April 20, 2024 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec
01:02:13
THOUGHTCRIME Ep. 41 — Getting on the Trump Jury? AI Girlfriends? Reform, or Revolution?
In this week’s ThoughtCrime, Charlie Kirk, Jack Posobiec, Andrew Kolvet, and Blake Neff answer many crucial questions, including:-Is it moral to lie in order to get on the Trump jury?-Will AI girlfriends replace real ones?-Can the American regime be reformed, or only destroyed?THOUGHTCRIME streams LIVE exclusively on Rumble, every Thursday night at 8pm ET.Go to https://twc.health/cj and use promo code CJ for 10% off the Medical Emergency KitGo to https://friends.rumble.cloud to sign up today!...
DNSA specifically targets the communications of everyone.
They're collecting your communications.
Hello, everybody.
Happy Thought Crime Thursday.
We have a show that is going to be less people, but hopefully deeper thoughts.
We have Blake Neff, who is appropriately quarantined.
I heard Blake cough once.
I said, you're doing this in another room.
And it's a true story.
And then Jack from an undisclosed bunker on the East Coast.
Jack, how you doing?
Wait, so Blake is there in the studio, but just in another room of the studio?
Is that what you're saying?
I'm literally about 15 feet away from Charlie.
Jack, you can understand this.
Jack, hold on.
Jack, you can understand this.
It's not a matter of us getting sick.
It's us getting our kids sick.
And the derailing effect... Jack, can you defend me on this?
This is true.
No, this is true.
This is true.
If it can be prevented, not having your kids, like, get sick, Just try to take that whenever possible, especially if you have big travel coming up and you know you're not going to be home.
So that is why.
Right, Angelo?
Angelo is enthusiastic, right?
This is a rational thing.
I got this by seeing the eclipse in Austin.
So this could be like the eclipse virus.
Wait, the eclipse made you sick?
It could have like demonic energy within it, you know?
Wait, wait, wait.
I don't understand.
How did the eclipse make you sick?
I got sick while traveling to Texas for the eclipse, so clearly they're related.
Clearly there's eldritch forces in play here.
It could cause untold drama, tragedy, suffering, the destruction of humanity.
Have you been hearing thoughts in the night that tell you to go to the ocean and wait for the hybrid children?
Occasionally, but you're not supposed to know about that.
Oh, fair enough, fair enough, fair enough.
All right.
Well, let's get into our topic here.
I think that it's just, that's the thing about thought crime.
You just take it until it's for this logical conclusion.
And then there's just awkward silence.
And then you pivot.
That's like the equation of thought crime, right?
You just keep going and going and going.
And you're like, okay, we're at the bottom.
We just, we're like, we're like, okay, does, does, did the Midas touchers have their clip out of that segment?
All right, good.
Next segment.
Exactly.
Uh, Blake, I'm going to.
I know your favorite, our favorite fans.
They don't watch live.
Oh, they'll be watching.
They'll be watching.
They have some sort of gremlin that goes through this thing.
Alright, so, Blake, jury selection with the Trump trial.
This also reminded me, Ryan, can we get the Harry Potter girl that was the head of the grand jury in Georgia?
There's a lot of Harry Potter girl energy going on in American juries right now.
Blake, what's going on here?
All right, so Trump is finally on trial, the moment we've been waiting for for a year.
And as we've warned the entire time, it is clear the entire battle plan of the Trump indictments is just get the best jury you possibly can.
So these cases are brought in New York, they're brought in DC, they're brought in Atlanta.
It's always in these urban areas that have 90, that voted 90%, 95% for Joe Biden in 2020.
And that way you can get away with things like bringing criminal charges that are totally unprecedented and have never been used on anyone else in history.
And so we're getting the jury selection here in New York now for Trump's Bush money case.
And we've already had like a third of the jury pool get drummed out because after they get seated, We go and we check their social media and it turns out they're these left-wing zealots.
But they're totally saying, you know, I can be super duper unbiased.
Please put me on the jury.
Like we've got one of these here.
How about let's play.
How about we play.
Man, they've got so many of these.
What would be best here?
Let's go this one.
How about, well, Cut 111 is a two-minute clip of the potential juror dismissed herself for not being partial.
She talks about how she's just became a citizen.
Or we could say Cut 97, woman says Trump didn't look angry, he just looked bored and he wanted all this to go down.
Want to do that one?
Let's do Cut 97.
That is unbelievable.
I know.
What was your impression of Donald Trump when you saw him?
