who support the biggest donors of the church.
He says, half of them, I don't even know their names.
It's anonymous.
The other half never, ever talk to me about anything.
He says the people who sometimes tithe or not at all, they're the ones that complain the most about how the church should be run.
Yeah.
Hello.
I know, but it's just, it's interesting that this is uniform across the board.
The biggest donors, the biggest value for value supporters of no agenda.
One line note.
Thank you.
We love you.
Good night.
The lower.
They don't bitch and moan constantly.
It doesn't matter.
We love all of you and we thank you very much for your courage and for your support, whether it's time, talent, or treasure.
And we will start it off with some of the time and talent that is brought to us in the form of artwork for our album art.
By the way, all of the end of show mixes, we now actually post the end of show mixes in the actual credits so you can download them, do whatever you want since there seems to be no that's very new for us.
There's no restrictions and we love it.
And of course, you can go to gitmojams.com and listen to this slop 24 hours a day.
We have three songs an hour now.
The rest is end of show mix stuff, which is quite funny to listen to.
Thank you, MVP.
He set up a website for it.
We're still working out the bugs.
Let me see if it's up actually.
Gitmojams.com.
So I don't know.
I may have a DNS thing here.
Anyway, it should be working.
If it's not working today, it'll be working tomorrow.
It's all filled with quotes by you.
And it's end of show makes it jingles, but really we're moving towards full-time slop, all slop all the time.
So the slop that we thank here is the AI-prompted slop.
And actually, we both immediately kind of took to the artwork from Capitalist Agenda, which is not a typical AI piece, nor is Capitalist Agenda necessarily an AI artist.
This was Choking the M5M chicken for episode 1813, which we titled Lunchbox from Lunchbox AI.
We both like this piece.
It stood out.
It really stood out as something different, which is how I imagine once the Hot 100, the Toe Tapping 100 is all AI slop music.
There'll be one of those things that just pops out.
It's like, you know, whoa, okay.
This is different.
This is good.
You know, everything Capitalist Agenda, who is a good artist.
He is.
The fact that the thing that makes this work, besides the choking of this chicken with M5M underneath him, is the, which is a lewd reference, you know, bringing us back to the hottie that gave you the note.
Yeah.
It's the eyeballs with the swirl in them, which really makes this work.
Only an artist understands that.
And only an artist, yeah, or someone who has some notion of how a cartoon should look will have that.
I mean, the only other possibility was the eyeballs popping forward with a boyo-yoing type.
That would work too.
But this is just dynamite.
Good piece.
Beautiful piece.
Had beautiful luminance in it, nice white background.
Jeffrey Rhea, you need to either do something with your art or you need to get another language model.
You are the orange man.
What he needs to do is get a copy of Photoshop or some other system, drop the art in there, and then brighten it up.
Filter out the orange.
I mean, we literally look at the page.
It's like his signature.
It's like everything he does is orange.
It's all orange.
It's got a film of orange over everything.
And I immediately hate it.
Yeah, you're never going to get picked.
I mean, you'll get picked for the newsletter once in a while, which I think you got last time.
But Adam will veto all your pieces because they're so orangey.
Yes, and it's not that hard to fix.
Like the methane cow.
Yeah.
It's a beautiful piece.
It's a good piece.
Too orange.
Too orangey.
Too orange.
Yeah, he's got another one, missing chocolate, orange.
And then Nessworks is also a good artist, and he makes another fundamental, detrimental mistake on his sock hop art.
Oh, yeah, this was noticeable to me immediately.
The people aren't wearing socks.
The reason, let me go back to just one more time.
This last time I'm going to bring it up.
A sock hop was called a sock hop, not because it was a cool name.
It's because it was required that you wear socks because they were having a dance on the gym floor of the school of a basketball court usually.
Yes.
And in those days, people didn't wear, they didn't wear Nikes.
In the olden days of the sock cop, they wore leather-soled shoes.
Bowling shoes.
They didn't wear bowling shoes either.
They wore leather-sol shoes.
Bowling shoes are actually kind of slippery.
They would be okay.
They wore leather-soled shoes.
And when you dance on a basketball court, you ruin the court.
It's scratched up.
It's a mess.
So you had to wear socks.
So when you see somebody in a sock cop wearing shoes, it doesn't make sense because it never happened.
Yeah.
So they throw you out.
Disquality.
They throw it disqualified, disqualified.
I did kind of like Nessworks's boots dancing on the M5M.
By the way, I haven't heard from our boot guy.
We gave him such an alley oop.
Like, come on, man.
Let's make these no agenda boots.
Just like PBB, PB, PBD.
Blue Acorn had some boots too that I thought were nice.
Yeah.
But ultimately.
And he had a chicken, and the Blue Acorn had two chickens in the background, which I thought added a lot.
Yeah.
But we'll have once our boot guy gets back to us and we get some no agenda boots made in America, made in America, made in America boots.
That's our exit strategy, man.
Where are you at, OP?
Opie shoes, OP boots.
Come on.
It's not called OP Boots.
I forget what it's called.
OP boots.
Well, it's OP shoes.
Hold on a second.
Opie Shoes.
Opie Way.
OPWay.com.
They do the sneakers, but then he has, he started a boot company.
The sneakers are nice too.
By the way, we could go for sneakers.
Opie Way.com, they got some nice sneakers.
High-end.
We could outdo Infotainment.
Valutainment.
Well, he's Valutainment.
Infotainment.
Bron Bloom.
That's a Bron Bloom title.
His are Italian.
Yes, so.
Ours are American.
But the thing, the problem, the problem he has as opposed to the sneakers is that people don't wear shoes anymore.
