Don Lemon ARRESTED! Mangione Death Penalty, Alex Pretti Attack + Kevin Warsh Fed Pick w/ Chris Cuomo
Patrick Bet-David, Tom Ellsworth, Adam Sosnick, and Vincent Oshana are joined by Chris Cuomo as they break down Don Lemon’s arrest during a church protest, the Mangione death penalty ruling, the latest footage of Alex Pretti attacking ICE, and Trump’s nomination of Kevin Warsh as Federal Reserve chair.
------
🏈 VT GAMEDAY COLLECTION: https://bit.ly/4qecMKp
🎙️ PBD & RAND PAUL - LIVE 1/31 @ 9AM: https://bit.ly/46oKpSy
Ⓜ️ MINNECT WITH CHRIS CUOMO: https://bit.ly/3Mh8lAx
🎙️ FOLLOW THE PODCAST ON SPOTIFY: https://bit.ly/4g57zR2
Ⓜ️ CONNECT ON MINNECT: https://bit.ly/4kSVkso
Ⓜ️ PBD PODCAST CIRCLES: https://bit.ly/4mAWQAP
👔 BET-DAVID CONSULTING: https://bit.ly/4lzQph2
🥃 BOARDROOM CIGAR LOUNGE: https://bit.ly/4pzLEXj
💬 TEXT US: Text “PODCAST” to 310-340-1132 to get the latest updates in real-time!
TIME STAMPS:
00:00 - Show intro
01:00 - Topics on the podcast
06:01 - 🏈 VT GAMEDAY COLLECTION: https://bit.ly/4qecMKp
07:46 - Don Lemon arrested for ICE church protest.
33:45 - Kara Swisher calls Stephen Miller 'Heinrich Himmler'
53:03 - Alex Pretti filmed attacking ICE before shooting.
1:09:26 - Andrew Schulz calls Alex Pretti shooting "cold blooded murder"
1:28:43 - Spain allows 500K undocumented migrants.
1:47:32 - EU partners with India for mass migration.
1:54:08 - Zohran Mamdani says NYC has $12B deficit.
2:07:40 - Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty.
2:17:56 - Kevin Warsh nominated as fed chair.
2:31:10 - Tucker & Hillary speak at Saudi conference.
SUBSCRIBE TO:
@VALUETAINMENT
@ValuetainmentComedy
@theunusualsuspectspodcast
@HerTakePod
@bizdocpodcast
ABOUT US:
Patrick Bet-David is the founder and CEO of Valuetainment Media. He is the author of the #1 Wall Street Journal Bestseller “Your Next Five Moves” (Simon & Schuster) and a father of 2 boys and 2 girls. He currently resides in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
You get to see the Bible instead of just people reading it.
So recommending Chosen caused somebody to flip.
My become.
Barber saw was anti-Jesus, anti-everything pat.
He was like, no, I believe in science.
We live.
Yes, they don't meet a lot of Puerto Rican atheists, by the way.
Exactly.
Very Catholic.
They're co-booked.
Exactly.
Exactly.
Puerto Rico.
So, yeah.
Well, you know, listen, whatever you want to call it, guys, breaking news.
Don Lemon just got arrested.
Oh, no.
And the timing of it to have Chris here to talk about how you feel about it.
It's going to be interesting.
Divine intervention, Pat.
Don Lemon got arrested.
Yeah, in a hotel.
In a hotel in L.A. 4 a.m. this morning.
Anyways, we'll get into it.
I'm sitting at a hotel wall.
One of many stories.
Number two is the new chief, Federal Reserve, Cal She, there was, what, $10 million of bets?
Predictions?
Positions?
$10 million of positions on it.
And it was not the person people were betting on.
And we'll talk about that.
Kevin Worsh, right, who is now the who's being nominated.
Aside from that, Senate Democrats on the White House reach a deal to avoid shutdown.
And what are the chances that that was going to happen?
Because Calci had that at 78% that there was going to be a shutdown.
The entire market was.
Oh, by the way, the Fitcher wasn't $9 million.
$96 million.
$96 million on who's going to lead the Fed.
And a head fake by Trump during the last week.
Yeah.
So there you have it.
Okay.
And then aside from that, you got a few other things that's going on.
You know, Trump accounts will put $3 to $4 trillion of wealth in young Americans' hands.
Trump warns Minneapolis mayor he's playing with fire.
We haven't talked about that.
We haven't talked about the clip because this angel, Alex Pretty, who, you know, not this angel, this clip where everybody was telling us he's an angel.
I think Elizabeth Warren is saying how amazing he is.
Clips came out that this guy, a couple weeks prior to getting shot, had an incident with ICE.
And you have to see this clip.
We've all seen this clip at this point.
Oh, it wasn't the first time.
We'll react to it.
Yeah.
It wasn't the first time.
No, again, tragic could have been prevented.
If Tim Waltz would have cooperated, my opinion, none of this would have happened.
Shouldn't have happened.
But we'll get into it.
I'm sure Chris has got a different position here, and him and Vinny can't go at it.
All right, more than half of Americans have very little confidence in ICE today.
Fox News poll, 59% of voters say ICE is too aggressive, up 10 points since July of last year.
Minnesota, Minneapolis mayor urges other cities to stand firm against immigration crackdown.
Kira Swisher said something about Stephen Miller, if I'm not mistaken, that Megan Kelly reacted to.
I don't know if you guys saw this clip or not with Kira Swisher, what she said about Stephen Miller, that Stephen, she compared Stephen Miller to, who did she compare it to, Ryan?
Himmler.
Himmler.
Himmler, right.
She compared to Heinrich Himmler, who was Hitler's right-hand man.
Right.
Of course.
And then there's a clip, Vinny.
I think you want to talk about the Tucker clip of him being in Saudi.
Yeah.
We'll get into that as well.
There's a guy that tried to allegedly free Luigi Mangioni for impersonating an FBI agent.
He's been arrested.
FBI is searching election hub in Fulton County.
Hillary Clinton and Tucker walks into a Saudi real estate.
So Hillary was at this event as well.
I thought that was a joke for a second.
Did you really?
Like two guys in a bar.
She was there.
There was a whole host of characters there.
Oh, so it's not just the two guys.
No, no, there were some names there.
If we could find the names that were there, but I got you.
They were two of the headliners.
Yeah, and probably this next one is going to be a top five.
I'm going to go through this story as a top five.
Spain legalizes up to 500,000 illegal migrants.
Some folks call them undocumented migrants in this article, sparking backlash.
We'll talk about that.
European Union opens borders to mass India migration with mother of all deals.
China eggs on Canadian PM, Prime Minister Mark Carney, trashing U.S.
And then there's a few other things here with California.
Fed says California aggressively forcing gender secrecy policy on schools in violation of federal law.
A guy named Chris Cuomo returns to Sirius XM with morning talk show deal.
This guy, Chris, is apparently a big deal.
And he got this.
The biggest.
Yeah, Vinny, I don't know if you heard, but he's got this deal from Spirit.
Are you serious that he's on Siri?
That's right.
And FYI, for whatever reason, somebody forgot to tell him when you're working out, doing cardio, weights, sweating, you're at the end of your workout.
You're like, testosterone has just gone up 1,300.
And then all of a sudden you want to attack Scott Jennings.
And you know, it's not in the jail.
I don't know.
I don't know.
Play soft jazz music.
Just watch the news.
It wasn't an attack.
It was a warning that wound up, unfortunately, being manifested days later.
Okay.
Well, we'll talk about that.
But Michelle Obama's got a message for you, Chris.
Black women don't complain enough.
And anyways, those are the stories.
Guys, there's a game coming up called Super Bowl, right?
And Seattle is going up against the New England Patriots.
And it's so funny because we can go through a whole different conversation with New England with Bill Belichick.
Maybe we'll do that all the way at the end because I'm sure we all have some opinions on Bill Belichick not making it into the Hall of Fame.
Tom Brady said, if I have to go come back and play with only one coach, I'm not picking anybody else but Bill Pelichek.
And the guy didn't make it and three other coaches were first ballot Hall of Famers, but this guy didn't.
But anyways, Patriots, Seattle Seahawks, while this is happening, you're watching it.
And if you believe Future Looks Bright, you may want to wear this gear that we're launching here today.
Go ahead, Rob.
It starts with what you wear.
Not just style.
Identity.
I like how you went with the British guy.
A Statement Without Saying a Word00:15:13
Built with precision.
Spinning from the curve of the brim to the weight of the fabric.
Every detail matters because this isn't just a panel.
It's confidence you put on.
Pride you represent.
A statement without saying a word.
Where performance needs legacy.
This is more than gear.
This is who we are.
All right.
Go to vtmerch.com, folks.
Good for mono.
Looking good.
Go to vtmerch.com, place your order.
Future looks bright.
And by the way, mono right there used to play for the Chiefs.
He's now here running VT Sports with Danny Connell.
Let's get right into it.
Top story.
I think, Rob, it's fair to say top story is Don Lemon.
Why don't we start off with Don Lemon as a top story?
This literally just was trending on Twitter the last 20, 30, 40 minutes ago.
Apparently this morning at 4 a.m. Don Lemon was arrested in connection with an anti-immigration protest that disrupted a service at Minnesota Church and increased tensions between residents and the Trump administration.
His lawyer said Friday Lemon was arrested by federal agents in L.A. where he had been covering the Grammy Awards.
His attorney Abel Lowell said, Rob, if you want to pull up the article, not the article, but what the lawyer said, because a lawyer wrote a full-on letter reacting to this.
If you go on XTAP and Don Lemon lawyer, you'll see it.
It says on a letterhead.
Yes, exactly, right there.
So zoom in a little bit, Rob, for us 47-year-olds.
There you go.
Don Lemon was taken into custody by federal agents last night in L.A. where he was covering Grammy Awards.
Don has been a journalist for 30 years, and his constitutionally protected work in Minneapolis was no different than what he has always done.
The First Amendment exists to protect journalists whose sole role is to shine light on the truth and hold those in power accountable.
There is no more important time for people like Don to be doing this work.
Instead of investigating the federal agents who killed two peaceful Minnesota protesters, the Trump Justice Department is devoting its time, attention, and resources to this arrest.
And that is the real indictment of wrongdoing in this case, this unprecedented attack on the First Amendment and transparent attempt to distract attention from the many crises facing this administration will not stand.
Don Lemon will fight these charges vigorously and thoroughly.
Chris, thoughts on the story?
Not happy.
I think the key word is even in the news item, not Don's response.
Journalist Don Lemon.
If he is a journalist, it just makes you feel, you know, there, but for the grace, go I, that if you want to go after people that you don't like and you have the disposal of the federal government, this is what it looks like.
Now, do I think that if he were working at News Nation or at CNN, would he have covered the protest the way he did?
No.
Why?
The dancing around with the people before, going into a protected space as kind of part of it, the line of questioning, all of those things I think would have had pushback from people who think about standards and practices.
But I think this is a very slippery slope.
I also think, just to put my lawyer hat on, I don't think they can make this case.
If you read the FACE Act, if that's what they bring this over, I totally agree with protecting places of worship, 100%.
And I think that protest was a bad look at a minimum.
If it weren't illegal, it was a bad look.
It was wrong, even if they had the legal right.
But I don't think they can make this case against Don, and I think the president just made him a lot of money because now he's a martyr.
You think the president just made him a lot of money?
A lot of money.
Really?
Millions.
Meaning someone's going to sign him, sponsorship, eyeballs, video?
Of course.
And just the organic people who are oppositional to the president and this administration as an extension of what's going on with ICE for many people in Minnesota and elsewhere.
Now he's the face of it.
This is the face of opposition to what the president is doing.
Trump just gifted that to Don Lemon.
That said, I would not want to be in his position.
Got it, Vinny.
Well, the face, for anybody on the Democratic side to ever say using the federal government to go after people like journalists and all that stuff makes me laugh literally out loud.
I had to hold it back.
The FACE Act covers crime to use force, threaten, or physically obstruct people in places of worship.
Say what you want.
They were getting in the way.
All the affidavits were just coming out that these people, including him, they were all standing around bumping into people, were stopping kids from getting to their parents, that there was a daycare downstairs, and they were stopping children, yelling in their faces, saying, your father is a Nazi, and I hope he burns in hell.
Okay.
And say what you want.
Don Lemon was outside with them beforehand.
He acted like it was a surprise and nobody knew.
It's all BS, okay?
And even if, let him make the money and do all this, Don Lemon has been begging for this type of thing, okay?
Because since he left CNN, he's been dying to be in the limelight.
Think about it.
CNN.
He was one of the main guys at CNN.
Now he's man on the street asking people, why do you hate Trump?
Respectfully, he was a number 52 show, right?
If you ranked them, he was never number one, but he was one of the face of CNN films.
How much, Chris?
How much do you think he was making a year, Don Lemon?
Four to six.
I don't know if he was.
$46 million.
Now he's wearing a parka out in the street away from his husband, bothering people.
So the FACE Act clearly, clear, like he knows what he's doing.
And then he tries to talk to the pastor and say, oh, I'm a Christian.
No real Christian is going into a place of worship to disrupt it.
He knows exactly what he was doing.
And if what you're saying is right, Chris, and he's going to get famous and all that, so be it.
But guess what?
Now he has a police record.
He's on record for doing what he's doing.
And by the way, is it weird?
We're talking about feds going after people.
The other two girls that were arrested, Chris, one of them's connected to BLM, they were released by a judge who's a Biden appointee.
So it's like we keep doing this cycle where people get in trouble for actually breaking the law, but then once it gets to the judges, they get released.
So what kind of justice system is that?
It's not fair.
It's a two-tier justice, and I think it's ridiculous.
Tom.
So I see two sides to it.
First of all, we've got video.
We've got audio on the disruptors, whatever you want to call them, that came in there.
They've clearly violated the FACE Act and deserve to be prosecuted under it.
If this was a Muslim mosque in New York City and this was Turning Point USA going inside and disrupting it, the arrests would have happened on the spot.
There is two standards for the type of faith that we, or the type of thing that we interfere with.
Now, in the case of Don Lemon, you know, his lawyer wrote what his lawyer wrote because that's a standard.
That is the standard problem that the lawyer is going to write.
The first paragraph talks about the client.
The second paragraph is, oh, but you're turning a blind eye to the two people that died should be investigated.
Well, those two different things.
I ignore the lawyer.
But I look at Don Lemon.
It's like, you know what?
You're out there with the organizers.
You knew what was going on.
And then you contradicted yourself in certain video segments of the same day.
Oh, I didn't know this.
I didn't know here.
And then you went inside, conducted not an interview, but it kind of bridged into, you know, holding the person's time and being part of it yourself.
And so I think what the feds did is they looked at that and say, you know what?
We're going to arrest this guy.
Now, is it a strong case?
No, it's not a strong case.
Fannie Willis didn't have a strong case.
Alan Bragg didn't have a strong case.
But this is how we do it in America.
You attempt to get an indictment or a prosecutor will step to get the mug shot to create the public perception.
Do I think Don Lemon rode the red line on this?
I do.
Do I think if he was working at somebody and they said with standard and practices, which Chris mentioned, which is sort of the compliance department of news media, would they have stopped and said, Don, done, done, done, done.
Interview people outside, but don't get yourself into the middle of it.
They're interrupting a church service.
Be on the steps as it spills back out.
They would have given him some guidelines and said, you and your crew, do it this way.
That's a good point, Adam.
So I often wonder what happened to Don Lemon, right?
This might be the best thing that ever happened to his career since leaving CNN, because since he left CNN and since that horrible interview where he tried to expose Elon Musk, his career has been just in a downward spiral.
I remember the times when I used to watch my good friend, tough guy, Chris Cuomo, over here, and he would toss it over to Don Lemon.
And Don Lemon seemed reasonable.
Remember that clip where he would let, come on, young black men, pull your pants up.
Let's get it together.
What happened to that Don Lemon?
Now, I suspect what happened to Don Lemon is the same thing that happened to the vocal leftists in this country: they have complete TDS, and Trump broke his brain.
I wish he would come back to reality.
Here's the final point: I don't even know if he's a journalist these days.
I think he's a full-on progressive activist, and the country would be a lot better if he just came back towards the middle.
Yeah, that's not gonna happen.
And have some semblance.
That's not gonna happen.
I know it's not gonna happen, but it would better start.
But let me ask you: is it a, does it do anything to credibility to arrest and nothing happens?
Or is it is this a distraction?
Is this a news cycle?
Let's do it today because in the 24-hour news cycle, you want the bad news on your opponent.
Look at the things that have happened.
It's a news cycle, and it's the game of nothing happened, though.
That's what I'm saying.
This isn't where anything's going to happen to him.
He may be a martyr.
Do you think anything will end up happening to him, Chris?
Legally?
No, I think he beats the case.
I think it's a bad case.
And I think you got to be very careful about the hypocrisy involved here.
If you want to laugh because you can't believe the left is talking about lawfare, then laugh.
But you're doing exactly that.
Own that part of it too, which is Trump is going after his opponents and doing exactly what he campaigned against.
Mr. Promises made, promises kept.
That's what this is.
Now, do I think Don put himself in a risky position all day?
Would I have done it that way?
No, I wouldn't have.
Would I want to be in his position?
No.
I don't care what comes along with it that's positive for his career.
I don't want to be targeted by the federal government with this guy coming after me the way he goes after people.
But own the hypocrisy.
Okay, let me ask you a question.
Tell me what, because so are you saying, Chris, that the federal government made this all up?
They told Don Lemon to go there to look like he planned it with these people.
Chris, they broke the law.
All of them broke the FACE Act.
It's not going after him.
But you're lumping him in.
No, no, no, no, Chris.
Let's be men above.
Let's be real.
You don't think he knew what the hell was going on?
Let's be 100 with each other.
You don't think Don Lemon coordinated with these black BLM chicks and didn't know this was going to happen.
He didn't know he was going to go inside.
He didn't realize, wait a minute, I'm educated.
I'm not stupid.
I'm going to go there and disrupt a place of worship.
And because Trump is going after people that broke the law, Chris, since 2016, the Obama administration spied and went after Trump.
It's been happening for nine years.
Nine years.
So what are you saying?
This is payback?
No, no, no.
No, it's not payback.
I can't hear you, by the way, Vinny.
Can you speak up a little bit?
No, it's called crazy right now.
It's called law and order.
So it's not hypocrisy.
It's if you break the law, they go after you.
The left creates like the BS.
They created Russia Collusion and then they went after him.
This is on camera.
He recorded it.
Like the moron that he is.
This isn't going after your enemies.
This is holding people's foot to the fire.
Okay.
You guys create the crime.
Okay.
These people are doing the crime.
There's a difference, Chris.
Come on.
I think the difference is your political opinion and how loud you are.
No, that's what I think the difference is.
You know, I get emotional, Chris?
Because I don't get how you guys don't understand it.
Your side, your side, Chris, has no leaders, no policies, nothing.
All you guys do is run on fear and drama and chaos.
That's it.
So you think fear, drama, and chaos.
Is not Trump and MAGA.
No.
No.
They fight back.
So, Chris, what are we supposed to do?
From games?
If they cut your hair, I think they cut a little bit of a check.
No, but here we go.
Since day one, since day one, Chris, you guys have been going after this one guy, Gavin Newsome, who's your guys' frontrunner that you're going to vote for, who wants an open border, no IDs, worst statements.
There is a better chance that I vote for my penis than that I vote for Gay.
Really?
So, so you're like, You have my vote, Cuomo.
Chris, are you going to sit this one out when he's the frontrunner?
Because he is.
He just said he's not going to be able to do it.
No, I'm asking.
I have no problem sitting out.
Remember, I wrote in my brother in the last one.
Here's what I want.
But look, I'm just saying, look, Vinny, it's not only that I don't agree with you and that I think you putting me on a side is petty, but I'm going to let it go because I like you.
I can criticize your side and not be on the other side.
I am anti-partisan.
If I could wave a wand, okay, if I could wave a wand like our president can, I would get rid of, I would go to Congress, say, pass these two things right now.
One, gerrymandering, illegal.
We're going to do it by an independent committee that we're going to figure out how to staff.
Everybody's going to get together.
That's who's going to do it.
Nobody else, nowhere else.
No state, no nothing.
Second thing is the parties don't get to control our political process.
They don't get to control the primaries.
And we would get reasonable in a second.
That's what I would do.
I'm anti-partisan.
But what about voting ID, showing your ID to vote in the United States?
Here's my stage.
Do I understand the arguments of disenfranchisement?
Yes.
Do I think it has jumped the shark and that the majority of the country wants it?
Yes.
I feel the same way about voter ID that I do about the death penalty.
Do I think it works?
No.
Do I think it's the right social instruction?
No.
But that's who we are.
We are violent, angry people as a culture, especially right now.
If the people want it, give it to them.
I'm not going to get it.
Same way with voter ID.
If that many people want it, fine.
I understand the arguments against it.
But if that's what people want, fine.
But what bothers me is, and then I'll shut up.
You want to talk about voter integrity and make it safer?
Great.
But then don't do what you're doing with Tulsi Gabbard right now.
What do you mean?
Don't do that.
Don't go to Georgia, play on a lie that there are 350,000 ballots that weren't counted or were illegal, which is demonstrably false.
You could even go to Wikipedia like you're going to learn about the FACE Act from Wikipedia.
There's nothing in there about the standard of what you have to prove, by the way, which is everything in making a case.
And the idea that you can show that Don Lemon had intent to organize and foment this situation as opposed to following along like a chooch, good luck with that.
I don't think they can make the case.
Hunter Thompson's Journalism00:15:53
But just be consistent.
That's what I'm saying.
You're not going to be able to do that.
But I think his prosecution is a good question.
Let me just say this time.
Guys, I want to get something in.
Here's what I want to say.
So I want to find out.
Everything to me is: can we have another case to compare it to?
Has there ever been a time, Rob, this is the question that I've been asking on all the open AI questions.
This is, has there ever been a journalist that joined protesters before and went into a church to question the pastor, the preacher, or the priest?
Okay.
I say no.
The answer is no.
It keeps bringing up a guy named Hunter Thompson.
Four times.
Thompson.
Hunter S. Thompson.
I've had to clear up four times.
Did Hunter S. Thompson go into the church to question a pastor and join the protesters before?
And he eventually said no.
There is no documented case of a major nationally recognized journalist entering an active church service with protesters to question or confront the pastor in U.S. history, which means there is a case here.
That's what I'm saying.
Because if you don't set the tone, Chris, from the top, if it would have said yes, I would have said, okay, it's the American way.
If you want to go under question a pastor, no problem.
But if you don't set the tone now to make it a precedent that you cannot do this, you don't think other journalists are going to look at this and say, I'm going to go into a church.
I'm going to go into a Catholic church.
I'm going to go into this.
Then guess what?
You know what's even worse?
Watch this.
You don't think a journalist like a Jake Lang, I don't know if I would put him as a journalist, but he's a guy that goes out there or a January 6th guy.
Younger Nick Shirley guys or these Nick Sorda type of guys that do very, very good job.
You don't think they're going to go into a mosque?
You don't think they're going to go into an Islamic center and start asking questions from them.
Then what do you think happens?
I think it is a very important, and now that I'm going a little bit deeper into it, I think it is a very important standard to set.
I don't know what's going to happen to the guy, but if you don't set the tone and this gets out of control.
So imagine they don't do anything.
Let's actually play the other side.
Say they don't do anything.
I'm a 24-year-old.
Dude, I'm going to sit down and I'm going to be like, wait, that's all you have to do is go viral.
Hey, what church are we going into next?
That's what they know already.
Look, I think it's a deeper conversation on one level, okay?
I get you about setting a standard.
Okay, so let's talk about the standard.
Nick Shirley, Jake Lang, let's throw Don Lemon in there, okay?
Are they journalists or are they professional provocateurs?
And that's the real problem is do you see ABC News going into a church?
No.
Do you see the New York Times going in and doing it?
Ask why.
Because they're afraid of being sued.
They know the law.
That's why.
But they have standards and practices.
But by the way, could that not be the fact that they know the law and they're following the laws?
They know the law and they know their brand and they are sensitive to different types of scrutiny.
You said what the truth is now.
Go viral.
Whatever it takes to go viral, you win.
Then I'm for it.
I'm for the fact that they did this to them.
We're not comparing.
Nick Shirley is, you can't put him even on the same plane as the Don Lemon is just the Trump and Trump.
Nick Shirley exposed one of the biggest fraud networks in the history.
That is not even close to true truth.
$9 million a 23-year-old kid.
Hold on.
It's not even close to true.
Do you put Nick Shirley in the same boat as a Don Lemon?
I think that that's a silly question.
I think if you want to talk about Nick Shirley, because what categories, well, what are they?
What were we talking about?
Lions versus tigers?
No, what I'm saying is Nick Shirley went and knocked on doors, played the fact that they wouldn't let him in as signs of fraud.
The state investigated, the federal government is investigating right now.
Nothing has come up to corroborate anything that he said on his video, except they didn't let me in.
I think it's because they want to hide what they're doing.
They investigated at the state level, and you can say Minnesota's corrupt.
I don't believe their investigation.
Okay, but they investigated, found nothing like what he's talking about.
Remember, we're not talking about the COVID scam with the white lady at the middle of it that involved all those other Somalians that was one of the biggest COVID scams going, which is real.
And they prosecuted in 2022.
86 people.
What he did knocking on the doors is not $9 billion, is not proven.
The federal government's looking at it.
Let's see if they come to a different conclusion.
But putting him in the same category, I'll tell you why I'd say no.
Am I biased?
Yes.
Why?
Because I have love for Don Lemon, even though we have a checkered past.
Okay.
And so maybe I'm biased because I have that personal emotional stake.
But I don't put Nick Shirley in any of the categories.
He's not a journalist.
Why?
Journalism requires rigor.
You don't knock on a door, get an answer, go and cross-reference it with different people's licenses, and then the people on the right do the rest for you and motivate you into Edward R. Murrow.
There's a reason.
There's been no corroboration of anything that he has said.
But hold on, but that was what you said.
And I'll let you.
But you said that.
I'm here for a pushback.
You're talking about the state.
You're talking about the state that has Tim Walz, number one.
I get it.
That has, hold on, Mayor Fry, Ilhan Omar.
I get it.
And Keith Ellison, who's a freaking communist.
Chris, I get it.
And I get what you're saying.
Let's wait and let's wait and let's wait.
I'm telling you, it wasn't just knocking on doors.
Who was the guy that he was with?
David, the white guy who had the proof and the money.
It wasn't like they just knocked him off.
He had the amount of allocations that were given to those businesses.
There's no children in any of these.
You don't know that.
And now in the state investigators.
No, I know, but the video is what it is.
They're presenting what they want you to see.
When the state investigators went there, they found children.
They found other violations, also, by the way, but not of a criminal nature like he had suggested.
All I'm saying is this: I'm not here to run down Nick Shirley, okay?
I don't give a shit about that.
What I'm here to do is say, let's see what they have.
They're incredibly motivated to show that he was right.
There has been no such proof to this point, and that matters.
Now, who's better?
Who's worse?
I don't know, but I do stand on this one point.
All that matters is going viral, okay?
And that's where our commodity is.
That's where the algorithm is.
That's where the money is.
And that's what these guys are doing.
Megan Kelly is no different than what you're accusing Don Lemon of.
They're both doing it for the same reason.
I know I'm on serious radio with her.
I don't give a damn.
They are in the business of pissing you off for profit.
Is Don doing that?
Yes, I agree with you.
He is.
Should he?
That's my choice.
That's my choice.
But there's a difference because, and I want to validate what people are doing.
Do me a favor, Rob.
Can you, and by the way, while you're talking about this, can you pull up the clip, Rob, I send you with an Adam, I'll come to you in a second.
Mayor Fry and Stephen A. Smith.
You know which one I'm talking about?
Yes.
So watch this.
This is where, you know, when you're saying what you're saying, Chris, here's Stephen A. Good friend.
Both of us are friends with this guy.
He's talking to him, and he asks him a simple question.
Look what his answer is.
Go ahead, Rob.
I got to ask you this.
When you talk about just illegal migrants in a city, people who cross the border illegally, that's what people call them.
I want to ask you, how many do you believe you have in your city at this particular moment in time?
He has to change it, undocumented.
How many people that are undocumented or living in the world?
Undocumented.
Yes.
Do you have any idea?
I don't know.
No, I couldn't.
I don't really have any idea.
How do you not know?
Presently, are here.
I do know that I think that the federal administration is going to be a good idea.
Yeah, you can pause it right there.
Okay.
So if you don't know the number of undocumented guys in there in your city, you are not a leader.
How do you not know who's there legally and illegally?
How do you not know?
How would you know?
Would you know that we don't even count?
At the federal level, how would you know an unknown?
Then this validates Nick Shirley's investigation even more.
There is no accountability.
What do you mean, how?
Well, not knowing how many people are undocumented in your municipality does not mean that they're all committing fraud and you're unaware.
No, those are two different things.
I know, I agree.
But by the way, they're illegal in the first place.
They came here illegally.
They are here illegally.
At least assume that, but I don't know how many there are.
The federal estimate is from 10 to 25 million.
That's a good range.
Shouldn't a mayor of a city that's going through crisis like this say our range as a number?
Shouldn't he have a range of a number?
Is it 1 to 25 million?
No, no, for the city.
Shouldn't he?
No, I know, but I'm saying if the federal government, where this is an obvious priority for them and it is not a priority for Fry, clearly, right?
Their estimate is 10 to 25 million.
That validates why Nick Shirley's content went viral.
Adam.
So I just want to ask one more question.
I believe Nick Shirley is not the story here.
I think what he did is needed, and he didn't go viral for the sake of going viral.
He went viral because everybody saw what was going on with their own eyes.
And now they start buying the quality learing center shirts because what Nick Shirley did was journalism.
So we'll compartmentalize that.
What I do want to focus on is exactly what PBD talked about with this Hunter S. Thompson guy.
Now, if you're not familiar with him, you might be familiar with the movie that was, I think, based around him, which was called Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.
And the whole concept of what he did was called Gonzo Journalism, where you no longer are reporting the story.
You are the main character in the story.
In my opinion, that is what Don Lemon is doing.
At the same time, you brought up Jake Lang, who's bringing bacon to protests and agitating Muslims.
So they are the main characters here.
In Nick Shirley's situation, the Somalians who are allegedly committing fraud were the main story.
Tim Walz and Inhale Omar are the main culprits in that story for enabling them.
But let me bring this back to your relationship with Don.
Jake Lang, Nick Shirley, these are young kids with a microphone.
Don Lemon is a 30-year celebrated reporter doing the same thing that kids are doing.
What kind of a fall from grace do you have to do from going to the bottom?
I don't want to go there.
I'm moving.
I've moved to do Man on the Street.
I get that.
But that's the point is that he's doing Gonzo journalism.
He's doing what gets you paid and makes you relevant.
Ask the same question to people on the right.
Megan Kelly, seasoned prosecutor, also pedigreed, had a shot at the big time, failed.
Now, what is she doing?
But she's not doing man on the street.
Would you ever do man on the street?
You could make the story.
There's something to be said here about man on the street.
People start their careers as man on the street.
Don Lemon is finishing his career, man on the street.
That is a very important point.
I don't accept the standard.
Now, tell me that.
Tell me someone else who still does.
I think that's regular people as a experts.
But answer this.
Who do you see doing Man on the Street that is a credible journalist that's been in studio, mainstream studio for 30 years?
I can't name one.
Why?
If you can, I'll understand your opinion.
Why is his, well, I don't accept the standard.
The idea of talking to people is a bad thing.
I'm not sure if that's the most basic form of journalism.
The reason that Jesse Waters became famous is because he worked for Bill O'Reilly.
Bill O'Reilly sent him out into the street.
Jimmy Kimmel sends Jay Airman.
Hold on.
That was an act.
Okay.
I understand the difference between my action and talking to actors.
And that's a lot of people who are incredible journalists who's now been relegated to man on the street.
That's my point.
So let me, guys, I'm going to move on.
It's where the money is.
So Megan Kelly, failing.
I think Megan left Fox.
And then Megan went to NBC, if I'm not mistaken.
And that just didn't work out.
It wasn't a fit, whatever you want to call it.
It didn't work out.
And then she went.
They paid her her full contract to leave.
Yeah.
Okay.
And by the way, if you only hear about money, sure.
She's got a top podcast.
Of course.
Why does she have a top podcast?
She's talented.
She's capable.
She likable.
She's strong.
Likable by who?
She's a professional provocative.
She's 4 million subscribers.
I know.
That's my point.
You're making my point, Vinny.
Not your point.
You're making my point, which is she gets paid to provoke people.
She gets paid to pick fights.
That's all she does.
You show me the last time she said something.
What do you think about Kara Swisher?
That was possible.
What do you think about Kara Swisher?
Kara Swisher is more of a hybrid.
She was a legitimate business reporter who's got deep contacts in sourcing, who is also a political lefty.
And we'll play to that.
And I understand why her comparing Stephen Miller to Heimlich Himmler is really a fan of it.
Is that responsible to make a comment like that?
Can you please not respond?
Can you play this clip, please?
It's too much.
And I would last like to call out Stephen Miller, who is in the center of this.
We always focus on Trump as we often focus on the top people.
But Stephen Miller, like a man named Ben Detsen, he was the one who created the internment cancer Japanese Heinrich Himmler in the Nazi regime.
This is what he is.
And he, of course, is the top at the top.
But people like Stephen Shirley.
Definitely Scott Galley will go down in history as a lot of her.
A lot of that.
And should be jailed.
This is how this podcast is.
You're absolutely right.
They exchange.
I do want to make one more point.
Well, here's my thing.
And she's a white liberal woman, which I think is one of the biggest cancers in this country.
That's a whole other conversation.
I'm just saying, how can you compare that to even Megan Kelly?
There's no comparison.
And the one thing that bothers me, Chris, how does anybody agree with her policy?
No, That's the only difference between the two friends.
Hold on, ready for this?
I don't watch any of her content.
But you know what I know?
Megan is extremely popular.
She has her own damn network.
And she's not a provocateur.
She's just pointing out what the other side is doing wrong.
And I'm not saying, hold on, her side, Chris, isn't doing wrong stuff.
I can go down a huge list, but for Kara Swisher to sit there and compare a Jewish man to Hitler or somebody that worked for Hitler that was burning and killing and massacring Jews is the most absurd, offensive thing I've ever heard in my life.
I understand why doesn't anybody push back.
I understand.
Everybody's pushing back.
No, he didn't.
He sat there like he was just amazed.
He don't know what he said about it.
But that also is how that podcast works.
But look, Vinny, everybody's got their own way of doing things.
You are a yeller, okay?
I'm good with great points.
Well, you have to do that.
You think so.
They're passionate.
I'll give you that.
But they're not always great points.
But you are upset about it, and that's your way.
I believe that that demeanor weakens the position.
Why?
Because we've both done a little bit of fighting, right?
I've done a lot more.
The cool head wins.
Okay.
Why?
Confidence, competence.
I know where I am.
I know what I'm doing.
I'm going to conduct this.
It's going to go my way.
I don't have to be loud and obnoxious about it.
You are right to be upset about anybody comparing American officials to Nazis.
I understand why the exaggeration is offensive to a lot of Jews and to a lot of people who want reasonableness to be the barometer.
I'm with you.
You've never heard me say anything like that.
You've heard me take a lot of shit for saying you shouldn't say it.
Like what I'm saying right now will be clipped.
Of course.
And the left will all send it around that I've been red-pilled.
I accept that.
That's my choice.
You've got to see the choices these people are making.
They're making choices to make money in ways that work with the algorithms.
That's what Megan Kelly is doing.
I don't want to make this a Megan Kelly thing.
The conversation was with Hunter S. Thompson at the beginning, where we said, I said, has this happened before?
Everything's showing no one's ever who's a journalist, joined protesters before, was fool enough to record it.
Choices For Clicks00:04:30
And even in the video that's there, it says, cut it off, because I don't want the counter.
He definitely put himself in a training position.
To go into a church, if you don't set the precedent and do something to Don Lemon, what are you going to do to him?
No, you have to make an example.
I don't know what the example is.
If you don't do something to him, you got two children.
What you did, you arrested him.
No, no, no.
Four o'clock in the morning.
You got two choices.
You don't do nothing.