They wear sneakers.
Yes.
You would look at it.
You watch TV.
They're coming out with a suit on wearing sneakers.
The number of people that wear Farragamos, which is an incredibly comfortable shoe or Gucci shoe.
No, I think the OP Ways, maybe that's better for us.
We'll find out.
We'll play it by ear.
As long as there's no tariffs involved.
No, he makes them in America.
There's no tariffs.
He makes them in North Carolina.
This beautiful thing.
All right.
Of course, we always want to thank our producers who supply us with treasure.
Here's how that works.
You go to noagendadonations.com or hit that little dollar sign or whatever it is in your podcast app.
You go right to it and you support us with your fiat fun coupons.
Or I see actually that we have some Bitcoin coming in.
That's just the color coding on the spreadsheet.
And here's how that works.
In this segment, we thank people who we call executive and associate executive producers.
These are real credits that they get because they are able to support us, just like in Hollywood, with more money.
$200 or above gets you an executive associate, associate executive producer credit, and we'll read your note.
$300 and above, you become an executive producer and we'll read your note.
And if you question the validity of these credits, go to imdb.com, type in No Agenda.
You see that there's over a thousand people who have done this, and you can use that to your advantage.
In fact, if you're dating and you're Gen Z or even millennial and you're having trouble and these women want to know, they're trying to figure out how much money you have.
You just say, well, I'm an executive producer.
What?
Yeah.
Look me up.
Hit me up on imdb.com, baby.
I'm right next to Dana Brunetti, huh?
Okay.
So we kick it off with our top executive producer who comes in with a, wow, this must be some kind of freedom America donation, 1776.33 cents.
It's AUG, A-U-G-AUG from Texas.
And AUG says, dearest pod father and grouch.
Yeah.
That would be you.
In the words of warrior monk and philosopher Alexander Jones, they're turning the frogs gay.
No, he says the solution to 1984 is 1776.
A while ago, I made a similar donation in honor of Sir and Mrs. Heck of Eagleford.
Come to find out he doesn't listen during basketball and she doesn't listen to donations.
This is one for me.
Wow, they missed out.
But if they hear it this time from the kid they taught to never stop asking questions, thank you.
I pray I get to support No Agenda more regularly.
Happy All Saints Day, Feliz Dia de los Muertos, the day of the dead.
Ivaya Condios, mofos, or something like that, says Aug.
Thank you very much, Aug.
We appreciate that.
That is welcome.
Very welcome today.
And there we go to Sir Schwartz.
May the Schwartz be with you.
333.33.
Keep it up, guys.
Sir Schwartz of the woke bashing culprits over tax getmo little mermaid.
It's code for something.
It's code for something.
And there's Dame Catherine coming in with a Bitcoin donation.
It's $300.
She says, I know times are hard, and I'm a most fortunate woman to have Bitcoin.
I love you guys and appreciate all that you do.
Remember, being rich is having enough to share with others.
From Dame Catherine Crypto Granny of Bangkok.
Thank you, Dame Catherine.
Very nice.
Yeah, she's been begging for us to have a crypto thing.
No, not crypto, Bitcoin specifically.
Bitcoin.
Yes.
And there it is.
There it is.
But, you know, it was always, it was on the donation thing.
And so I've had Jay change it because you had to click on a thing to go to where you should.
It was a long story, but you made it easier.
Yeah.
Good guy.
Catherine's always, she's always, she's very much in touch with the show.
Yes.
Astrid Klein.
And by the way, you can also boost us from Fountain and your message will come through.
Astrid Klein, you know, if people have a message, email it.
You send it to adam at curry.com or John or no, notes, no, no agenda.
What?
Yeah, go ahead.
Not to me or you, to notes.
No, you're right.
That's why I stopped.
Yeah, keep going.
Not to me or Adam, but notes at noagendashow.net.
Notes at noagendashow.net.
And the key is to put donation in the subject line.
Oh, wow.
That's so smart.
People don't seem to remember this.
No, they remember adam at curry.com.
That's all they seem to remember.
Short fireworks.
She's in Tokyo, 222.19.
The Archduchess.
Dear John and Adam, many congratulations on 18 years of public service, which I believe it to be.
Thank you for always being your authentic selves, honest, charming, at least in my case.
Sprinkled with a little bit of bickering, my right mix to keep it interesting.
We wouldn't like it any other way.
And we sincerely dread the end of four more years.
Dame Astrid and Sir Mark, Archduchess, and Archduke of Japan, and all the disputed islands in the Japan Sea.
Yes.
And people should know that we are not susceptible because of this very system to audience capture.
And that's what everyone else is falling for.
Oh, man.
Everybody wants us to say this.
Most recently, Ukraine.
Remember that?
I mean, we had Ukraine flags in Texas.
It was just idiotic.
It's totally idiotic.
It went away.
It went away.
We knew it.
We move on to Associate Executive Producer Anonymous from Hartford, Connecticut, 210 and 60 cents.
I am writing this with great shame.
It's probably why you're anonymous.
I have been aware of No Agenda since 2018, although I only started listening in September 2024, episode 1698.
You can thank Carl from Who Are These Podcasts for hitting me in the mouth.
Even if it took six years, it's okay.
You're here.
Your show makes my long Monday and Friday commutes to and from work tolerable.
Lastly, I'd like to thank all ATC workers.
You are all the glue holding the aviation industry together.
We appreciate you showing up and doing your hard work during these rough times.
Sincerely, an anonymous citation pilot.
It's a jet boy.
Jet jockey.
Jet jockey, yes.
And John and I also appreciate all air traffic controllers and everyone who has feet in the air.
Jingles, Trump, they're eating the dogs, followed by Nancy Pelosi.
Shut up.
They're eating the dogs.
Shut up.
That's a good one.
I hadn't heard that one.
I like that combo.
That's a good combo.
Ah, Linda Lupadkin in Lakewood, Colorado, $200 Jobs Karma.
For a competitive edge with a resume that gets results, go to imagemakersinc.com for all of your executive resume and job search needs.
That's ImageMakers Inc. with a K.
And work with Linda Liu, Duchess of Jobs and writer of winning resumes.
Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
Let's vote for jobs.
You thought, Karma.
And we have a final associate executive producer, $200 from Christopher Ryan in Hamilton, Ohio.
And he says, calling all male singers in the Cincinnati area.
I initially thought it read male swingers, but it is male singers.
The Southern Gateway Chorus is inviting male singers who enjoy a cappella music to join our Christmas Grand Chorus show this year.
If you've never heard of us, the Southern Gateway Chorus is an award-winning barbershop chorus that competes internationally.
It's a lot of fun.
If you're interested in singing a few acapella Christmas songs, visit southerngateway.org and sign up.
Love a cappella but don't want to sing?
Come watch the show on December 13th or 14th.
You can find all the details on our website's homepage.
I'll be performing with the chorus as well as a special quartet during the show, singing an arrangement of Joseph Lullaby, a song made popular by none other than Mercy Me.
Excellent.
I hope I do it justice.
Anyway, since I've used you for an advertisement, I won't ask for any jingles.
Well, it's barely an advertisement.
It's like a solicitation.
I love you guys.
I love No Agenda.
Pierce to the shit that makes our love lit.
Christopher Ryan, P.S. November 6th is my birthday.
Please put me on the list.
You are on the list.
And that concludes our executive and associate executive producers for episode 1814 of the best podcast in the universe.
Thank you all very much for your support.
Remember, you get these credits automatically.
If anyone ever questions them, let us know.
We'll be happy to vouch for you.
Go to noagendadonations.com.
Anybody can support us any amount, anytime you feel like it.
It's value for value.
Set up a recurring donation.
Any amount, any frequency.
Noagendadonations.com.
My formula is this.
We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
Yowza.
Yowza, yowza, yowza.
So.
So We have to have a couple of AI things that I thought were reasonably interesting that I wanted to come back to.
Oh, AI.
Okay, I actually have a couple of AI clips myself, but they're archived, so you have to dig them up.
Well, then let me get to the fresh ones.
The fresh ones first.
The AI bubble.
Are we in a bubble?
Are we in a bubble, bubble, bubble?
What's going on with the bubble?
We have the AI washing, which actually kind of comes down to these types of reports.
This is, oh, I should have warned you.
It's Amy Goodman incoming.
Sorry, everybody.
In labor news, several major U.S. companies have announced layoffs affecting tens of thousands of workers.
Amazon said it'll eliminate about 14,000 corporate jobs.
with Reuters reporting that number could more than double as artificial intelligence tools increasingly replace white-collar workers.
Meanwhile, turn— Yeah, bullcrap.
But we've already determined it to be bullcrap.
Right.
So now I have some CNBC clips about this very issue.
It's called AI washing.
Between January and September 2025, there have been more than 946,000 job cuts announced with roughly 300,000 from the government sector.
That's the highest since 2020, and it's a 55% increase from what we saw last year through the same time period.
It would make sense to think AI is to blame for the layoffs.
Now that we've had generative AI come in and kind of change the equation, investors and boards are asking management teams, how are you using AI?
Why aren't you using AI?
Can't AI help you streamline costs?
But the latest round of layoff announcements in the fall of 2025 suggest AI might not be the root cause of the restructuring.
Oh, really?
They also seem to be real signs that something new is happening, that we've turned a corner in the economy.
So we've seen a wide range of reasons.
You're not really seeing companies say, I am cutting 10,000 employees and replacing them with one single computer.
Using AI and introducing it to save jobs turns out to be an enormously complicated and time-consuming exercise.
I think there's still a perception that it's simple and easy and cheap to do, and it's really not.
Yeah, this is what your No Agenda show has been telling you for months, and now it's all coming out in the AI wash.
There's no doubt AI is a powerful force in the economy right now.
The extent to which we think it's affecting the economy and hiring is in graduate level, low-skilled jobs.
We haven't been able to find yet much evidence that AI is capable at this moment of taking over sort of white-collar middle management jobs.
So why are we seeing so many layoffs?
And how much of it is because of AI?
Wall Street has been hyping generative AI innovation for several years now, which is putting pressure on executives to make it a part of their business model.
79% of CEOs in the U.S. said they feared they could lose their jobs within two years if they didn't deliver measurable AI-driven business gains.
Man, this is, this is like, have we seen this movie before?
Like, oh, you got to have AI.
You got to have a website.
You got to have this.
You got to have e-commerce, e-commerce.
Do you guys have e-commerce yet?
We have been through these things so many times.
And eventually, something always turns out to be okay and usable.
But this one is different.
It's big.
Investors need to be a little careful with what some people have called AI washing.
And what that is, is this idea that because business is deteriorating or there's some difficulty going on with the business, you say, oh, we're letting people go because of AI.
No, you're letting people go because the business is hurting and calling it AI and because Wall Street is buying anything with the letters A and I attached to it.
And so what you might find is you would actually get a bump in your stock because you're letting people go because of AI.
There's this kind of financial fiduciary incentive for management teams to say they're using AI and say that strategies are related to AI, even if it's not totally related to AI.