Millions of others are going to do it.
But they just arrested him.
No, arrested means what?
They're going to release him.
Hey, none of us want to be arrested at four o'clock in the morning.
Nobody wants to be arrested at four o'clock in the morning.
But also, if you know, if you go into Wikipedia right now, you type in Nick Shirley, it doesn't say American journalist.
We would consider Nick Shirley a citizen journalist.
But even a, you know, a Wikipedia is going to say what?
Right-wing, contemporary, contemporary creator.
Okay, Kimberly.
That's what it is.
I agree with that.
Can you go to a go to Don Lemon?
Go to Don Lemon and let's see if it says a lefty.
By the way, let's see if it says a lefty.
If Wikipedia says a lefty.
If it says progressive, American television journalists.
Look how it doesn't say left-wing.
But also, I agree with your analysis, but one thing.
We're looking at Wikipedia, okay?
If you look at my Wikipedia page, I've never had anything to do with it, and it has said stupid shit again and again.
So this is not necessarily what they call them editors.
If you erode it, if you ask anybody what you think about Lemon, he's a lefty journalist.
He's a lefty.
And we don't know what that is.
I don't know that left right journalists is even a thing.
I don't know.
We got to define our journey.
Nick Shirley is a right-wing.
I don't even know if I would say right-wing journalists.
He's a content creator, right?
I think he's a content creator, and I think he played to phobias on the right with what he just did.
If you don't set the tone here, it's going to be nasty.
They have to make an example out of Don Lemon.
You cannot go to a place of worship.
It is going to turn into civil war if you don't do anything.
I get the face acting.
They're going to go into mosques.
They're going to go inside.
And let me tell you, it is going to be nasty.
It's as if a group of people want this thing to take place.
Don Lemon was a fool to go into the church.
You don't do this.
This guy's educated enough and smart enough to know this.
You don't go into a church.
You don't go into a place of worship.
I agree.
I don't disagree with what the red line was.
But I'll tell you what, you can apply the same thing, your same worry.
If you don't do something now, they want what's going to happen.
You can say that about a lot of things.
If Megan Kelly went into a mosque, she'd have a problem.
Not only would she have a problem, guess what I would say?
It depends how she went into the mosque.
I'm saying she didn't go in there to get it.
She wasn't invited.
If she went in, joined a bunch of J6, because that's even less qualified.
She joined J6 protesters before.
And we know some of the faces.
At the end of the video, she said, turn off the camera because I don't want people to see what their strategy is.
Then she goes into mosque, she's got a problem.
Questions the people there.
Then afterwards, she says, I didn't even know what the protesters were going to do.
Then the video reveals that you know exactly what the protesters were going to do.
You were with the protesters.
I want Megan Kelly to be arrested and held accountable because I don't want anybody on the left to be able to do this.
I am slower than you, even with Megan Kelly.
Why?
Because I err on the side of allowing a free media.
And if you can show me that she was part of the organizing and the ambitions of the effort, then I have a different analysis.
And that's okay, by the way.
It's okay to change your opinion as the facts change.
Look at Alex Predty, okay?
You can have a different feeling about it based on what you see, even if the ultimate disposition of the killing has to be dealt with through the context of that specific incident.
I don't know that Don Lemon was part of the organizing.
I don't know that.
You know, exactly, these were protesters.
There's very much.
I didn't say he didn't think there were protesters.
I didn't say that he wasn't out there hanging out with them before.
That's different than proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he was one of the organizers.
Now you're being his lawyer.
No.
Well, to me.
That's what this is.
I legal issue.
I get that.
But, Chris, if you allow, if there's certain things that when you're running a company, you'll have a certain lawsuit that 99% of cases that come in, you don't want to sue your guys.
Guy left, he did something.
Should we sue him?
Let it go.
Let It Go00:15:02
Guy does this, Helen.
Let it go.
He said this about you and he left.
Let it go.
This guy went and joined that company and he got on with this and he said this about you.
Let it go.
You want me to release the contract, even though it's been six months, we can extend it to two years.
Give him the contract.
You want, let it go.
Then there is certain cases that come up that you have to make an example, or else it will happen again, and it actually hurts everybody in the company.
Don Lemon, for a guy that we've talked about, and there is a purpose he serves.
I'm not a guy that says he doesn't serve a purpose.
I get, you know, both sides think they're right politically.
There's a place that he serves a purpose.
If this is the type of a thing, Chris, that will lead to a civil war.
This is the type of a thing that will lead to something very nasty if you don't set an example of what you do with Don.
Let me move on to the next thing, which was the Kara Swisher thing.
Who does Carol work for?
Herself.
She's independent?
Yeah.
The Pivot podcast.
Who was she with before?
She's been a business reporter.
Yeah, she's been with big outlets.
Her break was eight years or more with a guy named Walt Mossberg, covering primarily Apple and technology.
And then the Wall Street Journal had her and Walt create a conference called the D Conference, which was the first of its kind, a very small group of it.
She, when Walt retired, the Wall Street Journal stopped doing this and she connected with Scott Galloway and suddenly became far more left in her presentation than I ever remembered.
And by the way, I also don't think Scott Galloway is far left.
No, Scott Galloway to me is center.
I got to tell you.
Scott, I think he is amazing.
I think that he is a modern-day political philosopher and he should be listened to and observed.
His idea, I've never even heard anything like this.
This is what gives me the wow.
Scott Galloway says, hey, you populists out there, you want to make a difference on how your government responds to you?
Have a spending strike.
Stop spending.
Stop buying things that you don't absolutely need for three months.
And the corporations will go crazy, go run into government and say, you better make this stop.
The GDP just dropped.
And they will change because of that.
Genius, brilliant.
And it also exposes what?
You want to talk your crap, but you don't want to live.
You know what makes him unique, though?
Because he's the reason what makes him unique.
He was probably born a Democrat, but he became a businessman.
And then those two collided.
And he said, man, I may be socially left, but I'm not fiscally left.
I'm on this side.
And then he started realizing what's happening with boys.
I think he's got two sons.
He's so brilliant.
When he talks about young people in society, he gets him a lot of heat.
He says it anyway.
This is not a Scott Galloway topic I want to get into.
I'm going to stand on Kara Swisher.
Go ahead.
So Kara Swisher says what she says about Stephen Miller.
There's a clip that came up.
You know, I'm at the Pentagon yesterday in the Department of State.
We literally got back 3.30 this morning, just so everybody knows.
We landed at 3 o'clock this morning.
We got home at 3.30, 4 o'clock.
We slept.
We came back here at 8 a.m.
And we're doing a podcast here with you guys.
And we're energized, exciting.
It was great.
Yesterday, I'm talking to a bunch of different guys.
And, you know, we're at the, what do you call it? Department of War and all these different places.
And we're talking, Hex said yesterday, Christine Ohm did a podcast with Rand Paul.
Stephen Miller's name came up many, many times.
And I said, you know what Stephen Miller is?
To me?
Stephen Miller is, to give the analogy of basketball, I said, in basketball, everybody needs a Dennis Rodman.
Stephen Miller is Dennis Rodman.
Draymond Green.
He is the Draymond Green.
He's the rage baiting, you know, poking you, tapping you in the butt, irritating you.
Yes, that's who he is.
He's the Dylan, what was the guy's name?
Malavededa Dela Devil.
Oh, Da Veda.
Yeah.
So here's, watch, this guy's doing a podcast.
He's talking to a professor and accidentally realizes he used to teach Stephen Miller.
Look at the response on what he says about Stephen Miller.
Go ahead, Rob.
Miller.
My former student.
What's that?
My former student.
I'm sorry, say again.
My former student.
The Stephen Miller in the Trump administration?
Did you want to say a little bit more about that before we listen to this clip?
He said that I asked him in 2003 what he wanted to be when he grew up.
And he said, I want to be number two in the White House.
And I said, oh, when do you want to achieve that?
He says, in the next 15 years.
I said, wow.
Okay.
Well, who would be the president in 2003?
And he said, Donald Trump, maybe.
What?
The guy is very smart.
That's crazy.
Where was this?
And Duke is in Polisci 122.
You had him at Duke.
It's too smart.
I mean, I do a lot of homework here, Hein.
You could have told me this before the program.
Not enough homework.
Wow.
Okay.
See, there's no question that he's a very smart guy.
And he has a long-term vision.
Was he a good student, by the way?
He was very good.
Very good student.
Yeah.
Yeah.
See, this is the part that they don't want to talk about.
This guy, Stephen Miller, you know, they can say whatever they want to say about the Stephen Miller guy.
But that professor right there, you think they're probably on the same page politically?
Probably not.
You think that guy and the professor are on the same page politically?
Well, they're supposed to be, right?
Because that's what that podcast is about, is bringing this guy up as context of what the podcaster already believes.
Look, it's not about saying Stephen Miller is stupid or he's a genius.
That is silly.
The fact that he's a number two guy to Hitler type of a comparison.
It's so crazy.
Listen, that does nothing good.
Okay, it does nothing good.
It makes nothing better.
It doesn't create any chance of better outcomes.
All it does is piss people off.
And if that's what you want to do, fine.
I think the only mistake with Miller, Miller is not a front guy.
Miller's messaging, his demeanor, his style, I don't think helps the president.
Strategically, tactically, philosophically, if he's helpful to the president, that's the president's choice.
The only tweak I would do is, and now some on the left will criticize me and say, no, we need to hear him.
We need to hear him.
I think that one mistake that Trump has made thus far, except for Levitt, Levitt is a good communicator for him.
He is better than all of his guys at making the case for him.
And I think that what we're seeing...
She is better, you're saying.
Levitt is the best of his people, but Trump is so much better than all of his people.
And that wasn't always true for presidents, you know, that what you see with ICE now and the realignment that probably is going to come to pass, that's Trump doing it.
Trump had to get back involved.
He had to say, well, we're saying the wrong things.
We're doing the wrong things.
He is not being well served by the people around him.
Stephen Miller, strategically, they are very happy with.
Bannon says the same thing, which is weird because they're not buddies.
But having him as a front person, I think is complicated.
I'm not sure if I agree with that completely.
I'll tell you why, because I first saw Stephen Miller and I didn't realize I was seeing him.
You know where?
You know where he came to national prominence?
He fearlessly stepped up to the microphone and said that the case against his fellow classmates on Duke La Crosse, he wasn't part of the lacrosse team.
He wasn't part of that fraternity.
But he stepped up to the microphone and made a very cogent legal analysis and sat there and said, this is wrong.
This is racially motivated in the wrong way.
He was strong.
And guess what?
He was right.
And that's where America met Stephen Miller standing up for his classmates 15 years ago.
I want to say that.
Edited longer.
Do you know who blew that case wide open and proved that it was a false prosecution?
Me and Dan Abrams.
NBC News and ABC News.
We blew up the timeline.
We proved that things didn't happen when they said.
Those boys got railroaded.
And of course, Crystal Mangum, who was the accuser, wound up admitting it.
The woman who was with her wound up admitting it long before.
It was a con, and it was done by a local prosecutor in part who wanted to make a name for going after the rich kids and impress his working class.
And what happened to him?
He was disbarred and he actually did time.
That's brief, but he did time.
That's right.
So I know the case very well.
I remember his role very well.
I wish he would come on, you know, to be tested and come on.
He doesn't want to come on with me.
And that's unfortunate because I want to give people an opportunity to make their own.
You know, Lose Nation?
Yeah, you won't come on.
You know who you should have on, though, is if he won't come on with you, you should have on his wife, Katie Miller, who has this massive podcast now, gets everybody on, could pull her up.
I think she started it six months ago.
She's had Elon Musk.
She says everybody from the administration.
So she's doing a lot of the talking for him.
But I'll tell you one thing about Stephen Miller.
I don't want her.
I want him.
I don't want your wife.
Touche.
I want to share, but you know, you take what you can get.
But I do want to get back to Pat's point when he's talking about Kara Swisher.
I'll make a quick point about Stephen Miller.
Trump rewards loyalty.
Stephen Miller has arguably been the most loyal person since day one.
The whole Trump was right about everything.
That is being humanized in the human form with Stephen Miller.
That's why he rewards him.
Back to Karis Wisher.
PBD made the most important point about the, if you don't set the tone or set an example with Don Lemon, oh, you have no idea the floodgates that will open in mosques, in churches, in temples.
By the way, good luck getting in synagogues these days because they've learned the hard way that you need to have armed security guards and fences because people will go shoot up the joint.
The last thing we need are political agitators coming in in front of churches and mosques and doing it.
Basically what Vinny's upset about, what Kara Swisher said last point about how he's the Heinrich Hitler, the number two to Hitler is so disgusting to me and shows you have no idea about history.
Okay.
It's inflammatory and bombastic and it's just naive and wrong.
I told the story about my friend's grandma who basically told the story.
She's like, yes, I grew up, my siblings are dead.
They killed my grandparents.
They killed my aunt.
She's the only person alive in her whole family, much less her town.
And we're talking about two people that got in the way of the transition as well.
Let's go into that.
It's not even, doesn't make sense.
Because I want to get Chris's thoughts on this as well.
Chris, to be fair, I haven't watched what your position is here with Pretty, and I want to hear your thoughts where you're at after this clip.
So we initially all saw the same clip.
He was helping out that lady.
And then all of a sudden, the first reaction is, wait a minute, what just happened here?
Then we all had to hear how amazing of a guy he was.
He was gentle.
He was the kind of guy that you would want your daughter to bring home.
Ana Navarro, I think, said that.
Said, he's the kind of guy that you want your daughter to bring home.
Something like that.
I'm paraphrasing.
And you see the clip and you hear how many times the weapon that was used, how many 100 plus, what is it?
Uncommanded discharges the gun had, the 320 Vinny, what's the C3226 SOLWAR that has accidental fire, 100 lawsuits alleging that the accidental discharge, so when he took it away, the discharge, and then that prompted the other officer, the other agent to shoot.
So all of that stuff we've all seen, right?
Then we see this.
I don't remember seeing an accidental discharge.
That's what they're saying.
That there was an accidental discharge.
When they disarmed him, the guy that grabbed the gun, they're saying that that gun went off, the one that he grabbed, Chris, from the pretty guy, that discharge prompted all that.
They're saying it.
We don't know.
Although it would shine some light on why the other officers seem to move so quickly.
But I don't know it yet.
We don't know your aunt Anne.
I think all of it, guys, needs to be investigated.
Everything we're doing right now is speculation, just so you know that, right?
And then, by the way, comments were made on both sides, off the cuff, too early, emotional.
That both sides screwed up with.
So let's not sit here and put it every time with you.
But let's watch this clip, Rob, of Elizabeth Warren.
This one just got viral two days ago.
We haven't reacted to it yet.
Me and Rand Paul reacted to this yesterday, but the interview is not out yet.
So here's Elizabeth Warren.
And apparently, I think BBC, somebody identified that that is 93%, 94% most likely Alex Pretty.
Go ahead, Rob.
Caring for people was at the core of who he was.
He was incapable of causing harm.
Alex carried patience, compassion, and calm as a steady light within him.
Even at the very end, that light was there.
I recognized his familiar stillness and signature calm composure.
Yeah, okay, so then you see that, right?
You see the video of what's happened here.
Open-ended, what is your thoughts?
Maybe, you know, take a minute or two here and give us your thoughts on what you think happened here.
Early assessments of his character were exaggerated because of what we see.
This is somebody doing something that most people would never do, even if they share his politics and opinions about ICE.
This is violent.
This is aggressive.
This is wrong.
It's not even arguably.
It is a crime.
He is not protesting.
This is criminal activity.
It would fall into the category of rioting.
It does not change my analysis of his death at all, except for one troubling thing that is counterintuitive at this point.
I wonder if the cops who throw him around here are the same or knew about this in the second incident where he was killed, and that didn't motivate the aggression towards him.
I don't know, but everybody's saying this is proof that he asked for it 11 days later.
I see it the other way.
How do I need to know that none of the same guys were present or heard about it and acted upon him because of what had happened 11 days earlier?
But the shooting itself is isolated, not just legally.
That's not even a close call.
This would never come into evidence.
Why?
Federal Rule 403, probity versus prejudice.
And this is obviously prejudicial.
How is it probative of what happened 11 days later when you have video of the entire incident?
So the shooting, the death, stands as something that has to be justified in a way that it has not been to this point.
It looks like a bad shoot.
This informs you about his character.
100%.
100%.
They are different things to me.
That wouldn't be admitted in a court of law.
This guy, this angel, this amazing nurse had never done anything wrong with him.
But that wouldn't be an issue.
A week earlier, he's assaulting a police officer's car.
No, there's a report.
Federal Rule 403 Prejudice00:15:41
By the way, this incident, they have to fill out a report and say individual X, Y, and Z.
And now there's video to do it.
Did it show the video of him spitting on them or no?
It happened right at the beginning.
Another video of him spitting.
It's here.
You just can't see the answer.
He definitely in the video spits at them.
Watch that.
And gives him the favorite.
It says, come get me.
It says, come assault me.
You don't think you're going to remember a guy like that?
I think you would remember.
Of course you're going to remember a guy like that.
And now he kicks the thing.
And now they get out.
And they come and they rough him up for how he was doing it.
Do you not think ICE already knows who this guy is?
And the rage, the anger, even his parents said, don't go out there.
If they do, if they did, they have a problem.
But it's, I mean, they have a problem.
If it gets shown that it's the same guys or that they knew about this going into the second motive.
Well, motive is not part of the legal equation, but state of mind, yes.
State of mind for the ICE agent?
Meaning it's a revenge type of case?
Yep.
Oh, look who it is again.
Oh, you think you're going to get in our face again after I'm the guy you spit at?
What about that for me, Chris?
As a lawyer, I'm packing that.
As a lawyer, here's what the concern would be: okay, is that if what you're saying is true, which again, we don't know, but if you knew it was me and if you remembered from the last time or you'd heard about me 11 days earlier, and that wound up forming your state of mind, your intentions toward me, I'm going to rough this guy out.
How would you use that as a lawyer?
I'm the client.
I'm pretty.
How do you use that as a lawyer?
This was clearly an intentional killing, which, by the way, I don't believe necessarily.
I do not know enough.
But here would be the legal argument.
You knew it was him.
You hate him because of what he did the last time.
And that's why there were so many of you so aggressive, so fast, and shooting him so many times.