There's been surveys that have come out that found companies are attributing certain strategies and plans to AI, but it could be as simple as using AI to write an email for you, right?
Is that really a revolutionary use of this technology?
No, but can you say you're using it as part of your strategy?
Technically, yes.
Even Meta's decision to cut 600 workers in October 2025, they cut those workers from their AI unit.
And that's because the AI unit had gotten bloated.
Exactly.
I love this.
And, you know, I know people, I've known lots of people who, oh, yeah, I use AI at work to make my email better.
And then, you know, I adjust it, of course.
But I mean, how is that?
How can that be improving productivity?
Shouldn't you?
No, it's actually probably not.
Well, I mentioned on the show before about two months ago that there was a study done internally that has not been publicly discussed at a nondescript AI company, yes.
No, at NVIDIA.
Oh, NVIDIA.
And they tried to find places where the AI was actually increasing productivity and they couldn't do it.
It could be a bullcrup story, so I can't say for sure, but it sounds right to me.
Well, and the fact that productivity is, if you write an email, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and then send it to you right now from the point where you finish the email to you sending it to AI to improve it, quote unquote.
It could have been done.
Right?
It would have been shipped.
So the productivity is going down, not up.
By the way, you're making a big mistake here.
You're pronouncing it NVIDIA.
Yeah.
No, it's not NVIDIA.
According to Nora and President Trump, it's NVIDIA.
Nvidia?
Listen.
I know we're out of time, but just on that matter, we talked about that because I know how closely you follow the stock market.
Do you worry about an AI bubble?
I guess I worry about everything.
You know, I mean, you know, I'm a worrier.
I worry.
But you know what I do?
I worry and then I fix it.
I fix it.
That way I don't have to worry.
There's a lot of money behind AI.
Well, there's a lot of money.
And right now I'm taking advantage of it because we're leading AI.
We're leading it by a lot.
China's in second place, but we're leading it by a lot.
We have the greatest minds of any country anywhere in the world.
And we're using that.
I'm using those great minds to help us.
Now, will something happen later?
I guess, you know, something, but it could also be something very good happens.
And I hope it's going to be very good.
But if it's not so good, we're protected.
I think this is the wrong clip.
This is the NVIDIA clip.
Sounds like it's the wrong clip.
Will you allow the chipmaker NVIDIA to sell their most advanced channels?
Nvidia.
Nvidia.
Will you allow the chipmaker Nvidia to sell their most advanced chips to China?
No, we won't do that.
It's not on the table at all.
We will let them deal with NVIDIA.
Nvidia is the NVIDIA.
NVIDIA.
Anyway, let's ask Bill Gates if there's a bubble.
Because if anybody knows, it would be Bill.
I also asked him if he is worried about whether we are in an AI bubble.
Here's what he had to say: We need to define bubble.
If what we mean is like tulips in the Netherlands, that they eventually look back and said, What the heck?
There was nothing there.
Those were just tulips.
No, that's not where we are.
If you mean it's like the internet bubble, where in the end, something very profound happened.
The world was very different.
Some companies succeeded, but a lot of the companies were kind of me too, fell behind burning capital companies.
Absolutely.
There are a ton of these investments that will be dead ends.
What do you think, John?
What do you think?
Bill's right.
Yeah, but what do you think will be the what will the killer app be?
Is it going to be porn?
Is it going to be...
Oh, the killer after...
No, the killer app is already ChatGPT.
It's already here.
But what is so killer about it?
What is the...
People are using it instead of search engines.
Okay.
Okay, so that's going.
That's a big deal.
One of the things a lot of people only do on the internet is do searches.
I mean, Google the rest of them.
Yeah.
Duck, duck, go.
Duck, duck, go.
So just.
So Grok and ChatGPT, which is more or less the same probably, I think Grok delivers better results personally, but this is.
Have you put Grok into expert mode and then done a search?
This actually, I think, is interesting because it will go out and it will scan through 10, 20, 30, 60.
I've seen 90 web pages and something that I could do myself, but it does it faster than I could do.
You'll do it a lot faster than you will.
Yeah, it still takes several minutes to come back with an answer.
But yeah, and I just like, I'm not paying for this.
And this is exactly what came up with in a conversation that open AI investor Brad Gersner had on a Zoom call with Sam Altman.
And funny enough, Sacha Nadell was also on the call.
It's a three-way.
And here's Brad's question and Sam's answer.
Quite arrogant.
You know, how can a company with 13 billion in revenues make 1.4 trillion of spend commitments?
And you've heard the criticism, Sam.
We're doing well more revenue than that.
Second of all.
Brad, if you want to sell your shares, I'll find you a buyer.
I just enough.
I think there's a lot of people who would love to buy OpenAI shares.
I don't think you're going to be able to.
Including myself.
Including myself.
People who talk with a lot of breathless concern about our compute stuff or whatever that would be thrilled to buy shares.
So I think we could sell your shares or anybody else's to some of the people who are making the most noise on Twitter, whatever, about this very quickly.
We do plan for revenue to grow steeply.
Revenue is growing steeply.
We are taking a forward bet that it's going to continue to grow and that not only will ChatGPT keep growing, but we will be able to become one of the important AI clouds, that our consumer device business will be a significant and important thing, that AI that can automate science will create huge value.
So, you know, there are not many times that I want to be a public company, but one of the rare times it's appealing is when those people are writing these ridiculous open AI is about to go out of business and, you know, whatever.
I would love to tell them they could just short the stock and I would love to see them get burned on that.
But, you know, we carefully plan.
We understand where the technology, where the capability is going to grow, go and how the products we can build around that and the revenue we can generate.
We might screw it up.