That would be the argument.
Is that true?
I have no idea whether that is true.
But I do know that framing the second incident by this first one is a public trial, not a legal one.
The shooting stands on its own unless you can show that the reason that happened is because this happened.
And that is not easy, and it's not even easy to get into.
What's the argument?
Be the other side.
Argue for the other side.
Other argument is this.
This guy was in the business of pushing ICE agents to break.
That's what he does.
That's what Renee Good does.
That's what all these people are doing.
And some of them are paid to do it, organized to do it.
It's not organic.
So 11 days later, he did what he does.
They grabbed the woman.
They did whatever they did to the woman.
That was his opportunity.
He comes in.
He says things that you can't hear on the tape.
He's touching them.
He's resisting them.
He's pushing them to break.
So he got what he asked for.
As people on the right are saying, FAFO.
Does that make it legally justified?
Probably not.
Why?
One of the two parties has a duty to be trained to de-escalate and not to be what they come upon, not to match energy.
So, but legally, that would be it.
Now we know what this guy's motivation was.
That's what instigated the incident.
Does that absolve the officers?
No, but it complicates the analysis.
That's the two ways to look at it.
Yeah.
So I appreciate you going back to the other side and pointing that out.
You're like doing the taxes.
I think it's kind of, I don't know.
I think we have to be careful about floating, you know, it's for the investigation to find out which officers were involved.
Are they the prior officers involved?
And I hear what you're saying.
In a court of law, I'm speeding.
They can't bring up that I was speeding as a 16-year-old 10 years ago.
Was I categorically found to be speeding with a fully calibrated radar device at the time?
All of the evidence very isolated to that crime, that day, that situation.
And you can't go back to it.
It's not just public opinion, though.
You can go back and look at this and ask yourself deeper questions about, okay, who's getting the guy revved up?
Who's he organizing with?
How does he know to be here?
There's a whole lot of things that are going on.
The way he's yelling, the way he's positioning, we have found playbooks over the last 10 days that were being circulated on Reddit, that were being referenced on Signal.
So there were people out there that were getting this guy going.
And to walk into that environment with a firearm, with reputable reports from mainstream media that went to his parents because they want the crying mother, get the widow on the set.
We need dirty laundry.
They went to them and they were saying, we told him not to go down there.
We didn't think it was a good idea.
And so you go and you look at this and you go and this is frame by frame played out.
You can reach one conclusion.
Play it at full speed and see what certainly appears to be subject to investigation.
That gun discharging.
It was a gun he was carrying discharged.
So if he's not carrying a weapon, the weapon doesn't discharge.
He's probably still there.
Don't wrestle with officers.
Don't, he appeared to be reaching for the cartridges, which is where the holster was.
It looked like he grabbed one of those.
Now you're out over your skis.
I've watched this probably 80 times.
You're not going to show me that in the video.
Could it be developed as evidence from testimony?
Then let me back up four seconds and say wrestling with law enforcement officers.
Wrestling law enforcement is a huge mistake.
Resisting is a huge mistake.
Every lawyer will tell you.
And I know that's emotionally unsatisfying for people who want to resist and who want to oppose.
Every lawyer will tell you: fight the fight once the arrest is made.
Do not fight the arrest.
You're going to lose.
There's no question about that.
Does it deserve the death penalty?
You're saying yes.
I don't think he got that.
No, no, no.
I'm not saying he deserved the death penalty.
It is a tragic, unfortunate, avoidable outcome that he put himself into the middle of.
Who was it avoidable by?
Who was it able to do that?
If he's not resisting the officers, it doesn't happen.
Chris, you know, they were not because that's a but for analysis.
The proximate analysis, the legal analysis is keeping the officials.
The officers have the duty to de-escalate.
They did not.
There are tons of people in mainstream media that are calling this, you know, a vicious murder.
He was executed in the back of the head.
No, he wasn't.
You want to see a vicious murder?
Go look at the way MS-13 conducts things.
Those are vicious murders.
This was not an execution.
This was not the mob taking Saddam Hussein to the end of the alleyway and executing him against the wall.
Those are executions at the hands of the murder.
But I'm not saying too many people are.
But I'm thinking you have to look at me here, brother.
Look at my shirt.
I bought it just for you.
But are you ready for this, Chris?
I carry a gun every single day, all the time, no matter what.
And if I know I'm going to get into a fight, or if I know I'm going to go into a war, guess what?
I'm not bringing the gun because I, by the way, Second Amendment, I love it.
Good for him.
Congratulations.
When you're going into that situation, by the way, in that first video, did you see what did he have in his back of his pants the first time?
Maybe a weapon.
Maybe 90%.
I would say he had the gun, but they pushed him away and they had to take the person that they detained and they wanted to get rid of him.
They want to get this person.
God doesn't know what they were for.
I know, as a gun owner, as an educated ex-military, military police, if you're going to go into that situation carrying a gun, you better expect that's going to happen, Chris.
And mind you, these are human beings.
Besides the training, you're in a scuffle.
There's a gun in that split second.
Anybody can watch Monday night quarterback watching it all slow motion.
There's a gun.
It's happening in real time.
A gun went off.
Everybody panics.
And guess what?
You said FAFO.
My thing is crap happens.
Okay.
That type of situation happens.
But the real thing, and you mentioned it, Chris, who?
I think Pat did, I'm sorry.
Who is talking to you?
And who's motivating you to where your parents say, I don't know what the hell happened to him.
I don't know who he's hanging out with.
All the signal chats, all the stuff.
It was all coordinated.
And then when the governor and the mayor and Elon Omar are saying, Gestapo Hitler Nazis, go after them.
Think about it, Chris.
He thinks in his head, these are Nazis and I could yell at them.
And not like the Jews couldn't say anything during the Holocaust and everything.
They couldn't yell at Nazis.
I have the power.
I can yell at these Nazis.
I could tell them to go to hell.
I could spit on them and nothing's going to happen.
Let's take that step back.
And how did he get to that point?
You're a nurse.
What?
By the way, have you ever tried to kick the freaking light taillight off of a car?
That's not easy, bro.
That's not easy.
I tried to do it when Adam had a car.
But my point is, it's the mentality of how we got to this point in this country.
I don't have any problem with everything that you're saying.
I mean, some of the things I don't agree with in terms of whether they happened or not, but that's not the point.
The legal analysis of the shoot does not involve any of that.
The legal analysis of the shoot is not about how mad the guy was.
These are people who are trained and given color of authority to deal with people at their worst.
That's the job.
Then don't do the job.
Forget about it was accidentally discharged.
The one thing that I think should be consensus is: should there be a law that you cannot carry a weapon into a protest?
Is it not?
In Minnesota, you're allowed.
In Minnesota, you could.
And most do it state by state, but I don't know what's stopping having a federal law.
Yeah, but here's my question: if there's a federal, like the ICE was conducting federal duties and you interfere in that sense, Border Patrol.
I don't know.
Whatever.
I don't know about the law in that sense.
Not a Minnesota thing, but if they're conducting duty and you show up with a gun and you get into a confrontation, I don't see that.
I mean, the Second Amendment guys aren't going to like us for this.
But I mean, it does seem that the one thing everybody agrees on is that he shouldn't have had the weapon with him if he was going to engage 100% the kind of stuff that he was.
Now, I wish everybody thought about it the way you do and the way I do, especially on a personal level.
Like, if I thought I were going to mix it up as a gun owner, I'm not bringing the weapon unless I think my life is in danger.
That's why I have the weapon.
But he didn't make that choice.
Should it be put upon you that it should be the law that you can't bring a weapon into a situation like that?
The Second Amendment guys will never allow it.
Of course.
Never.
But it is interesting that we've seen this flip about.
And I think it's about the desperation of advantage.
But also, sometimes things just through the lens of right and wrong make sense.
You don't bring a weapon to a place like this.
Only bad shit can happen.
That's right, wrong.
But we don't see things that way.
We see things right, left.
And Alex Pretty is a perfect example of that.
It's crazy how it's a Rorschach test.
How it's not about reasonable.
It's about which side do I support.
And more and more of our things are becoming that.
And that's why I'm so afraid that the violence gets worse, which is why I said anything to Scott Jennings in the first place.
I don't want to hurt Scott.
I liked working with him.
I think he's smart.
I think he's really valuable to CNN.
But you keep talking this talk.
Imagine, Vinny, you know, you and me, like you say something.
I'm like, yeah, Vinny?
And what are you going to do about it?
As soon as this mic is off and Pat's not looking at me, what do you think is going to happen then?
You'd be like, whoa, whoa, what are you doing, man?
You're supposed to be friends.
You're not a friend.
You're not friends.
Like in the Jennings situation.
That's don't be a bully.
Don't taunt.
Bad stuff's going to happen.
People are listening to you.
A couple days later, this happens.
Do I blame Jennings?
Absolutely not.
But we are asking for worse.
That's all I'm saying.
Yeah, I think I'm kind of where most Americans are these days.
It was just like, I'm so one day I'm on the side of ICE.
The other day I'm on the side of pretty.
I think a lot of Americans are confused.
Let me do this.
Can you, if you're going to go there, can you play the Andrew Schultz clip?
Because it's causing a lot of people in the marketplace to kind of go through it in the way you're describing it, which is kind of like, man, what I'm seeing just doesn't look right.
I can't believe this.
What's the thing?
Rogan did it at first, and he kind of changed his position a little bit.
He changed his position a few days later.
Not fully, but he said, I wonder why, who this is benefiting.
Nobody else is talking about the investigations that Nick Shirley did.
Here's Andrew Schultz.
Go ahead, Rob.
Let's talk about what happened in Minneapolis.
Ice murdered an American citizen in cold blood, and then the Trump administration called him a domestic terrorist.
Yeah, that's it.
Yeah.
Like plain and simple.
Yeah.
I see the administration trying to spin it.
And it's fucking disgusting.
It's like they didn't even have a moment where they're like, hey, we're reviewing the footage.
We're going to try to see what's really happening.
All of them, Trump and all the cronies, put out collective statements that immediately blamed an American citizen that was exercising his first and second amendment rights, right?
He has a right to protest.
He has a right to carry a firearm.
He's a legal gun owner, right?
There's no question about this whatsoever.
And the administration immediately comes out and they try to gaslight the public, which you cannot do when we have 15 different videos of what happened.
Yes.
And that is what they do, though.
But that is what they do.
Yeah.
And I think that governments have probably been doing this for centuries, millennia.
And now you have a public that is armed with phones and we can see what actually fucking happened.
And you're not going to just lie to us, plain and simple, like that.
He apparently didn't see the second video.
He obviously didn't see the second video.
This, I think, is from two days ago, three days ago, before the video went out with.
So just to defend Andrew, he may have not seen the other clip, but go ahead, Adam.
I mean, I think Schultz is mostly right here.
Schultz has been, and I think this is a calculated decision, going a little bit further left because he wants to have a good relationship with his mayor.
He's a Hollywood guy now, more than a political guy.
So I understand where Schultz is coming from.
The reality is this: with this guy, Pretty, he should be alive right now.
He should be alive for a few reasons.
Number one, he should have been in jail a week ago after what he did, assaulting the police officers, spitting on them, kicking the car.
So he shouldn't have even been at that protest.
Number two, I don't know what needs to happen with ICE, but there's a collective conscience that's basically saying, stop killing people that are protesting, whether you need rubber bullets, whether you need gas, whatever it is.
At the same time, I stand with law enforcement.
None of us, other than PBD and Vinny, to an extent, have woken up and have served our country and put your life on the line.
And if you believe what James O'Keefe is saying, and he's been in war zones and believe in all and been in all sorts of chaotic situations, he said this is the most calculated, just communist agenda that he's ever seen, and he actually feared for his life.
So, last point is this: PBD, you talked about how we need to have a cool down period and stop having a rush to judgment.
You talked about how if you get in a fight with your wife and you're driving home, you know, used to have a half-hour drive home to be like, you know what, babe, let me think about it.
Now, you know, he's clearly not married yet, by the way.
Well, I get it.
But now, it's not about being right.
It's about who's first.
Yes.
So everyone wants, oh, you saw what happened?
But nobody wants to.
The left, you think that the mainstream media is going to play these videos of him being an agitator and an instigator?
No.
Yes.
They want to make you're playing a warning.
Don't give them that much credit.
We've all been duped by the left.
You included me for sure.
But he should be alive.
But you brought up the major point, FAFO.
These guys are looking for issues.
Marcelo's Off-the-Cuff Conversations00:15:16
I'm going to say something with Schultz and with Rogan and these guys.
I think Schultz is, I don't know how to say this.
I'm going to say it.
I think Schultz, how likely is it that Schultz studies the market of comedy very closely?
Yes.
How closely do you think he is?
As much as you possibly can.
Is it fair to say he knows the future of comedy as Marcelo Hernandez?
Oh, I mean, that might be a part of it.
Do you think he knows that?
That's a major part of it.
Marcelo the other day sat right next to Jimmy Fallon while he's doing a skitch with what's his name?
No, no, no.
While he's doing a, they're talking to Bat Bunny, and then they're asking questions of somebody else that's sitting on there.
I don't remember who it was.
And when I saw that clip, the first thing I was, I was watching Jimmy Fallon.
You know what I said?
I said, Jimmy Fallon knows Marcelo's about to take this job.
That's Marcelo's job.
Whether it's going to be three, five, 10 years, that job or Kemmel's job is Marcelo's job.
So now watch this.
Andrew Schultz is a guy that's super capable.
He started his career mini.
He was on Fox News a lot back in.
I think he was on the five.
I don't know what show.
He was regularly on one of these Fox shows.
And then he recreated himself probably because he wanted to be a mainstream comedian and it kind of took off.
And Schultz is not just a comedian, comedian.
Schultz is very smart.
He's a very smart guy.
Very.
Every time you talk to him, you enjoy his company.
He's smart.
I think there's a part of Schultz where he's sitting there saying, I'm not leaving New York.
I'm staying here.
This is my position, right or die.
This is my hometown.
I'm going to defend this place.
I'm going to be a voice here.
I'm going to be that guy.
I'm going to be the Joe Rogan of New York City.
That's his mindset.
I agree.
So logically, if somebody sat down with Andrew, my opinion, logically, I think Andrew eventually would logically say, okay, I agree with these three areas, but I still think this was a cold-blooded, you know, okay, fair.
He's got that.
With Joe, to me, Joe genuinely is heart first.
Rogan, you mean?
100%.
Joe genuinely is heart first, is empathetic.
Joe genuinely is somebody that, and by the way, I mean, I'm not even part of this camp.
Like, you know, I've been on the podcast a couple of times, but I'm not, you know, best friends with Joe.
I'm not in the comedic community.
Hey, come down and do this.
I'm not.
It's just a hey, friendly.
We see each other once or twice a year.
It's that kind of a relationship that we have.
So I'm not saying this because he's my best friend and because, you know, all this other stuff and we're always doing stuff together.
No, I would be lying to you if I said something like that.
I genuinely believe this guy's got a big ass heart and he leads with that.
But the part that makes Joe so special is he starts with heart and then he says, fuck, dude, but what, you know, I don't know.
Maybe, huh?
I think that's what he goes through.
So Schultz, I think Schultz is kind of wondering if getting too close to Trump is going to help him in his Hollywood career, doing movies, doing acting, having the show, because Schultz has the capability of also running one of those shows.
One time I talked to Schultz, I said, hey, if you wanted to come down here, let's figure something out.
I would make this entire place Schultz place because I think Schultz needs to have a late night.
So I think Schultz is kind of going through there saying, do I want to be a political guy?
Probably not.
What the F am I doing?
Let me just go be the comedic guy and do movies on all.
I think that's kind of where he's going.
I'm not a question on Schultz.
And by the way, I don't think Joe cares to be in.
No, I agree.
Joe's already done that.
Did you guys hear about what happened with Joe and the Grammy Award?
Did you guys hear about the Grammy story?
You guys didn't hear about what happened?
Why he didn't get nominated?
No.
Rob, do you have this clip?
Did you see this or no?
Watch this.
Let him say it himself, Tom.
And I'm so glad the three of you guys haven't seen it to react to it.
You haven't seen it.
This is phenomenal.
Watching.
The Globes.
The Golden Globes.
Golden Globes.
Golden Globes.
Yeah.
What did I say?
Did I say Grammys is for me?
Guys, this tells you how much I follow this stuff.
Golden Globes.
Go ahead, Rob.
Speaks in being snubbed at the Golden Globes after Amy Poehler won podcast of the year.
This was the first year of this being a category.
So here's the thing.
A lot of people say, why wasn't Joe Rogan nominated for the Golden Globes?
And like, why did, you know, Amy Poehler win?
I didn't submit.
They asked me to submit to be nominated for the Golden Globes, and you had to pay $500.
And the $500 is like for paperwork or whatever.
I said, no.
Like, I don't care.
I already won.
Like, you can't tell me I didn't win.
I've been number one for six years in a row.
All of a sudden, you're going to have a contest in front of all these people wearing tuxedos, and you're going to say, now I'm not number one.
Like, f ⁇ off.
Joe Rogan speaks in.
I love that.
So that's why he wasn't nominated.
They actually approached him, and he probably knew he wasn't going to win.
I wish.
Well, what do you mean?
Do you think Amy Poehler legitimately has a bigger better place?
No, I think Joe Rogan.
Come on, Guam.
That's not the question.
Of course, it's about who's voting.
They weren't going to let him win.
They don't like his politics, and they don't like how all over the place he is.
I wish Scott Galloway had his platform.
I think the problem with Schultz, the problem with Rogan, when they get into these kinds of waters is they're not built for this.
Okay?
Scott Galloway is built for this.
He's educated in a way.
He's thought about things.
He's experientially there.
He has an understanding of philosophy and politics and history.
You know, who you get your opinions from matters.
Now, I'm not saying you don't have the right to.
That's an elitist opinion right there.
Listen, it's an elitist opinion, but I have the choice to watch.
You do for sure you do.
What I'm saying is I respect his success.
The people have spoken.
Joe Rogan is the number one podcast.
There's no way you can look at it where it isn't.
But I also think it speaks to where we are as a culture.
But you said it's a different thing.
When you say build for this, what is this?
The reason that Joe Rogan is going to, the generous way to say it is start heart and then go head, is that he's negotiating the space the way most of us are.
That's not usually who leads, who leads in thought-making, what we used to call the cognizante, right?
That was an elitist word, right?
Arb there.
But look, only Tom.
It's elitist in terms of what do you see as elite.
I think that, why do I listen to Scott Galloway?
Because I think he's an idiot who has hot takes?
No, no.
No, I respect his experience.
Why do I come with you guys?
I respect the basis of your opinions.
I love the success that you guys have built.
I love what you're about.
I love the consistency.
I respect it.
Is that elitist of me?
No, it's I expect and respect quality.
The reason Rogan is all over the place is because this is kind of new to him of people listening to his ideas about things and him needing to have takes on things.
What's his great asset?
He gets the best people to go on that podcast and he has open-ended conversations with them.
That's what he does well.
These other guys who are trying to get into the opinion business, not all opinions have the same value.
But have you heard his, like, I have to push back because if you've heard his stand-up from his, regardless of the career, which was, it's from Fear Factor to everything, right?
If you listen to the stand-up, it's smart.
It's not just.
I'm not saying he's not smart.
No, no, no.
And I'm saying, though, and then with the pod, I have to push back because if you've listened to these conversations that he's had with scientists and, you know, NASA astronauts, Elon Musk, and everything, the questions and the pushback, he's not, I'm not saying you're saying he's dumb, but there's a reason he's number one is because of the conversations and the questions.
And it's not like he's sit there and write them.
He wrote the questions down.
This is off-the-clu conversations where even he's thinking.
And if you've gone into like, he goes down these rabbit holes and it's not the, oh, I'm high and I went down this rabbit hole.
It's sometimes.
But Chris, when's the last time you heard an entire podcast of Joe Rogan?
Maybe the whole be honest.
Absolutely now.
Okay, so you're going to sit here and say that he's that guy and you haven't done any actual research.
You're watching clips of the film.
That isn't even close to accurate.
What do you mean?
What you just said is stupid, Vinny.
How do you figure it?
The idea that I haven't watched an entire podcast starts to listen to him means that I don't have any research basis for my understanding of Joe Rogan.
I'm not a research.
You watch clips on you on clips, like a thousand.
I've listened to his podcast so often and I've read and seen.
I mean, that's just so much.
It was just so Chris.
Chris.
No, Rogan.
We don't need to watch a 40-hour podcast and develop opinions.
How many clips have you watched of Rogan?
Huh?
How many clips have you watched of Rogan?
Literally thousands.
Thousands.
And I respect his success.
And I don't agree with your assessment of his interviews or the level of sophistication.
You want to say that about Howard Stern?
I'm with you.
You want to say that about a Galloway?
I'm with you.
I think there's some really good people out there who aren't necessarily from the political space.
That would be elitist.
Can I bring this back to you?
Wait, Howard Stern, the guy that brings people with Down syndrome and butt-naked girls.
Yeah, he's done a lot of stupid things.
But as an interviewer, anybody who listens to the interviews he's doing now, you know, people grow and mature, Vinny, okay?
The way that Howard got Howard Stern almost started race riots in New York City.
Howard Stern wanted to run against my father because he believed everybody deserved the death penalty.
I had plenty of reasons not to like the guy, okay?
First thing he ever said to me when I met him was, it's just an act.
So I got plenty of reasons to dismiss the guy.
People evolve and they change, and I give them that.
Why?
Because I want it.
That's why.
I want that grace.
I want that forgiveness, not from some other schmo.
I want it from there.
But his interviews are sophisticated, especially when he's in his wheelhouse.
I don't feel that way about Rogan.
And that's just my opinion.
I'm not disrespecting him.
I don't want bad things for him.
But I do think you wade into these kinds of waters.
It's not surprising that he's going to go back and forth.
You know, I'd rather hear Tom Holman if he weren't in the administration.
I'd want to hear his take.
I want to hear John Miller on CNN.
I want his take.
Why?
Because he did the job, because he knows what goes into the analysis, because he understands the politics of it.
That's all I'm saying.
No disrespect.
And I know everybody's going to take the clip and say Cuomo's jealous of Rogan.
He hates her.
It's not true.
I wish him only good things.
But you also said he's not going to be number one in three years.
Remember that?
Do you want to put a bet on that?
You said that a year ago that he's not going to be the number one podcast.
Well, in fact, he almost lost it last year.
But I'm saying in three years.
So, wait, when did you say this quote?
I don't think Rogan will be number one in three years.
There are too many other voices coming into the spaces.
You want to make a bet?
Well, you said that statement a year ago, so we have two years left.
I'll bet you a 500 bucks is going to be number awesome.
Hey, take that to the bank, guys.
I think he's going to be number two.
Listen, there's another podcast in South Florida that might be in the conversation at that point.
Can I bring it back to you?
Because I think where you were going with Schultz is very, very accurate because we obviously know Marcelo very well.
We know Schultz very well.
Because if you're putting yourself in Schultz's position, I know you said you didn't necessarily want to come out and say it.
So I'm just going to ask you.
I think he's looking at two different diametrics.
I think he's looking at culture, Hollywood, what Marcelo is doing, and then looking at politics, New York, and business.
Schultz and his team, how many times have they said, how do you build a business?
What are you doing right here?
At what point is he going to see the taxes in New York and say, even though I'm trying to play this game, it's going to be too much.
Andrew loves his dad.
When you have a man who was raised by an incredible family, have you ever heard how he talks about his mom and dad?
Yeah, the ballroom dancers.
He gets emotional talking about his parents.
When you have incredible parents, loyalty goes higher.
When you have incredible parents, loyalty goes higher.
To want to make them proud goes higher.
To want to make them happy goes higher.
And if his parents are pro-New York, this is where we are.
We got to make it work.
He's probably going to do that.
Does that mean long-term he's not going to move and go to Florida?
Something like that.
He may do that.
I think he's going to stay in New York.
I think he wants to be the king of New York.
You said that earlier.
Yeah, I think he does.
I think he does.
But I also think Marcelo Hernandez comes into play here.
I really believe that.
For those that don't know Marcelo, why do you think that?
Guys, Marcelo is, you know, like, I wish I knew Vinny at 23 because I think Marcelo and Vinny give me the same vibes.
Okay.
But I met Vinny at 44.
Okay.
If I would have met Vinny at 23, I would be like, Vinny, listen, man, we're going a different route.
If I was, I'm telling you right now, if I was Vinny's agent at 23, Vinny probably doesn't give a shit about politics at 23, right?
Funny guy doing what he's doing.
I would have helped Vinny have a job like a Fallon Kimmel if I was an agent.
If I'm me, my wiring, I negotiate a lot of people's contracts behind closed doors that nobody knows about.
And I'm not going to say publicly.
I talk to a lot of people that call me, big contracts, and I'm talking to them and I'm involved.
And, you know, I enjoy this.
I just have no desire to go into the, what do you call it? The agency.
I have no desire to go into that space.
Zero desire to go into that space at all.
Marcelo and Vinny have a lot in common.
Extremely likable.
The difference with Vinny is: once politics gets a hold of you, you hit a certain age where you're like, dude, I don't give a shit about being famous.
I love America.
I want to talk about this, this, this, that.
Marcelo hasn't gone through that yet.
Marcelo's 26, 28, 28.
28, good looking, charming, handsome.
My God, he's likable.
He's probably a center guy because of his mother.
His mother's beautiful, talented.
This guy's got a very big upside.
And Marcelo, everyone's watching what's going on with Marcelo and his videos going viral and it's effortless.
The mother's Cuban, no?
The mother's Cuban.
Some others QA.
So he could easily show Cuba.
But I want to transition into the next story.
I don't want to stay here.
We haven't covered a lot of stories, but that's my thoughts on it.
You know, he worked here at Value Attainment.
That's why Pat has told me.
Oh, is that true?
Yeah.
But look, whether he worked here or not, this guy, the credit goes to his abilities on what he's done.
Can I make one point, 20 seconds that I think you'll appreciate?
So he just did his comedy special.
It's trending on Netflix.
It's a top three thing.
I went to the show, multiple shows.
We're backstage.
We're hanging out with his family.
You know, he's a very good friend of mine.
I met him when he was 19.
It was right after Charlie Kirk got killed.
And we had a very important conversation because you know where we stand on Charlie.
I'm like, he goes, yeah, but Charlie messed up on one thing.
And this is what I do in comedy.
It's called rounding the joke.
He says, I'll go all in on white people as an example.
White people did this, white people did this, white this.
But at the end of the joke, just when he's offending the white people, he'll say, well, we all know that the white people are the best kind of a thing.
And that's what he criticized Charlie on is that we live in this dunking culture where you'll dunk on somebody and they'll clip it.
And then what he does is he rounds the joke.
You're at two minutes now.
So what I would say with you, with Marcelo, there's a difference between Marcelo and Charlie Kirk.
Marcelo's got a clear vision.
He wants to be the modern day Jerry Seinfeld and hire.
Okay.
Charlie Kirk was not trying to be a comedian.
Spain's Population Decline00:14:56
Of course.
So it's a terrible comparison.
If Charlie wanted to be comedian, it'd be a different story.
Marcelo's going to differentiate.
I know he's saying it.
I get it.
I get it.
Okay.
All right.
Let's get to the next story.
This next story is a little bit of a weird story, but I think we have to touch it.
This is kind of weird what we're talking about here with Spain.
So as the United States experience, and by the way, this is a Fox News story.
As the U.S. experiences negative net migration due to President Donald J. Trump's policy, Spain is heading in the opposite direction, announcing plans to grant legal status for up to a half a million illegal immigrants.
Spain's socialist-led government approved a royal decree on Tuesday allowing unauthorized immigrants who entered the country before the end of 2025.
And we have lived there for at least five months and have no criminal record to obtain one-year residency and work permits with possible pathways to citizenship.
While many European governments have more to tighten immigration policies, some encouraged by Trump administration's hardline approach, Spain has taken a different path.
Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez and his ministers have repeatedly highlighted what they describe as economic benefits of legal migration, particularly for the country's aging workforce.
Spain will not look the other way.
Migration Minister Elma Sais told reporters at a news conference saying the government is dignifying and recognizing people who are already in our country.
Cuomo.
Politically fraught, I think that Spain, I don't think, I know Spain is in a very bad place economically.
Unemployment, where their future is, what kind of investment there is in that place.
They have real problems.
So they're looking at it through that lens.
And yeah, it's a socialistic government and politics, and that's a little bit more expansive in its thinking about migration than other European countries.
But there are conditions put on it, but I think that it is a very risky move because I think it's hard to know who you're allowing and what their impact will be.
And this would certainly not fly in America, certainly not right now.
Vinny.
You know, I just, I mean, check your phone.
The whole thing with everything with immigration, I know, Tom, you're going to go for it.
Everything from Pred, like, especially UK and all these countries, they don't understand what this is going to do to the country.
And going just really quick, Alex Predi, why is everything happening in the country with all this ice and everything?
You know why?
Because for four years, the Biden administration opened the border.
They're doing exactly what they're going to do over there and flooded this place with people that do not belong here.
And the moment that people speak out, it's like, ready for this?
One side makes the mess, and you go to try to clean up the mess and they go, hey, what the?
And they get mad at the person cleaning up the mess.
Okay?
I think this is a horrible freaking move.
It's all for votes.
It's all for votes.
And they're going to feel the brunt of it.
And I feel bad because I have friends, Pat, whose families just fled Venezuela to go to Spain finally after 30 years.
And now they're going to go to this.
This is what they're going to go to.
As Chris pointed out.
I have one question to ask when we get to this.
And I am so curious with this one thing.
But, Tom, I want to hear your thoughts.
And I have one question I want to ask.
So Spain has a struggling economy in a lot of different ways.
And the concept that the way that you're going to figure out how to fund the struggling economy, I'm going to use a word here, but it was a word that's been used to describe a set of countries.
Within the socialist bloc that is the EU, there was a phrase that came up, not invented by me, called pigs.
And I believe it was Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain, or Ireland, Greece, Spain.
But it talked about the ones that were consuming socialist resources to take care of all their people versus the ones that were contributing the capital to do it.
And the capital usually came from Germany and sometimes France, because remember, the UK is not part of EU.
And so what you have is this struggle in Spain, and someone stands up and said, oh, if the illegals have been here five months and have no criminal record, let's give them a residency and work permit.
The residency and work permit includes rights to things that we have seen break budgets in the United States, like Medicaid in California, like, you know, EBT cards in New York City, where that puts stress on the system because all of these illegal immigrants, and that's what they are, they're immigrants to humanize them, and they're illegally here.
And so I won't say alien.
These things create stress on economies.
Why are you walking on excellence and say alienation?
Well, because I think that illegal immigrant is a very strong, clear term.
Now, illegal alien is also a clear, strong term, but the average person, I think, doesn't know that alien has been a constant verb, excuse me, constant noun in the lexicon of describing immigration for 150 years.
Who cares?
I'll use both of them.
But the point simply here is I will.
I'm just wondering why, you know, why is that a.
You're going to just rank it.
Yeah, why is that a sensitive thing to even say?
Like, we have to be careful not saying a word like that.
That's not a church word.
It's not a derogatory term.
I'm sorry.
Maybe I was self-checking a little bit.
So these, you know.
Tom, say how you feel.
So these illegal aliens come in there.
They are going to take more resources from Spain to take care of them because just because you have a work permit and residency doesn't mean you have a job and then that you're being taxed and then the cycle is going back into the country.
I think this is a really bad idea that's been brought about by the EU and the globalist agenda that's underneath the socialist policy.
The socialist policy will bring bankruptcy.
The globalist agenda destroys cultures and brings all these people in.
Ask Germany how it worked with all the boat people.
They have been trying to untangle that mess now for four years.
Vinny, you said something already, right?
Yeah, yeah.
Okay, Adam.
Circle back in 10 years.
Let's see what happens here.
You know, I've been very vocal that I wake up, I don't think about California.
We see how this state is basically falling apart, and I wish them luck.
I sure, as I sure don't wake up and think about Spain.
For one point, I used to wake up and think about London.
I used to think about Paris.
And at this point, guys, do what you got to do.
We'll circle back in 10 years.
What I will say is this.
How many videos have we shown or seen of the guy?
I think he was in Germany or South Africa.
And he goes, you're not going to tell me where I can govern my country.
You're not going to, this guy goes all over the world basically exposing what illegal immigration or immigration and globalism has done to all these amazing countries.
Why is it that countries that have a culture, that have borders, are expected to take in the third world?
If Europe wants to do it, God bless.
All I want is that to not happen in America.
And I think that's what a lot of patriots feel.
And Pat, I know you want to ask a question.
My thing is the people.
The people, what can they do?
If you're a Spaniard, no, no, besides a vote, they're voting for socialism.
No, no, your government, your government, when they say Spain, it's not the people.
The people of Spain don't voted for the government.
Hey, anybody can come in the office.
Obama came in and he did such a great freaking job.
What I'm saying is, at what point, Pat, at what point, Chris, I want to know you guys think, do the people say enough is enough?
For four years, I'm actually embarrassed, Chris.
If I was in the military, I think it would have been a different story.
For four years, we know what the Biden administration did, and I didn't do anything about it.
America didn't do anything about it.
When the border was eyed open, why didn't we act?
Why did we all go to the border?
I'm being dead.
No, no, hold on.
And say, hell no, you're not going to let these people in because we are where we are today because of that policy.
And nobody said a peep.
Nobody from the other side said a peep.
And then we get land to this point where people are getting shot and ice and this and that.
And everybody's like, how did this happen?
Murder, by the way, is down 20%.
Overdose deaths are down 20%.
And New York Times came out with the article.
And they're like, what in the world?
How did this happen?
I think, Adam, it's going to keep happening to where the people are going to have to step up.
Last thing I'm going to say, when the Gravin Newsoms come in, Chris, I know you said you're not going to vote for him.
When the Gavin Newsom comes in when the pendulum switches and he's the guy that is pro-illegals, pro-open border, pro-no-ide to vote, what's going to happen then, Chris?
What are the American people going to do when the border gets reopened and the same problems happen again?
Let me just answer this, and I'm going to give us a question.
Let me just say one thing.
I can answer.
If you could possibly speak, the people did speak.
They voted for Trump.
Just like the people spoke and they voted for Mamdani.
And in four years, they're going to realize, what the hell did I do?
They should have voted for a different guy with Nam Cuomo.
That's my only point.
The people will speak, but they speak with their votes.
No, but actions.
I have a question that actually goes to what Vinny was actually saying, not my own opinion off the side.
So, Vinny, you're saying, what are the people doing?
I'll tell you what they're doing.
Conservative people, conservatives have won elections.
Now Rocki won a conservative election in Poland.
And Mertz, a conservative candidate, won an election in Germany.
We're not talking about prime ministers.
We're not talking about this.
But Ursula von der Leyen is still president of the EU Commission.
And the EU Commission and its globalist desires and constructs are infiltrating what's going on.
But you are seeing the voters vote for conservative candidates in response.
When you're saying, what are the people doing?
In many cases, they're trying to vote.
And they're trying to put these conservative candidates out.
And they're rebelling against the policies that are coming from the centrist control point that is the EU flag.
Remember, the blue flag with the stars on it runs Europe more than your sovereign flag does, regardless of what people want to tell you.
That's a good point by Tom about validating my point.
Here's my thoughts.
The question that I got is the following.
So if you look at, Rob, can you pull up what times in U.S. history has population declined?
What few times has the population declined in the history of U.S.?
You got three different times.
1918, 1919, okay?
Near zero growth or minute decline in growth states, growth rates.
And of course, we had COVID, which was like negative 1%.
Aside from that, we've never had another time.
I actually want to see the reports come in on what happens to U.S. population in 2025, because I think it declined.
I think the U.S. population probably declined in 2025.
I think it's going to decline even more in 2026.
And why?
Because of immigration.
We're not letting people in.
So then what's the solution to that?
The Democratic solution is what?
Open the floodgates, let people in.
10 to 25 million, whatever number that you said earlier here.
We've heard both of those numbers.
What's the Republican plan for that?
What's the conservative plan?
Now, of course, they're talking about this $1,000 plan.
I don't know if you're seeing this or not.
Rob, this battery pack doesn't work, by the way.