Like, this is the bet that we're making.
We're taking a risk along with that.
So.
That is the most arrogant response.
Oh, really?
You want me to buy your stock?
Or you want to buy stock?
Exactly.
I could find someone who wants to buy your shares.
What's interesting is Altman has an amazing tell.
He really believes what he's saying because when he answers these questions, you know how in NLP and neuro-linguistic programming, if someone looks to the right and up, they're lying.
If they look to the left and up.
Yeah, there's a bunch of these different theories.
looks up to the left which which means he's visualizing he's visualizing his powerpoint presentation his his deck uh he looks up it's almost like he's looking at the light bulb on the ceiling and the guy goes all the way up uh uh we we're gonna have a lot more revenue a lot and he said something interesting which i i was kind of overlooked um he said are consumer devices i i i only heard that in the second run through as i had already clipped this his consumer devices
what consumer devices would they be coming out with that could be interesting i think maybe that maybe he gave something away unless he thinks that just the website's a consumer device which is nobody else would define it that way and regarding shorting uh michael burry the guy from the big short he has put a 1.1 billion dollar short on nvidia and palantir and palantir actually everything crashed a little bit
eight not a crash but eight percent down yeah we talked about that on the dh unplug show which runs every tuesday yes people should download it it's it starts at eight o'clock central nine is live live it's on the stream it's andrew horowitz who is a money manager and a fine human being one of my friends i love him love him very very much okay his services are beyond compare he's fantastic and columnist john c doork let's join andrew and john now
yeah uh good yeah so uh yeah what was the challenge palantir has got a pe ratio of 200 a 100 pe ratio is like hot stock so there's 200 it the stock should be half the price it is the way i see it and horowitz did not agree with me i mean he did agree with me that the prices of the stock is it's ridiculous yeah
because people don't understand what what per earnings per share or i'm sorry pe ratio the ratio the price earnings ratio what it usually indicates the number that number usually indicates the yearly rate of growth that's what it's supposed to reflect so if you have a pe ratio of 30 that means the company is going to grow by 30 a year hopefully it's just a guess and so if you have a 200 or a 200 pe ratio the stock is supposed to be growing at 200 a year
that no if it grows 100 a year that's doubling so come on give me a break so uh and so so you look at these pe ratios and you you try to determine if they're sensible we both like palantir by the way i think it's we both think it's a good investment but not at these prices not financial advice not and we don't give financial advice what else so any that's it that's all i got
no no predictions on a crash or anything that's i mean this this can't i don't see a crash until the first uh actually i don't see personally and this is just because i have these 20 and 40 year cycle things that i like to play with uh and the last crash was in 2008 2009 Nine era, so do you 2028-29?
It has to be after Trump's out.
So it'll be in, and you could push it off a little bit so you have a cry.
I foresee the following.
Trump's presidency reflects that of Reagan's.
And his vice president, George Walker Bush, became vice president.
And then he had a small blip in the economy just before the election that Clinton won.
And that I think will be the same sort of thing because Vance will get in there probably with Rubio as his vice president, which would be my guess.
I would say the other way around.
I think Rubio with Vance is going to be a little bit more than that.
Rubio would like to see it the other way around, but I don't think that's what's going to happen because Rubio can still become president.
You'd have two Vance's and then Rubio could take over.
So you'd have the long stream.
It wouldn't work out the other way.
So you end up with, but it's not going to matter because what's going to happen in the 28 to 30 era, you're going to have another crash, enough so that it's going to shake the Democrat Party and you're going to end up with Democrats in again.
Or the Republican Party and the Democrats will get in in 2032.
Well, hopefully we're dead then.
But we all be dead.
It's not that far from now.
I'm going to see that.
And we'll still be spitting in the mic, baby.
Four more years.
Four more years.
I got to wash my.
Never mind.
Yeah.
What is it called?
The thing that you have in front of the mic?
The windscreen?
Windscreen.
I have to wash my windscreen.
Pop filter.
That's it.
I use one.
Let's do a, I have two clips here to commemorate the passing of former Vice President Dick Cheney, the man who had his heart in a bag for the past 10 years.
There were some things that I'd remember when he had the mechanical heart they had to take out.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Because he did, because there was no rhythm.
If you have a mechanical heart and it's just pumping blood continuously, you can't keep track of time.
You can't do anything.
He has a lot of things with Dick Cheney.
The CBC did.
I'm surprised there wasn't more.
I thought we would have had more obits.
Did they think that Cheney would just live forever?
They didn't have anything pre-produced on the planet.
Everybody hated this guy.
Pretty much.
Trump didn't even acknowledge that I know that he died because he ended up voting for Kamala.
The guy was a terrible person.
Let's listen to the CBC OBIT.
Trust the Canadians to do it for us.
So help me God.
Congratulations.
By the time he was sworn in as U.S. Vice President to George W. Bush in 2001, Dick Cheney had already been a long-standing force in Washington.
I picked him because he's strong, he's steady, and he gets the job done.
A White House staffer under Richard Nixon, chief of staff to Gerald Ford, 10 years a lawmaker on Capitol Hill, and Secretary of Defense to George H.W. Bush.
It was as vice president that Cheney became as divisive as he was consequential.
The enemy has shown a capacity to inflict great damage on the United States, and we have to assume there will be more attacks.
After 9-11, Cheney cemented the widely held view it was his hand that guided the Bush presidency.
Dick Cheney's legacy is fundamentally complicated.
Garrett Martin, professor at American University School of International Service, says Cheney will be forever seen as promoting the most controversial U.S. policies of those years, including pushing the false notion Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
Enhanced interrogation for torture, essentially, the Patriot Act or surveillance also, domestic spying on Americans.