Can you ask Mateo to just come into the building?
At this point, like I've asked for a battery pack three times.
And I know you brought it to me.
This one doesn't work.
I know they're doing $1,000 for the kids that they're giving away that, you know, Bank of America signed up for it.
I want to say Michael Dell signed up for it.
I want to say a bunch of guys signed up for it that they say they're going to be doing.
What else are you going to do?
And FYI, say that report comes out.
Be the liberal.
Be the opponent.
Be the enemy.
Argue for it.
What do you say?
Is that a taint?
Is that a bad look?
What is it?
If it says U.S. population declined for the first time, not because of a war, not because of Spanish flu, not because of, what do you call it, COVID, but because we stopped taking any immigrants in.
What do we then say?
How does the enemy argue against that?
I'll come to you, Tom.
Logical argument, and Chris, I'm going to come to you afterwards.
So somebody came to me with that argument.
Let's just say all of a sudden news comes out.
2025, the first time in U.S. history where population declined, not due to a virus or a war.
I would say, let's look at the underlying reasons and let's make them plain and understandable for people.
Boomers, now the generation is passing away.
Birth rate, because we've destroyed the concept of the American family and the pride of having children and doing things because we've become so anti-family.
We're having less children.
And so we're responsible for our own shrinkage.
These same headlines, ladies and gentlemen, are showing up in Japan.
These same headlines are showing up in Korea because the pride of having a family and building within the country has been replaced by this individualism and this socialism and this lie.
And consequently, we're passing away right on time with actuarial tables and we're not having children to replace it.
That's what's going on, folks.
That's what's going on.
What would you say, Chris?
There are people on the left who would say good, right, because they think the world is overpopulated.
I think there are people on the right who would say good because they believe that the country is overpopulated.
And then it would become about what we decide to make it mean, okay?
What does it mean?
Does it mean that we are shrinking in a bad way or are we getting stronger because we're concentrating our assets?
And I think it would become a political football.
And I think that the idea that the right doesn't have a plan or the left does is optimistic on both, though counterintuitive, because they're going to react, not act.
So it will become a thing.
Okay.
If Pat's premise happens, we've gone down in population.
We will feel some kind of way about it, right?
And different people will make us feel that way.
Then they'll react.
And if it seems that, well, this is good.
It's working.
It's working.
Trump's policy is working.
If it's seen that way, you know what the rights plan is.
Let's keep going this way.
This works.
And if it's, oh, no, we overcorrected.
We need, then they'll have another one and they'll encourage what Tom is talking about.
Population Decline Impact00:02:55
Hey, what happened to our investment in our families?
How come we're not having enough babies?
So they'll react to it.
I don't know that on its face, the population going down is inherently good or bad.
I don't know.
But I do think it will be shaped by our binary politics.
I think the moment that news hits, you're going to hear mainstream media on the opposite side saying, look what happened.
Do you now need your immigrants?
What do you want to say now?
Are you not going to open the borders and start accepting people that are coming in?
Biggest mistake.
Look what we're being impacted by.
Companies can't hire people.
Capitalism is being affected by it.
Job creators need these immigrants that were at least willing to do the work.
I think that messaging is going to go off.
And all I'm saying is they got to find a way to get a message that incentivizes people to have kids again.
And the way you do this $1,000 works, the IVF program thing that they announced, I think you saw that as well.
I think I would be going a little bit deeper to find a way to go deeper on the story.
I'm going to attack cost of living.
I'll tell you who wants to, whoever wants to win that argument goes all in on cost of living because the whole problem for the American family is purchasing power, right?
I mean, and you saw what happened.
It took three days for the banks to get the administration to step off the credit card idea.
Three days.
Oh, we talked to the banks.
They're going to put out a Trump credit card that's 10%.
But otherwise, we'll let them figure it out.
These are the big dogs.
The banks, the health insurance companies, these are the big dogs.
Big pharma.
If you take them on, you change the cost of living.
If you change the cost of living, you change the ability to have kids.
I think cost of living is a major factor.
Affordability is a major factor.
But I'll tell you what I think is the biggest factor, and that's feminism.
We talked about this with Tate the other day.
I think there's going to be a reawakening amongst women who have been sold a bill of goods to say, stop focusing on having kids, stop focusing on having a family, focus on your career, focus on your job, be a boss, babe.
I think young women are looking at the world saying, huh, is this really what I want to do?
Compete with men?
Pat, you brought up a study, I think it was up 12th grade girls, about how men still, their number one priority is having a wife, having a family, and living that ideal American dream.
For women, it's now number 12.
Women no longer want to grow up and have a family.
And I think young women are going to basically come to their senses and say, no, I don't want to do this.
And I've already seen it where young women in high school are saying, I don't want to end up like the Chelsea handlers of the world, 50-year-old cat women.
I want to have a family and I want to have kids.
It just may be too late for some 30 and 40-year-old women.
We'll see.
We'll see what happened here.
I mean, for EU, that argument, remember, that argument's going to come here.
If you're saying one and a half million to 2 million people self-deported, that's the number we keep hearing about.
Women's Changing Priorities00:05:15
Okay.
If you're saying, then think about the people that you've deported.
All right.
Then three, think about the people that are no longer coming here.
I support all three of them.
I support all three of them.
But you better get ahead of it.
It takes how long to have a kid?
40 weeks.
40 weeks is almost a year, 52, 12.
It's three months less.
Like you have to get ahead to promote and then get husband and wives to think about having kids and that thinking could take three to six months.
Like, this is not a boom, boom, boom.
Let's have kids.
And you don't get pregnant right away.
Yeah, you don't get pregnant right now as a young man, worried about getting people pregnant.
And then when you decide to have a baby, it is so true.
You realize you got eight minutes.
It is so true.
Come on, to get it done.
It is so true.
What's happening with China, Pat?
Yeah.
But no, this is more child policy.
He backfired.
But that's a policy.
We stopped having kids.
Correct.
It's a very different thing.
That was force.
This is our choice.
Feminism destroyed, obviously, the child birth rate.
There's a bunch of different things that we can talk about that prevented this from happening.
But I think family nucleus, going back to selling it, affordability, all of this is a part of it.
Hopefully they'll figure it out.
By the way, this story goes to Rob.
If you can go to page 18, the video, European Union opens borders to mass India migration with mother of all ideas.
If you have this clip, Rob, press this clip.
Go ahead, watch this, folks.
Finally, Prime Minister Dianarenda, we both know our greatest wealth are our people.
That is why I'm so glad that we are signing an agreement on mobility.
We will facilitate the movement of students, researchers, seasonal, and highly skilled workers.
And this is also why we are launching the first EU legal gateway office in India.
It will be a one-stop hub to support Indian talent moving to Europe in full alignment with EU member states' needs and policies.
This is good for our economies.
This is good for the friendship between our people.
And this openness benefits us all.
As we conclude this 16th summit.
Rob, is she going to get to the point or is this going to be like that?
I mean, just tell me what she's saying.
Let me just read, guys.
I don't know about you.
Maybe you have more patience than me.
What is she getting to, Rob?
So, European Union has agreed to open its borders.
Mass immigration from India has assigned a bloc, largest free trade agreement, EU Commission.
President Ursula von der Leyen said in a press conference in New Delhi, alongside Prime Minister Modi on Tuesday, that the bloc has agreed to a mobility scheme to allow the influx of students, researchers, seasonal, and high-skilled workers from India into Europe.
The EU chief has also said that Brussels will open a legal gateway office in India to help facilitate migrants move to Europe.
This is good for economies.
This is good for friendship between our people.
This openness benefits us all, said von der Leyen, despite the scale of the charges, changes agreed.
Reports in a legacy media generally ignored or buried the migration aspect of the agreement.
Report heavily on the commitment trade agreement signed alongside India already ranks among the top countries of origin for legal migration into the EU, with Indian nationals receiving the second most first-time residence permits among any nationalities in 2024, 192,000, only behind Ukraine at 295,000.
According to Indian Prime Minister Modi, there are currently over 800,000 Indians living in the European Union, Tom.
Well, guess what, Pat?
What you just said is exactly what's happening here.
What Pat was just talking about three minutes ago was: you know, what is the left going to say?
Oh, we need workers, we need this.
This is going to help me.
This is, yo, guess what?
And by the way, who's speaking?
Prime Minister of Germany, which is really the economic backbone of the EU?
No.
Is this France?
No.
Is this all of the prime ministers coming together like a G7 type conference?
No.
It's Ursula van der Leyen.
She is the unofficial president of the EU.
And this deal has been cut.
And it's, you take a look at the birth rates in all those countries.
You look at what's happened over there.
This is the response, Pat.
This is exactly what you were asking.
They're saying, well, we need, what do we need?
Seasonal labor, skilled labor, and we're going to allow students to come here.
Exactly the categories that you're waiting for liberals in America to say, who's going to, where are we going to get skilled labor?
Where are we going to get it?
This is it.
There's another factor.
This is the response, Pat.
This treaty is the response.
There's another factor that matters a lot and wasn't mentioned by her and wasn't mentioned in the write-up either because people don't want to touch it.
What does India have going for it if you're going to make a mass migration deal?
Other than that, they're the second biggest population.
What do they have going for them?
14% of their population is Muslim.
And what they have going for them is the big reason that people are migration averse right now is extreme Islamism.
Is that when Muslims are coming into societies?
Rokana's Political Evolution00:15:24
Look, I don't like this.
I do a lot of work to distinguish between extreme Islamism and being a Muslim.
But we see these communities where extremism takes root.
They change culture.
They fight against culture.
India doesn't have that as a mark against allowing them in right now, which is kind of an unspoken motivator.
Why are you less worried if you hear Indians are coming in than you hear Bangladeshis are coming in, right?
Which came from India, right?
Because of the extremist Islamism risk.
And that's something, too, that America is just starting, despite 9-11, just starting to wake up to because we don't have a huge Muslim population here, really, relative.
You do in New York now.
We have a growing, it's a growing population, no question about it.
Chris Chris, significantly.
It's also uneven.
Uneven?
Yeah.
That's your synopsis of Mamdani?
Uneven, because it's too early to see the policy failures.
But his early reads, you know, kindness is not always really kindness, right?
There's such a thing as tough love.
You leave people out on the street who are not competent to make their own decisions, and then they die because there's a storm.
That's on you, brother.
And it's one thing to say, I'm not going to tell you how to live your life as if they want to be on the street.
Leadership often is not about the softest, the gentlest self.
But it's going to take time for his policies to be put into proper context versus what he was saying.
But he's not off to race.
He's asking for money.
Are you prepared to donate to Mamdani's administration?
And I don't live in New York City.
Okay.
So you're good.
If you did, I would have a much higher tax rate.
Would you donate to Mamdani?
No.
I don't believe in what he's about.
I do believe in the affordability, in cost of living, whatever you want to call it.
I would love to cover that all the time.
I wish the algorithms were trained to reward members of Congress and influencers for talking about health care costs and why it's so expensive and why we need the ACA subsidies in the first place.
But you don't need what comes along with it with him to get those policies.
Let me do this since you're talking about that.
By the way, breaking news, we'll get to it here in a minute.
Luigi Manjioni will not face death penalty judge rules.
We'll talk about that here in a second.
This literally just happened right now.
Right.
Wow.
But prior to going into that, while you're talking about this, in regards to Mamdani, did you see the clip of him getting up and saying, hey, we need $12 billion?
And I don't know where you saw that clip.
Can we play that clip since we're on Momdani right now?
That wasn't one of the topics, but I think it's timely.
So here's Momdani.
Apparently, taxes wasn't supposed to be raised for the average New Yorker.
And then all of a sudden, this is what happened.
Go ahead, Rob.
City is in a difficult position.
We can't hear it, guys.
Can you start from the beginning, please?
Where the city is in a difficult position.
Guys, start from the beginning.
I still can't hear anything.
City is in a difficult position.
There you go.
Thank you.
We are also seeing a moment where the gross fiscal mismanagement has left New Yorkers with a bill the likes of which we have not seen in many, many years.
And we have seen in the politics of the past that in moments such as these, we ask those with the least to bear the greatest burden.
And we know that here in the wealthiest city and the wealthiest country in the history of the world, that we can not only put our city back on firmer financial footing, but also build a stronger city for everyone if the top 1% of New Yorkers pay an additional 2% in income taxes.
Recently, I actually had a New Yorker turn to me and self-identify as someone who would be taxed by this proposal.
Is it true that you want to raise taxes on me?
And I said, it is true.
And they said, well, I would leave.
I said, I don't think you would.
They said, why not?
I said, because we're looking to raise income taxes on the top 1% by 2%.
So for $1 million a year, that's an increase of $20,000 in taxes.
And when I told them the amount, they realized that it wasn't enough to actually make the change where they were.
I've been arrested.
Yeah, of course.
Please raise taxes more.
Why don't you do 20% on these guys making a million bucks?
So I know you voted for this guy because you didn't like his opponent.
He was going up against this guy.
This only guy named Anthony.
He's only because he's ugly.
I judge people on looks.
What do you think about what he just said?
He's better looking than his brother.
What do you think about what he just said?
Look, here's what I think, okay?
And I know people are going to get upset and they're going to come after me.
Knock yourself out.
He is way over his head.
Okay.
We've never seen the light.
No, you've never seen the likes of this because you've never been involved in elected office.
You've never led.
You've never understood.
You're a kid and you're an inexperienced kid.
So it's new to you.
It's not new to New York City and it's not a new challenge to anybody who runs a major municipality.
You can say the numbers aren't impressive to the top, but that's not the way they're going to hear it.
And it is very popular in New York City right now, if not in New York State, if not in the country, to go after the top.
So he is playing to a popular political trope, Richard, which is kill the rich and tax them.
I don't care if he taxes them because I don't live in New York City.
But the idea that he knows what to do, here's the problem with taxing me two cents more.
What are you going to do with it?
Where's the money going?
How efficient are you?
How responsible are you?
How aligned are you with what I think matters?
He doesn't check any of those boxes for these guys.
What do you mean?
He's never had like a big boy job or he's never run a company?
What are you trying to say?
No, no, Chris.
Oh, he never has?
Chris, saying serious.
Last week, he announced in front of a camera, New York is staying at Sanctuary City.
And if all the kids are going to come and eat and go to school and everything for free, that's where that two central government goes.
That's right.
That's where that's going to go.
And that's why they don't want to give it.
So it's not like the rich are pigs.
No.
Right?
I'll give you the money.
I'll give you the money.
If you want the money from me, but let me know what it's for and let me feel good about it and know that you can get it done.
He doesn't check any of those boxes.
There's a lot of rich people that you know leaving.
Are you hearing Exodus?
I am.
So some of that happened already.
Okay.
Because of him, not a wave like I've seen already, COVID.
But, and there are a lot of people came out to where I live also.
You know, they moved.
Your area blew up.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, you know.
Yeah, for sure.
I love that area.
Yeah.
So, and the infrastructure is not set up for it.
That's what we have a lot of people.
It's not set up or it is.
No way.
The traffic is bad.
Traffic, plumbing, everything.
First responders.
It's a challenge.
But look, he is on course to take New York City in a terrible direction.
Leadership, policies, execution.
And I haven't even built in the thing that matters most yet.
Crisis.
You think 10 dead homeless people is a crisis.
You have ICE come to New York and try to do an operation, and he doesn't get some better brain around him who says, you're not Jacob Fry.
This is not Minneapolis.
You better work with these guys and do it now.
If they come here hard and heavy, you could have bloodshed in the streets of New York that he will not be able to control.
And there's a 50-50 chance he'll say something so effing stupid in that moment that you'll have no leadership.
It's scary to me.
And I know people don't like that.
And they'll say it's because I'm Islamophobic.
No, I'm worried for Muslims because I don't want them to be judged by a guy who has a tendency towards extreme Islamism.
It's not fair to them that they have to own him now.
By the way, while you're talking about this, I want to show a clip again of your good friend Kira Swisher.
If you want to pull this up, of Kara on with what's his name, Rokano, who we had him here on the podcast, watch this clip.
Okay, folks, I just want you to listen to this.
Rokana could be Speaker of the House.
And tell me how you feel though.
And tell me how you feel about she's saying something about taxes in California.
And look at the way she talks about it.
Go ahead.
Tell me if somebody's watching this.
Let's just say you're watching this.
You're a job creator.
You work your tail off.
You have days that you go without sleeping at all.
If not, you have weeks where you go three hours a night, every night, seven straight days as a business owner.
You're losing money.
You're losing all this stuff that's happening.
You tell me, if people in this state thought of you this way, would you want to move your business to California?
Go ahead and play the clip.
And I think what it is, it specifically targets 100 people, I think it is, who are threatening to leave California, except for Jensen Pong, who's apparently staying.
I have two minds of this.
One is you made your, and I said it to Ronnie this weekend.
I said, you made all your money in California, you ungrateful piece of shit.
You could figure out a way to pay more taxes, and we deserve the taxes from you, given you made your wealth here.
The second thing is, yes, there are different ways to do this, but the length of time it would take and the kind of vehemence you would fight, whatever happens, means nothing would happen.
So why don't we just do shock and awe at this point?
Because you don't seem to be, you know, availing yourself to thinking that you owe your state something more.
They don't think that at all.
Watch.
They don't.
They think that there's waste and that there's abuse.
And there is some waste.
I'm not going to say everything we've been spending is perfect, but the point is you have a real crisis.
Would you, business owners watching this, the ungrateful business owners that risk it all to create jobs in any economy, which by the way, these ungrateful business people, Kara Swisher doesn't understand.
Any other economy would welcome them.
Nashville would welcome them.
Brentwood would welcome them.
Franklin would.
I think Arizona may, Nevada would, Texas would.
Dallas definitely would.
Austin would, Florida would.
A lot of people would.
Why the hell would anybody want to go to California when they look at you the way that they look at you?
That they own you, that they own you.
Tom, how do you process this when you hear the way Kara's explaining on, you know, these entitled pieces of, you know, the way she described it?
How do you view this message from her?
This is the evolution of Kara Swisher that disappoints me that I don't really understand where it's coming from unless she just felt that there's a highly profitable lane there and this is the differentiated market.
This is a woman who was a tremendous analyst with Walt Mossberg.
I used to look forward to their breakdowns and analysis of what was going on with startups and with companies.