And of course, his most hawkish line on the war in Iraq and being largely unapologetic about it.
What we did in Iraq was exactly the right thing to do.
If I had it to recommend all over again, I would recommend exactly the right same course of action.
And then there was my favorite about Dick Cheney.
In 2006, Cheney accidentally shot a friend while quail hunting.
So another Cheney friend described it as a peppering.
Late night comedians had a field day.
Peppering is what you do to a Caesar Salad.
He shot that dude.
George W. Bush today called Cheney a decent, honorable man.
His death, a loss to the nation.
But the current president is a big-time Cheney critic.
As a Republican lawmaker, Cheney's daughter Liz supported Donald Trump's impeachment.
Here's Trump in 2022.
The Cheneys are die-hard globalists and warmongers who have been plunging us into new conflicts for decades.
Just last year, Dick Cheney took on Trump directly with a campaign ad for daughter Liz.
There has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump.
Cheney, a lifelong Republican, said he'd vote for Democrat Kamala Harris.
Today, Trump's White House lowered the flag to half mast for Cheney, underlining U.S. law requires it to do so.
I loved it.
I loved it when he shot that guy in the face.
Remember how funny that was?
I didn't see it, so I don't know how funny it was.
It was, if we didn't have memes back then.
Oh, man.
He's like, oh, sorry, man.
I shot you in the face.
No, I just peppered.
It's okay.
And who was the guy who got shot?
And he was like, oh, it's okay.
It was just a peppering.
It was not a big deal.
His face was full of buckshot.
No, it wasn't buckshot.
It was your birdshot.
Birdshot.
Okay.
Anyway, big difference.
He's gone.
He's gone.
Ding-dong.
He's gone.
I wonder.
I wonder if he's meeting Jesus right now.
I have my doubts.
I doubt it.
I have my doubts.
So a couple of light clips.
Let's go with these TikToks.
I got a couple here.
All right.
This will be it because we got to get out of here, man.
It's way too much content.
Okay.
This will be the end of it then.
Okay.
Which one?
Well, just one of them.
If I'm going to pick one, I think we'll go with the non-binary girl.
All right, non-binary girl.
You're up.
Two things to know.
I'm non-binary.
I go by they them.
And I work in a store that is pretty much all women.
So whenever they're like addressing us or when they're talking, they're always like, hey, ladies.
So I've taken it upon myself as someone that is non-binary to use this to not listen.
And whenever anyone addresses a group as ladies, I am not included.
So when they say, hey, ladies, let's like stop talking or hey, ladies, let's like get to work.
I will do none of it because you're not talking to me.
You're not talking to me.
You're not talking to me.
So I will not listen to anything that is said when it is started with, hey, ladies.
I'm a they, not a lady, a they.
Oh, they.
Oh, goodness gracious.
Did you share this with Chanel?
Thady?
No, not yet.
I can't wait for you.
There's definitely a point of information, the new term they.
I never heard this before.
They did.
Okay, daddy.
Oh, they did.
I'm going to show my spoon by donating to no agenda.
Imagine all the people who could do this.
Oh, yeah, that'd be fun.
So we're going to have Adam go through the people that donate over $50, and then he'll take us to the meetups and some other housework.
Yes.
We have Ed in Summit, New Jersey, and he actually has a switcheroo.
He wants us to switch a row this to Capitalist Agenda, who helped me out with an amazing image bringing Applejuice the hockey player to life.
He says, From this day forward, I claim 167.41 shall be known as the Applejuice Donation.
Okay, Ed.
Good luck with that.
Oh, Sir Bernie Adama.
Haven't seen him in a while.
No, he's.
Yeah, that's right.
12345.
And it's a John specific request to mention postcard book he received a few months ago.
This is up to you.
What is this about the postcard book?
Well, he had me do a blurb because I do blurbs at the drop of a hat.
A lot of people got impressed by this.
Sioux CityHistory.com.
Go see SiouxCityHistory.com.
And it's a book of antique postcards about Sioux City, Iowa.
Oh.
Or is it South Dakota?
Sioux City.
No, Sioux City.
Sioux CityHistory.com.
Sioux City, Iowa.
And I found it fascinating.
And he probably needs to sell a few books.
So go check it out.
Hey, so a Dutch guy, he sold a book in Holland, a self-help book, 350,000 copies in Holland, which is a lot.
That's a lot for here.
Yeah, his name is Michael Polachik, and he's a DJ, a former DJ.
He's kind of from the generation that came after me.
And he has it translated in English.
And he asked me to do a blurb for his book.
Would you mind just adding one as well?
I'll be glad to.
Yeah, exactly.
That's what I thought.
You know me.
I said it before.
Just throw it in there.
No problem.
We got a twofer.
Dame Rita, Sparks, Nevada, 11106.
She appreciates the humor.
John Rubinet, $100.
Thank you, John.
Another name we haven't seen in a while.
Ash from Texas, $86.67.
God bless you.
Ash in Texas.
Kevin McLaughlin, Concord, North Carolina, boob donation, 8008.
He says, Laos Deo, which translates to praise be to God, inscribed on top of the Washington Monument facing east towards the rising sun.
Stephen Hutto, St. Petersburg, Florida, 75.
Servent, 6767.
There you go.
The only 6-7 donation for this show.
David Cox in Austin, Texas, 63.25.
Teresa Andrews in Camarillo, California, 6161.
Les Tarkowski in Kingman, Arizona, Small Boob, 6006.
Susan Brendel in, or Brendel, Brendel in Wexford, Pennsylvania.