They called Apple out when they thought products were not optimal or decisions were not there.
But it was very, very straight up and it celebrated technology and it celebrated the things that happened.
And now all of a sudden on the other side, the post-40 Cara Swisher suddenly is like this socialist champion that is ignoring the risk.
She knows about the risk.
She covered the amount of venture investment.
She covered venture investment path that went bad, where pension money and other money that was in venture funds went after some company, invested in it, and it became a smoking crater.
She sounds like a bitter woman who lost an opportunity and she had a chance to make a lot of money.
I just sense bitterness.
I sense it too.
And also, with liberals, I'm also confused by the lack of math, Pat.
I won't go too deep into it, but yesterday, Pat and I saw Eric Adams, and we asked him something, and he pointed out that I believe the answer was an $8 billion reserve.
I think that's the number.
And the reserve, if I'm interpreting what he was saying correctly, would have been an account and money that was unspent that was available to the budget of New York City.
Well, have you ever trusted a mayor that comes up and says that the problem is this number?
Doesn't it always end up ending up being bigger and bigger and bigger?
Because nobody, you covered this in the media, Chris.
Nobody wants to tell you the full number.
The real number from Mandami right now is 20 billion because it's 12 billion he's willing to talk about today and 8 billion that was in a reserve account.
When you put those together, it's at least 20.
You're assuming he even knows the number.
That's my next point, is that they come back correcting it.
And so her coming up with numbers, what's another percent?
What's this?
And Mandami, it's like liberals have lost the spreadsheet because the narrative is just like, go after the risk.
But also, there's a pendulum move in profile, right?
The left is now inhabiting the populist angst.
The outrage, the disruption.
The institutions failed us.
The government failed us.
It doesn't work.
They have that now.
Tune in on Instagram.
That doesn't always happen when you're supposed to be outrageous.
So Trump had disenfranchised, disaffected.
Now you have what I call mega, because they're actually a bigger group who are now using the populist outrage.
And the president is trying to navigate that, right?
Because he's like, wait, no, this is my vibe.
How do I get back in front of this?
What's good?
What's bad?
Swisher, though, is a perfect messenger for that because she has a harshness to her that is hardwired.
This is someone who had an interview with me, okay, that I, you know, I did at the time because I was like, I'm not afraid of any questions.
And they're like, oh, Cara Swisher is going to take you apart.
I said, okay, let's do it.
And she told me and means it.
And her brother confirmed this to me.
Okay.
He invited me to Christmas Eve dinner, by the way.
She would not have helped her brother if he was in the situation that my brother was because it would have conflicted with her journalistic duties.
Wow.
And she had to stay impartial.
To your brother?
No.
Having his ass in a sling?
It's one thing.
I'm not saying she said she wouldn't use her contacts.
She wouldn't manipulate her platform to help him.
I never did any of those things.
I never had to.
So that's who she is.
Think about that.
I wouldn't have helped my own brother if it would have compromised what I see as my journalistic ethics.
Are you open to a comment?
Sure.
Someone who you don't always get along with, if ever, Ann Coulter, said that in that the religion of liberalism becomes fanaticism, and then that becomes your religion and your flag, leaving behind even your family.
And I'm paraphrasing Ann.
Yeah, but I think I get where she's saying.
She's super smart.
I've never had a bad relationship with Ann in my life.
I know she asks me a lot.
Yeah, yeah, but I mean, that's the business.
Can I tell you guys something?
You know what was when what was my number one reason for when everybody said, I cannot believe you brought Cuomo on.
We lost a lot of people when we announced Cuomo.
Don't forget that.
We got a lot of criticism when we.
Casey Anthony Controversy00:04:29
It was non-stop.
He cannot believe you.
Till today, we still get the messages.
It's toned down a little bit.
When I see a brother back up a brother, to me, it says parents raise that family very well.
That's where it stops.
When I saw that, that's values, that's principles.
That's very, very important to me when I see a brother defend a brother the way it happened.
Politically, at the time, whatever, set all the other stuff aside.
COVID, all the stuff you said, craziness, set the stuff aside, the values.
That part, I can't understand the Kara swisher thing.
I want to go to three more stories before we wrap up.
I only got a few minutes.
Let me get to the next one.
Rob, Luigi Mangioni.
This story just came in.
Chris, I'm going to come to you first.
Then, Adam, I'm coming to you next.
Okay.
So, Luigi Mangioni, Rob, you just texted it to me.
U.S. District Judge in New York ruled that federal prosecutors cannot seek the death penalty against Luigi Mangion for the 2024 killing of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson.
Judge Margaret Garnet dismissed the federal murder charge, determining it was technically flawed because the underlying stalking charges did not meet the legal definition of a crime of violence.
Chris, for people that may disagree with this, what do you say to them?
I understand why you disagree, and I hate the message that it sends, and I think the prosecutor screwed up.
And did the judge have to make this ruling?
No, but it was close to her having to make it.
Why?
Because the way the law works is the reason you get the death penalty.
Remember, in the law, the death penalty is very, very, very high standard.
Okay.
And you need to have violent felonies underneath.
They said, yeah, stalking is violent.
That's not the way the stalking is perceived, especially when there's been no contact prior.
So I think they forced her hand a little bit, but I get why you don't like it because it sends a terrible message.
If this isn't murder, what is?
And I don't like it.
I don't like this kid.
I hate that he's Italian.
I hate that people say that he's handsome.
I hate that he's raised all this money.
I hate that people argue the other side of it.
To what you said about Don Lemon, to me, Mangioni is that times a million in terms of the message.
Chris, can you comment on how New York State is more limited on what will get you the capital punishment in the first place?
Well, it's fine.
When compared to Florida, it's federal though.
It's federal.
It's not state.
It's federal.
If it were a state case, New York would still be tricky.
But Florida, I mean, he would have been dead as soon as they caught him in Florida.
But federal law applies the same in all states.
Apparently, this judge, I sent you a picture of her, Margaret Garnett.
She was a liberal judge appointed by Biden.
And this just goes that everything's political at this point.
Everything is so politicized that the most unique person in this world, in this country at this point, is someone who's fair and balanced.
You know, Fox says they're fair and balanced.
Yeah, okay.
You know, CNN certainly is not.
MSNBC, which had to change their name to MS Now, I believe.
We know, where are people getting independent, non-political viewpoints at this point?
Here's just the latest example of a liberal judge that's just siding with.
Look, who was she appointed by?
Bottom right?
Joe Biden.
Joe Biden.
So they say that, you know, the Justice Department is weaponized or politicized.
Here's just another example.
It's pretty clear.
Biblical, I'm not the biggest Bible guy, but eye for an eye, you kill somebody in cold blood.
It's you.
You're gone.
You're gone.
Death penalty.
That should be just point blank.
That's my opinion.
Sometimes they screw up the case, though.
Casey Anthony here in Florida.
Casey Anthony, exactly.
Very strong, overreached, went for the death penalty.
Yep.
She winds up getting acquitted.
Why?
They went for too much.
I think these guys did the same thing.
They did it the wrong way, and they gave this judge an opportunity to make a ruling that I don't think will be overturned on appeal.
What do you think should happen to Mangioni?
Forget about the fact that he's Italian, just from a lawyer standpoint.
Do you think he did it?
He's the worst.
Of course he did.
Of course he did, right?
He did it.
Of course he wanted to do it.
He planned it.
Of course.
He did it for bad reason, and he's a bad guy.
But he's a hero on the left.
There's no lightning.
Five Moves to Freedom00:02:45
There's a story of some guy dressed up as a CI agent.
Well, that's a good thing.
But what do you happen to him?
If not the death penalty.
Well, he's going to get convicted and they're going to give him life in prison.
So then he gets to go sell books and be a hero to the police.
No, no, no.
No, hell no.
We're going to pay for him to be alive.
Well, you're going to pay for him to be alive, right?
That's life without parole.
What do you mean no?
He's not going to write a book on the story.
No, because you have the son of Sam law.
You can't make money off your crime.
Well, good.
Yeah, and I'm going to make a great point.
David Berkowitz.
A 36-year-old named Mark Anderson.
I will tell you where he's from.
Went all the way across country to Metropolitan Detention Center.
He claimed he was an FBI agent.
He told the prison staff he had an order to release Louis Mangioni.
They asked for his credentials.
Guess where his license went?
Guess where he's from?
You're never going to guess.
Minnesota.
Somalia.
Oh, Minnesota.
Same thing.
He's from Minnesota.
They searched his bag.
They found the barbecue fork and something that looked like a pizza cutter.
He went all the way there with a pizza cutter as if they were going to have pizza after he got him off.
What was he trying to do exactly?
You know what I mean?
To get him out of jail, to break him out of prison.
But he's nuts.
He's a crazy person.
So a crazy person from Minnesota.
No way.
You're never going to believe that.
Tom, do you have anything on this or no?
No.
So two days ago, I had a one-hour call with his three lawyers, Luigi's lawyers.
Luigi wrote me a two-page long letter that was written in August that I received two days before Christmas.
Yeah.
Or even a day before Christmas?
Something like that.
And it was interesting because when he came out with the 27 points, one of the things he wrote on the 27 points when my phone blew up is Luigi Mangion is reading your next five moves in prison and other inmates were reading your next five moves as well in jail.
So this was kind of how the exchange is going.
So I'm talking to the lawyer and Yeah, that one right there.
I think it was 0.7 or 8 or 9 or one of them.
There you go, 0.7.
Your next five moves.
Yeah.
So to me, you know what I was asking the lawyers?
And who knows?
Maybe we'll do something together to go even deeper because one of the lawyers that's there, she's also a content creator and she gets a lot of eyeballs.
She's with Midas Touch and she does a very good job.
She's a talent.
And obviously, to be a lawyer for someone like this, you have to be very, very good at what you do.
All I want to know is, how does this happen?
How do you go from a guy that has a trajectory of getting to where he could have gone in life, being a good citizen, make good money, create jobs, get married, have kids, do all this stuff that he wants to do, to all of a sudden get to this point?
Preventing Future Tragedies00:03:25
I want to know where this led to this.
Because if we don't, how many other Luigis are there that we have to know that if we don't see patterns, we can't prevent, right?
When I'm talking to these lawyers, I'm telling them how I was at 18 years old.
If you judge me on where I was going to be in life, you would have never said I'm going to be here ever.
None of my friends would have ever said I'm going to be here.
Someone got a hold of me, whether it was a couple of my drill sergeants, whether it was Drill Sergeant Green or Drill Sergeant Purdle or First Sergeant Ward or Lieutenant Colonel P. Cox or Lieutenant Off or Sergeant Braxton or all of these guys, these friendships, the influences, the Pastor Dudley Rutherford, the Rich Dolly's, these men who got a hold of you, who said, Hey, you can do better.
The Brian Heflin, the Cisco Davises.
These are men who get a hold of a young man who doesn't have a sense of direction to say, what are you doing?
And flip it also on the other side.
You know why my concern, the same thing when I brought up the Don Lemon and you said you're more here than you're on the Don Lemon side?
Dude, we got to prevent this thing before he gets to the next level.
20 of us went to watch Joker when he came out.
I'm a big Joaquin Phoenix guy and I want to watch the movie.
43 minutes into the movie, I look at you and I said, there's no way I can watch this movie.
There's no way I can watch this movie.
This is horrible.
This movie is inspiring you to go kill the billionaire.
Yep.
That's the movie.
You don't think five kids are going to say, fuck me, you know, let me go kill him and F these guys.
And you don't think all you need is five kids to watch.
You don't think these movies are going to have that kind of an impact.
And how big of a movie was it?
Of course, Joaquin Phoenix crushed it in the movie.
Of course.
And who was the bad guy?
Was it Robert De Niro?
Who was the guy that was a little bit more?
Yeah.
And so you watch this and you say, how does this happen?
I'm interested in what gets somebody to that point and what can we do to prevent that from happening at a large scale.
Guy next to me does a Zoom with me yesterday.
He said something very interesting.
22, 23-year-old content creator, very talented.
He says, you know what I miss?
I said, what do you miss?
He says, for seven or eight years when I was a young boy, I watched every one of your Motivation Monday videos in your car.
I watch every one of your videos about what it is to be a young man or this or content creator and all this other stuff.
He says, America doesn't have a, you know, people that they watch on how plays a role of a father.
He says a lot of young men need that messaging today in a big way.
Right before jumping on here, we're talking, Chris and I are talking about your son and, you know, I'm not going to say it publicly, but what decisions he's making, what he wants to do with his career.
Good looking guy.
You know, he's doing what he's doing and family, the conversation.
There's nothing like family, but there's also nothing like influencing someone else that's maybe not your family to prevent them to do something dumb.
I'm willing to bet the guy was this close of just being a regular guy you would have met, you would have never thought about him.
And I'm willing to bet there are tens of thousands of Luigi Mangionis that are this close to do something stupid, this close.
Jerome Powell's Influence00:09:54
And if we don't find a way to get a hold of these guys, we're going to have a bunch of these cases happening.
Bunch of these cases happening.
So it's interesting they chose to go this route.
But again, we'll follow this case a little bit closer.
I want to get to the next one here.
Next story I want to go to is the Jerome Powell story, the federal, you know, the name that was announced this morning at 6 a.m.ish, give or take, President Trump Calci, $96 million of wagers were made on Calci on who's going to be the next Fed chair.
Look at the volume on the bottom left, $97 million.
Rob, how far back can you go on this?
Is this all?
So if you go to all, go a little bit lower, Rob, so we can see the names.
It's been Kevin Warsh for quite a while.
But if he can go a little bit higher, if he can go a little bit higher, who's the second one?
Who's the blue and who's the black?
Who's blue, Rob?
Judy Shelton is in at 1.8% and Rick Ryder.
Rick Ryder was also one that was on the list.
And look at it just a few days ago.
Is black Rick Ryder?
Yes.
Pretty bad name, but so eventually ends up being Kevin Worsh as the guy.
Tom, how do you feel about this announcement, this decision?
So here's what's been going on.
The president has been at verbal, you know, debate, battle, war, whatever, whatever odds with Jerome Powell since before he won the election, talking about interest rates and talking about things like this.
And everyone thought that Kevin Hassett, who is serving in the White House, was going to be the guy.
And so he was up there first.
And then all of a sudden, many people, including me, think Kevin Hassett maybe sounded a little too measured in public because Trump clearly wants somebody to run the Fed that aligns with him and Scott Bessett on interest rates, specifically with the president.
And so Kevin Warsh's name came up.
And then Kevin Worsch was like the leading candidate for a while.
And then over the last three weeks, there was a little bit of shift that happened.
Rick Ryder's name came up at the same time the president said, I think Kevin Hassett should stay in the White House.
He's doing a fine job.
Instantly, everybody says, okay, well, that's it.
Hassett is absolutely off the list because the president complimented him and said, I want him to stay in the White House.
But then the president said positive things about Rick Ryder.
And then some leaks came out from the administration, from the cabinet, that said the president is very, you know, encouraged by a recent interview he had with Rick Ryder.
So people were thinking that's it.
Well, the president now has a two-horse race.
He's got Rick Ryder who wants the job and Warsh who wants the job.
Well, guess what happened?
I think what happened is he had a conversation with the two of them about policy alignment.
And I think Warsh was more aligned with the president.
So the president felt that he would be following him more and pick Warsh.
Historically, the head of the Fed has usually been someone that even the most partisan presidents have felt needs to be balanced, can't be quick turning knobs at the Fed.
And what has happened here, I think Worsh is going to be more likely to give us a half a point cut before June.
No cuts were going to happen here in January at the Fed meeting.
There's a 0% chance of that, according to Calci and others that are speaking.
And Kevin Wars is going to be our new head of the Fed and is probably going to give us quarter-point cuts in two of the next four Fed meetings going through June.
And that's tough.
Why are some people saying they're surprised by this?
Because this guy's known for wanting to raise the rates or keeping it consistent.
He's not really known for being a guy that was going to lower the rates.
Well, I think what has happened is in the last two interviews, remember, the president had interviews.
And in the last two interviews, something happened.
And the president, in all of his discussions on Powell, has wanted the Fed to follow him, even though they're looking at unemployment, inflation, and all these other things.
The president's been speaking since before he was reelected for that.
And so I think what has happened here is Warsh, even though he's had his historical quantitative stances, and I call what you just said, Pat, is very accurate, but those have been quantitative stances.
This plus this plus this means it's too salty.
So I'm going to add more water to reduce the saltiness of the soup.
That's a technical answer.
And I think he met with the president, and the president's like, I want to do this for the American people.
I want to do this with Fannie and Freddie.
I want to do this for our economic policy.
Can I count on you?
I think that's what happened.
Vinny, what's your technical analysis?
Go ahead, Villa.
I concur with everything that Tom just said.
Adam, where are you at with this?
I'll just summarize this real quick.
I won't go long.
Jerome Powell, thank you for playing.
You've been here for eight years, I believe.
Appointed by Trump, renominated by Biden.
I believe the last day of his term is going to be February 4th.
My birthday.
Shout out for you.
Here's two things I guarantee you happened.
He met with Scott Besant, who's the Treasury Secretary.
He said, Are you guys aligned?
We're going to do this.
Last but not least, I'm Donald Trump.
I'm the president.
I'm going to nominate you.
We're going to be cutting interest rates real quick.
Aren't we, sir?
Yes, sir.
Okay, boom.
You have the job.
Boom.
Done.
That's what's going to happen.
That didn't work last time.
So did Jerome Powell end up listening to him?
Jerome Powell did what Jerome Powell's going to do.
This is not a job where they listen to him.
This isn't a.
The difference is Trump didn't know.
So his words exactly, didn't know what the hell he was doing last time.
Admitted by Eric Trump and by Don Jr., Trump knows exactly what he's doing at this point.
And I think Scott Bessett knows exactly what he's doing.
And you don't think they had a conversation?
They said, here's what our agenda is.
We're going to need you back.
I agree that Scott is involved in this decision.
I agree that Scott, to me, is the top two.
I put him on top.
He's top two for me.
MVP.
Bessant.
Oh, to me.
He's been great.
Oh, I put Rubio one.
I put Besson two.
I love it.
I'm with you right there, Bob.
No, I would put those two there.
Of course, it's going to be different for Chris for you.
But what do you think about this?
What do you think about this choice?
President gets what he wants, and he's just more obvious about making it that way.
That I want the guy to agree with me.
You know, usually presidents don't say it that way.
Why?
They want the patina of objectivity, that this person's going to go in there and do what's good based on the data and the commission, not just my politics.
This president is different.
He wants a yes man, and he's got one.
Well, can I ask you a question?
Let's say you're the CEO founder of Value Taint, Bette David Consulting, Line Holdings.
You created this thing, right?
You've put C-suite executives in place.
If you're going to hire essentially your CFO, you're going to say, this is what we stand for.
This is what we do.
These are the principles that we need you aligned.
Are you going to go ahead and do the exact opposite of what I want you to do?
Like, what would you solve for if you were hiring this person?
That's not how this position works.
That's not how this works.
But I want to know at Valutainment, how it works.
But that's not how this position works, right?
Like, who gave Amy Coney Barrett the position?
Trump.
Is she a pro-Trumper?
No.
She's a conservative.
No, she's not a pro-Trumper.
And by the way, let me tell you, out of all the things I talk about with Rand Paul, and we talk about a lot of different things, non-interventionists, Rubio, all this stuff.
The one thing that stuck out with Rand Paul, which by the way, is going to be launching.
I don't know when we're going to launch it.
Phenomenal conversation is why does the president keep talking about Supreme Court not supporting the tariffs?
I said, what do you think is going to happen with the tariffs?
He says, I actually think they're going to rule against him.
And I think he's going to lose the ability to use tariffs without going through Congress, then through Senate.
So I think if Supreme Court does the right thing, all the stuff that he's been doing with tariffs is going to be gone.
Crazy.
That's Rand Paul saying this.
Rand Paul saying this.
What's the point and why?
Who do you think on there is not going to be on his side?
If you were willing to bet which one of the Supreme Court justices is going to be against Trump, that's a conservative, who is that?
Her.
Her.
Of course.
Of course she's going to be on that list.
So to me, I don't think this is a job.
Like, you know how we would defend Jerome Powell, even though Jerome Powell was appointed by him.
We're like, I actually don't mind what he's doing.
Like, you know, pump the brakes before.
Lord, Lord, Lord, Lord.
Pump.
Pump the brakes.
And by the way, this is the first time in the economy where you're actually able to see the knob.
Like gold 1255 finally makes sense why 1255.
Dollar devalue a little bit.
Bitcoin's not moving.
You're finally able to be a little bit more using predictive analytics because the part of that I give credit to Jerome Powell.
I give credit to Jerome for not all of a sudden saying, let me listen to this.
And I think this guy's going to do the same.
I think six, 12 months later, he's going to do the same.
You don't think he's going to be aligned with Trump?
No, I don't think after 12 months, he's not going to be.
You don't think they have to do that?
I don't think these jobs you hire works that way.
Well, this one don't.
He's right, right?
Because the guy's in there for a long time.
Yeah, I don't think these jobs work that way.
I don't.
Yeah, I don't think these jobs, I think this to me is the same kind of a hire as Supreme Court.
You don't get to hire a Supreme Court and tell them you better do this.
It's not how the system works.
That's why it works, by the way.
That's why it works.
So, yes, great.
I think for me, this announcement being made was a little bit of a bigger announcement.
Inauguration Anxiety00:03:05
I think there's a lot of noise.
Yesterday, I was with the first lady and all the folks watching Melania, what do you call it?
The new show with Amazon.
And by the way, everyone's seen the numbers.
Everyone knows the reports, how it did opening weekend, the $1.75.
I've watched everything, all the negative.
Only one seat was sold in London.
You know, theaters, I've read it all.
So before I even give you my thoughts on this, I want you to know, as somebody that follows stories, I know what's going on as well.
But let me tell you what happened with the documentary.
The first hour of the documentary is somewhat slow.
If you're a woman and you love the, like I think, you know, somebody who was into fashion design details, I think you're going to like it.
Am I going to have my wife and my daughter watch it?
100%.
But the second hour, I'm going to have my son watch it.
And for a completely different reason.
Because in the second hour, what the documentary actually did, it highlighted what that two-week process was when they won, preparing for inauguration January 20th.
Couple live, unscripted moments with the president that I don't even know if the president, of course he approved it, but I don't even know if we were things that you would want to have it be in there, right?
I don't know if you would want it to.
Is this 2016 or 2024?
2024.
Okay.
2024.
But there's a couple moments like there was one moment where they're sitting there and you can tell he's furious.
And it's a scene with them saying, well, why does the inauguration fall on the same day as the national championship?
This has never happened before.
So they did it on purpose.
And he says, sir, I don't know.
There's nothing I know about this.
There's certain moments you have to watch while decisions are being made and him getting in the anxiety.
Like he couldn't wait to go in to do the job.
Like you're sitting there.
They show at the end of the inauguration when he comes home.
They're going to the room.
It's 3 o'clock.
He goes to his room.
She goes to her room.
I think if anybody's not watching, I do think, again, let me preface what I just said.
Fellas, the first hour, you're probably going to be playing Suduco or you're going to play Batgammon or you're going to be doing something else on your phone, checking Twitter and all this stuff.
The second half, I think folks who are interested in politics and want to see a little bit of the behind the scenes with the president, I think you're going to see that here with it.
But yeah, yesterday when we were there talking to a lot of these folks about different conversations, I think this is an announcement that was made because if there's one thing that the president's very good at, is knowing when to drop a story to take attention away from another story.
To the float.
There's been a lot of Christy known.
There's been a lot of, and we were with Chris, we were supposed to do an hour podcast with Christy yesterday.
The White House shut it down that they're not doing any interviews right now.
But there's a lot of moving parts right now, what's going on over there.
Rand Paul's Qatar Property?00:14:50
But so I think he did this.
Good timing.
Get the market to talk about it, to get away from the topic of discussion.
But I do not think you hire somebody as a Fed share and you're going to tell the guy what to do.
I think you have a conversation.
You and your team believe this is the guy and you give him the job knowing you can't fire him.
It's like he's got the job and he's going to do the job.
Let's go to the last story before we wrap up.
Vinny, what was the story you wanted to get to?
Hillary Clinton and Tucker Carlson walk into the Saudi Arabia real estate forum.
And let me say that one more time.
When I read this at first, I reacted thinking that was fake.
Hillary Clinton and Tucker Carlson walk into a Saudi real estate forum.
Let me read this.
And by the way, the title there makes it seem like it's only the two of them that were there.
There were other people there as well.
It was rather hard to parse why Hillary Clinton, the former Democratic presidential candidate, and Tucker Carlson, the contrary.
And by the way, this is New York Times writing.
The contrarian right-wing commentator had been invited to speak at a real estate conference in Saudi.
Neither had much to say about real estate.
Yet on Wednesday, they took the stage separately at a hotel ballroom in Riyadh, the capital of the conservative Islamic Kingdom.
And here's what Tucker had to say.
Go ahead.
And of course, this year, just a year later, it's like, yeah, of course, everyone's in Saudi.
And I'm glad to see that because it's reality-based.
I'm not here to promote the Saudi government, of course.
I'm American.
But I think that Saudi Arabia is a fundamentally real country.
It's an ancient country.
It's the physical center of one of the largest religions in the world.
And it is, of course, a force because of its resources and its diplomacy.
So like, I'm glad to see a real country get treated like a real country, like an actual country, not just a client of some other country.
So it's good.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if people had some ideas about those things you've spoken about, the graciousness, the hospitality, the kindness, before they commented on it from afar?
Because I think it's an experience which once you've had changes your perception.
I strongly agree with that.
And I've taken a lot of abuse in my country for saying things like that out loud.
I'm, for whatever it's worth, a pretty fervent Christian.
And I feel completely comfortable here in the seat of Islam.
And why is that?
And just saying that is a threat somehow to some people who are propagandists and liars.
But it's true, so I'm going to say it.
And moreover, I think it points up like something that's really important about life, which is it's worth meeting people and seeing things before you try to assess them.
Oh, that's a great life lesson.
I wish I wasn't.
I try not to talk about anything I haven't smelled.
And I mean that, including people.
Like, how do you really know?
What you're doing is you are taking other people's word for something, which, if it's, say, your wife or your children or someone you love is okay.
But if it's like a propagandist you've never met who's trying to convince you to do something against your own interests, maybe.
Hold on.
I'm a little smelling Tom because that's what I do.
Easy, Joe Biden.
Now you can talk about it.
Tom, great body soap.
I love it.
But I want to, what he just said, I hope everybody understands.
He said, and I quote, I'm, for whatever it's worth, a pretty fervent Christian, and I feel completely comfortable here in the seat of Islam in Saudi Arabia.
By the way, Saudi Arabia bans Christianity from public life.
Churches are illegal.
Don't know if you guys know that.
Converting to Christianity is punishable by death.
And the country is ranked 13th in Open Doors list of 50 of the most dangerous places in the world for Christians.
Now, okay, if you're Tucker Carlson, you're American standing on stage saying there how comfortable that you feel, I don't think it's courage.
I think it's curation.
Saudi Arabia doesn't invite people like Tucker to challenge them.
I think it's there to polish their image.
You know what I mean?
Like those future and real estate forms, they're not neutral spaces.
They're tied to big money and state power.
That's why Hillary Clinton was invited there.
And it's just ironic.
Tucker, you know, with all the stuff that Tucker's criticized, Israel and how they are and people paying and all that stuff, he's over there doing the same thing.
So if you're going to call it out on one side, you can't pretend that it's, you know, something else when you're in it and you're doing it.
I'm curious to what, because I know he has a property, he said we're in Qatar, if he's going to get a property there where Christianity is outlawed, even though he's a fervent Christian in a land and the seat of Islam.
I'm just very curious.
Cuomo.
That's your boy.
That's your boy.
And I think that he is an interesting study in opportunity and opportunism.
And I think that when somebody is not really tied to any principle or philosophy except advantage, they're capable of anything.
And you go to the place that you know exports the most dangerous form of extreme Islamism, where you know 9-11 would not have happened but for.
And you pretend that it's something else.
Why?
You think that's what's going on with them.
What else could it be?
It cannot be based in anything rational.
It can't.
It is anathema to everything he says he's supposed to be about, depending on the day.
You know, it goes to where we started the podcast today, which is if you're just about tripping the algorithm and getting paid, you're going to have very obvious choice structure.
If he was still working somewhere, you think he's there saying that?
No way.
And is that censorship?
No.
If he's part of the PBD crew, wait, what are you going to say when you go over there?
Hold on.
You're all about free speech.
There's no question about it.
It's one of my favorite things about you guys.
But you'd be like, whoa, this is bad for us.
What do you say?
You know who you're sitting there with, right?
But he doesn't.
And that's part of the plus-minus on independent media now.
That you're independent, right?
But is that always a good thing?
Nope.
He's something though.
You said at the beginning that he could end up being a number one podcast, Pastor Rogan.
100%.
So you think Tucker's going to be the number one podcast, Pastor Rogan?
I don't know if it is him, but he's certainly.
Look, I mean, say what you want about Don Lemon.
He's got more of a following online than he's ever had before.
And that was before this.
Now, forget it.
You know, he may be in your guys' rare air.
I think you're making him a martyr.
But Tucker Carlson, absolutely.
Why?
Because this is what sells.
Because by design, the platform's rewarded.
How much has he changed from the time you went and did the show with him?
You were on his podcast about a year and a half ago, right?
14 months ago.
How much has he changed?
Even that was very capricious.
For him to sit across from me and say, I was an asshole to you when I was at Fox, you know, because you were the guy at CNN and that's what we were told to do.
Right.
You know, I shouldn't have been for the war in Iraq.
You know, I was conditioned by others.
That's not too different for me from, you know, a demon came at me last night.
I got to tell you, it could have gone either way.
But I escaped it.
Thank God.
He is capable of anything.
And I think that that's exciting for people.
And I think it's a little scary for people who worry about what people decide to follow.
Adam.
I think Tucker Carlson is the exact opposite of Chris Cuomo because it's so easy.
No.
Actually not two-faced.
Actually, not two-faced.
Because the challenge with Tucker is he talks tough online.
But then when you're in person of him, he's like, hey, how are you doing, president of Iran?
How are you doing, Putin?
How are you doing, Nick Fuentes?
But when he gets home, oh boy, does he talk tough.
So I think he's compromised.
I've been saying that for a while.
He wants to get there and smell what the rock is cooking.
The more and more he keeps talking, the fishier he smells.
Something's going on here.
Because what I appreciate about you is you call out both sides, but you're pretty firm in your convictions.
At this point, I literally have no clue what Tucker's convictions are.
But he's going to go buy a property in Qatar because why?
He's an American.
Go buy a house in Detroit.
Go buy a house in Louisiana.
Don't go buy a house in Qatar because you're a proud American.
Something's going on here with this guy.
I will let the public figure that out.
Last point.
Good for Saudi opening up to the world.
Saudi 20 years ago was right on par with Iran.
I don't know which way.
They're both.
The Wahhabism, the extremism.
At this point, it's pretty clear who the bad guy is in the Middle East.
And it's Iran.
Saudi is at least trying to open up to the world and respect them.
But to say that as a fervent Christian, as a passionate, like he's a deep Christian, to feel comfortable there in the seat of Islam where you know how they treat Christians.
He's saying that, Chris, because he has security.
They promise him security.
Good luck.
What is it?
Is the message that more Christians?
What would happen if I went to Saudi and I said what I wanted to say about faith in you and what you're doing?
And then you're not in one of these forums where there's security out the wazoo.
What would happen?
Patrick, your wife is going to a funeral and you disappear.
That's it.
You're done.
Bye.
Yeah.
It's not even joke.
By the way, I actually, I don't think he gets to that point in Saudi.
I think it may get into that point in a different place, but I don't think I would be as safe as he is if you go there.
But let me tell you what's going on behind closed doors.
This is what I think is going on.
Okay.
And it's funny because it's the end of the podcast.
So few people are going to see this.
But whatever way we clip this, this is what I think is going to happen in 27, 28.
And you guys better follow this closely.
My opinion.
Ready?
This is my opinion.
I think under Trump administration, there's two camps.
Two camps you're dealing with.
I think there is the non-interventionist camp, and then there's the interventionist camp.
And let me unpack that for you.
I think there's going to be a camp that's going to be the Massey camp, which the Massey camp is going to be the Tucker, Candace, all that.
All those guys, they're going to be a Massey camp.
I don't know about Nick because he changes a lot, so I don't know what that's going to be, but say it's going to be the massey camp with that community, and there's a lot of people there.
I think there's going to be the JD camp, okay?
And the JD camp is going to be the teal, the Musks, the technology, the open AI, the Altmans.
I think that's going to be that camp.
And I think there's going to be a Rubio camp.
And I think the Rubio camp are the guys that are watching to see a guy like if you go in DC, Rubio has more respect and what do you call it?
Pull.
It's the word I'm looking for.
Influence.
Influence.
I think he's got way more influence.
A lot more what?
A lot more gravitational.
He does.
He does over there.
But here's the problem.
This is part of a conversation that we were having yesterday as well with a few different people that were there.
Is the feeling I'm getting is Vance may be weaker in the general, but he'll be stronger in the primary.
And Rubio will be stronger in the general, but he won't make it past the primary because Vance has TPUSA, Vance has the youth, Vance has all these guys.
And when it comes down to it, the massey community has to go somewhere.
Where they're going to go, who knows?
They're going to talk, And then eventually, when it comes down to Newsom versus somebody else, you're either going to sit it out or you're going to support somebody.
So I think whatever Tucker is doing, it's all leading to 27, 28.
I think 2020 is the most important presidential election we've had in 12 years from 28, going back to 27.
This is wide open.
Because Stephen Colbert yesterday said he may run for office.
It's going to be wide open with the people that are going to get into it.
Should not be Newsom, by the way.
The way the Democratic Party is trending, subject to what leadership it has, because it will not have the leadership it has today in the presidential cycle, my prediction.
They're looking for their own disruptor.
I don't know how Newsom checks that box.
I mean, he could be as obnoxious as he wants on social media.
He's an animal.
He's got him at 75%.
He's up there, Chris.
Calci's got him at 75%.
AOC second.
And then Pritzker's at like 2%.
Stephen A's at 2%.
Stewart's at 2%.
A bunch of these guys are going to be able to get to the 20%.
I think it's someone that's not in that mix.
You might be right.
But I also think whoever hates Trump the most is going to get the nominee.
But they're positioning New York.
Depending on what happens in 27%.
Remember, those are the macros.
And once upon a time, a certain Bush did really good in the macros.
$140 million.
And then that's right.
Then he went to Iowa.
Oh, wow.
Why can't he pull?
Then he went to New Hampshire.
Then they went to South Carolina.
And then all of a sudden, Super Toostie came up and they're talking about the viability of his campaign.
When the macros when the macros at the beginning were, oh, this is one big difference.
One big difference.
Jeb Bush is not a stage guy.
George Bush is a state guy.
Newsom is a stage guy.
If there's one of the best interviews that was done on Trump is the one that people talk about the least, is the one Lex Friedman did.
President said something on Lex Friedman that was so powerful.
I think it was Lex Friedman.
If I got it wrong, I want to give credit to whoever did it, but I want to give credit to Lex because he did a very good job.
He says, Lex, I got a lot of friends that are billionaires.
But you think it's just a billionaire that becomes a president?
You have to learn how to speak from stage.
If you don't know how to speak from stage, you are not going to become president.
Mike Bloomberg.
Yeah.
So Mike Bloomberg is the other one.
Yes.
All right.
Anyways, by the way, one of my favorite podcasts we've done, we had so many different stories.
It was great.
And it was banter.
There was exchange.
There was disagreement, which is always good to do.
Chris, thank you for this cigar.
Always good seeing you.
Excited to see what your son ends up doing because I think my oldest wants to go the same route as your son wants to go to.
And he just told that about six months ago, which was kind of a surprise to all of us.
So we'll see if he's going to change his mind or not.
Gang, everybody out there, God bless.
Have a great weekend.
Oh, this is Rand Paul's.
Rob, how long is the intro?
About 130.
Oh, that's too long, Rob.
So here's all we'll do because I got to go out there.
We got to make that decision on the, you know what I'm talking about, the new podcast set.
Rand Paul is going to come out in the next couple of days.