Happy birthday to Laurie, our wonderful sister.
Love from Karen and Susie.
Birthday is $11.11, and that is $60.
Steve Banstra, he's one of our pilots.
Nashville, Tennessee, E-G-G-S Over Easy.
Oh, yes, Eggs Over Easy, 5993.
Got it.
Dame Nancy, Sam Bruno, California.
Donate.
It's good for your soul and for the show.
Love Dame Nancy of the Confused, 5721.
Brian Furley, 5510, Double Nickels on the Dime.
Cameron Ling, Lynch Linga, North Branch, Minnesota, double nickels on the dime.
Troy Funderberg, Missoula, Montana, 55.
Hakon Underson from Portland, Oregon, 52.72.
And here are 50s.
James Sharimetta from Napanok, New York.
Chris Connacher from Anchorage, Alaska.
Tony Lang from Castle Pines, Colorado.
Sir Alex Zavala from Kyle, Texas.
NikkiUDads.com.
NikkiUDads podcast, 50.
Alex Stubbings and Leslie Walker from Roseburg, $50.
They love the show.
Aichi Katagawa Kitagawa from San Francisco 50.
Jason DeLuzio in Miami Beach, Florida, and Walker Phillips from San Rafael, California, $50.
These are the 50s and above.
Thank you for your courage and for supporting the best podcast in the universe.
Of course, we only mention over 50 and keep the rest, under 50, anonymous.
We do have people on layaway programs, etc.
Go to noagendadonations.com and you can find out all of the wonderful things you can do to support us.
But ultimately, it's value for value.
Whatever value you get out of the show, send it back to us.
We accept it and love it all.
Noagendadonations.com.
It's your birthday birthday.
Pretty short list, but a very important birthday right off the bat.
Greg Speed wishes our very own speed racer, Ashlyn Speed, a happy birthday.
She turned 19 on November 5th, and we love what Ashlyn Speed does.
Christopher Ryan celebrates today, actually.
And Karen and Susie wish Lori, their wonderful sister, a happy birthday.
She'll be celebrating on the 11th.
Happy birthday from everybody here at the best podcast in the universe.
So we have no nights, no dames, no title changes, but we do have one International Peace Prize to give away.
One No Agenda International Peace Prize.
Thanks to AUG for AUG's donation of not just $1,000, but $1,776 and some dimes.
So you can go to noagendarings.com and let us know where you would like to receive and in what name precisely AUG your International Peace Prize should be.
These are the real deal.
No Agenda International Peace Prizes.
President Trump and Vice President Vance and Witkoff gets one.
Who else gets one?
Trump.
Witkoff Kushner.
Kushner.
There you go.
So these are the real deal.
And go to noagendarings.com or noagendadonations.com.
No agenda beyond it.
Yeah, the meetups.
Another great way you can participate in our value for value economy by organizing one or just going to one.
It's really good for you.
It's good for the soul.
You will meet people who are like-minded.
You'll have great conversations.
You'll meet, you'll make connection.
That is automatically protection.
And of course, these will be your first responders in any emergency.
Today, the Northern Wake Post-Halloween Recovery Hugathon kicks off at 6 o'clock in Hoppy Endings, Raleigh, North Carolina.
So many meetups there.
They never send a meetup report, which is a little bit disappointing.
Please send one.
On Saturday, the Treasure Valley Boise, 3:30 at Old State Saloon in Eagle, Idaho.
Also on Saturday, Holy Hobos and Holy Hobos and Pretty People, Part 2, 5 o'clock at Post Brewing in Fort Collins, Colorado.
And the rest of this month, we have Oklahoma, Cauleyville, Texas, Fort Wayne, Indiana, big one on the 15th of November in Albany, California.
John will be there.
Central Ohio, Zurich, Switzerland, Charlotte, North Carolina, Wilmington, California, Burlington, Kentucky, Spokane, Washington, Wageningen in the Netherlands.
Many, many meetups that are taking place around the globe.
Don't miss out.
Become a part of the movement.
We're not just a podcast.
We're a movement.
You know, who always says that?
Yo.
Glenn Beck.
Who always says that?
Glenn Beck.
This is not just a podcast.
It's a movement.
So join in the movement.
Go to noagendametups.com.
You can't find one new year.
Start one yourself.
It's always a party.
Sometimes you want to go hang out with all the nights and days.
You to be where you want me.
Trigger to hell aim you wanna be where everybody feels the same it's like a party and before we get to the end part of this party which is a real party with a whole bunch of ai slop end of show isos we uh end of show mixes we actually uh try and uh select an iso that we'll play at the very very end of the show uh you once again only have one which means you're very confident it's like sam altman confidence you're
showing us here with the i just had one iso i know be the winner anyway so no i never said no i gave up i had one the other day that that alex jones beat that's true and i don't have any alex jones today otherwise i've got a chance well let's listen to mine here we go seems like it's making a lot of people gay too okay can't beat that one
uh here's another one we did such a good job not too bad and then this one it's it seems magical okay those are my three entrants okay i have one uh okay here we go i double dog dare you to find a better show than this i don't know seems like it's making a lot of people gay too i mean that's no we're not using that
it's john's ai iso and here's a stip of the day green bass for you and me just the chip with j c and sometimes at all so since we're approaching the holiday season i thought i would maybe it's a good idea to uh promote booze a little more yes booze is always good people love these tips on alcohol the bunch of winos are people
well this is not wine but this this is a product and i i have a story this is a product with a story no so we were in south africa back just before mandela got in and who's we who's we the family no the whole family yeah took the whole family wow i was invited to give a it's by a very important group down there to bring to talk about stuff and uh very important vips spook work
it could have been uh-huh but uh so you know we were there for a week and so i'm you know going to a lot of bars and restaurants and then i ran into this product there very well presented it's stunner and it never had they did not bring it into the united states until probably five or six years later and i was stunned when i saw it here because it's one of the tastiest you're not familiar with these with irish cream and some of these yeah these these cream liqueurs well
they're delicious yeah but although they they're not nearly as good as this south african product which everybody does everywhere in the country it's called amarula a-m-a-r-u-l-a it's got a big elephant on the label and it's a cream liqueur made with some screwball citrus fruit from africa and it's just a stun one of the most stunning products you can ever Just have a little glass of it.
It's delicious.
And do you think I can pick this up at HEB?
Emarula?
Yeah.
Definitely a liquor store in your neck of the woods would have it.
Somebody would have it.
I'd be shocked if you can't find it because it's everywhere.
Because I just picked up two more bottles of my Robert the Mondavi stuff.
Yes, yes.
It's still the bottom shelf.
There's one more.
I left one bottle for that one No Agenda listener in Fredericksburg who wants to go get it.
And that'll be it.
So Amarulo.
Okay.
Yeah, it's Amarula.
Amarula.
A-M-A-R-U-L-A.
And is it like a nutty taste?
No, no, it's a citrusy taste.
Citrusy.
But it's got an aftertaste and an acidity.
Everything.
This is unbelievably tasty.
We cannot wait to taste it.
We're all rushing off to our local liquor store.
Find all of John's tips at tipoftheday.net.
Great fast for you and me.
Just the tip with JCD.
And sometimes Adam.
Created by Dana Bernetti.
But before you go, we've got some end of show mixes.
We got, man, we got a lot here.
Danny Luce, Bonnold, Crabtree, MVP.
We got tons, tons of AI slop.
Find it all at Getmo Jams.
GetmodJams.com if it works.
Hey, coming up next on your modern podcast app, NoAgendastream.com.
That Larry Show.
And I guess he's mad about Mom Donnie.
The title of this show is The Big Rotten Commie Apple.
That's Larry for you.
That's Larry for you.
And we, of course, will return on Sunday to bring you another several hours' worth of media deconstruction.
There's always something going on in your world.
And you can get informed here without the spin, without getting spun up, without all the nonsense.
But of course, if you want to hear us say, we'll be here for that too.
Coming to you from the heart of the Texas Hill Country in Fredericksburg, Texas, in the morning, everybody.
I'm Adam Curry.
And from Northern Silicon Valley, I'm John C. Borak.
We'll be back on Sunday.
Until then, please remember us at NoAgendadonations.com.
Any amount, it always helps.
It's value for value.
Until then, adios, mofos, hooey, hooey, and such.
With his glasses on and in real Some folks said he pulled the strings Control the budget, control the things.
A powerful presence, don't you deny?
Highest office he reached for second high.
But on one thing's for sure, the record will show.
He's a major figure from long ago.
A political heavyweight with him tough as nails.
In a world where music means nothing, give more jams.
No agenda in the morning gives you joy, bay heart trigger warning and 5M worst enemy crushing their credibility with hilarious clarity.
No agenda in the morning.
No ads, no dependencies.
The trolls in the troll room doing their thing.
Zionists, nights at the round table, raise your rings.
Most podcasts are paid for and bought.
No agenda uses the ancient art of free thought.
So I'm hitting you in the mouth.
Think I'm joking?
Look around and find out.
There you've been around the block once or twice.
It would be nice if you donated some time.
Double nipples on the dime that would suffice.
No blankets, just send your cash.
There's nothing to watch, just sit back and laugh.
And you don't have to listen to mustache grooming ass.
Oh, cold bone, Gino.
In the morning, morning.
No ads, no dependencies.
Got the trolls in the troll room doing their thing.
Zionists, Zionist, Zionist, Zionist.
No agenda.
In the morning.
In the morning.
Fed, fed, fed, fed, fed, fed.
It's nine o'clock.
Do you know where your agenda is?
My what?
No agenda, stream.
You want slop?
Sloppy Joe's?
What's the dinner?
No agenda averages too.
Counter two slops per hour.
Oh my god.
Yo, dog, we heard you like fed music.
The blue pill is for gnormies.
The red pill is for insnails.
Are you ready for the next level?
Yes, please.
Then you want the fed pill.
Fed pill records, the official global fed pill industrial complex, supplying the world with the music they crave.
Oh boy.
We've got all the hits from totally real actual musicians.
Trust me, bro.
From parodies to paradox, originals to covers, silly to bangers.
Hear us on the No Agenda Music Stream or occasionally on the end of show mix.
Also available on YouTube.
Global Fed Pilled Industrial Complex.
Forget your med bed and take your Fed bed.
Please just leave me alone.
I'm Radio Sam.
CEO of Fed Pilled Records, also known as Potty Mouth, the bundled crap tree.
I am not a Fed and have zero agendas.
Adam Curry absolutely did not MK Ultra Mean to make this.
That's a spook.
See right there.
Come and take your Fed Pill today.
Fed pill may cause hallucinations, memory loss, clog urethra hair loss.
Consult a doctor immediately if you experience an episode of delirium causing you to believe your neighbor's daughter has kicked your dog.
Or if you hallucinate a space laser hovering above your house for longer than 48 hours, consume responsibly.
It started with Adam's call, a simple phone spark, a podcasting concept to leave it so much With Adam's wild spirit engine, skeptical hands.
Three hours every Thursday and Sunday they stand.
No script, no small talk, no filler in the dread.
Just news clips and commentary from their own hands.