Um, you know, he looked less orange, uh, definitely like more yellow, yellow.
Um, nothing else than that.
He looks, uh, he doesn't look angry or I think he looks bored.
Like he wants this to finish and go do his stuff.
That's how I, yeah.
This is another wild thing here.
This person got dismissed for, you know, possible bias and other conflicts.
But she's also just speaks English as a second language.
And imagine like highly technical legal language in the court, how confusing that might be.
It reminds me there was a juror like that in the George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin case a decade ago, where after the verdict, there's a profile and it emphasizes how she couldn't really tell what was going on.
And she felt like she was on trial the whole time.
You get this bizarre stuff.
Let's play another one here.
We have- Wait, wait.
Can I throw in actually my, because this juror specifically, and Charlie maybe, because you're a good, you got a good read on people.
So my read on this was that she probably was kind of like, she didn't code to me like an anti-Trumper.
She didn't code to me like some kind of dyed-in-the-wool leftist.
She wasn't like this, you know, everybody's dunking on the new NPR CEO right now.
But she didn't even but she's just like a kind of like a normal.
We'll talk about that later.
But she's sort of like a normie farmer's market liberal.
But this this girl, like she kind of seemed like she was almost favorable to Trump or would have at least been impartial.
And yet she removed herself from the jury.
And as Blake will say, there are other people who lied and are extremely biased against Trump that got seated on the jury, two of which or at least one of which was removed earlier today.
Yeah.
And I just want to say maybe these people just say they're biased because they don't want to do this.
It's just like a lot of time and they want to go home and like, actually, I'm biased.
It's a way I can get off the jury.
So let's play cut one twelve next.
Let's play cut one twelve. .
That this has to do with something that very well could have been.
The fact that this juror may have been arrested back in the 1990s conducting some type of political vandalism against something, posters on the right, and it was not revealed or he did not remember it and did not include it, and that is why that juror has been dismissed.
Didn't remember it.
Yeah, I hate when that happens, you know, when you forget all your arrest records.
Oh, that's right, in addition to the arson and the burglary.
I also got arrested for taking- Yeah, we call that the Antifa juror.
That's basically the Antifa juror.
He lied his way on there.
He was tearing down stuff.
He got arrested for something that passed.
And they ask you that on the questionnaire.
And so, Blake, as you mentioned earlier, but for people who aren't familiar with the process, jury selection, it's called voir dire.
There are rigorous written questionnaires that every potential juror must fill out before they go in there where they go through line by line.
And they, of course, they ask you your personal information, your demographic information, et cetera.
But then they start asking about, do you have any cases that are similar to this?
Do you have any, were you ever, you know, were you ever involved in any legal matters?
You ever serve on a jury before?
And then they ask you, like, if you were arrested, what was that?
In fact, one of the things that was coming up, I think, in a lot of the questionnaires and in a lot of the questioning, and Charlie, I'm sure you appreciate this, is that a lot of the people were saying that, I think like 50% of the people were saying that they had either been mugged or knew someone who had been.
On the jury?
That were in the jury pool.
Not just on the jury, but in the entire pool.
The entire population of New York has been, has been mugged at this point.
Let's go to, uh, this other one.
I want to play this one.
I'm trying to find which one this is.
Where the one that has now gone viral, uh, significantly where she, she's the Harry Potter girl.
Do we have the Harry Potter?
Not the one from Georgia, the one where she, where she was just kind of, uh, she dismissed herself.
Let's see.
Or there she got dismissed for bias.
And she said, I I'm like a COVID anxious and I'm immune compromised.
And my half sister is Chinese and I'm afraid she was going to get deported.
And it made me anxious.
And it made me mad this right here.
Can you share your opinion of the former president and why you felt that you could be unbiased?
that single cat women are they have bad politics.
People say, how dare you say that this woman is a perfect example of single cat woman politics.
Perfect.
Play cut 115.
Can you share your opinion of the former president and why you felt that you could be unbiased?
I'm not a fan.
I, during COVID-19, I lived with someone who was immunocompromised and I think his handling of COVID-19 was abysmal.
I also have a sister who's adopted from China and the comments he made about China when he was running for president made her very anxious and therefore made me angry.
There are policies he has supported that regard women and reproductive health that I do not agree with.
Oh, she keeps on going from there.
Seems unbiased, Blake.
Just perfect.
By the way, she has an audition reel.
I gotta find it.
Somebody emailed it to it.
Freedom at CharlieKirk.com.
Blake, your reaction?
I mean, so the big picture thing here is we have some of these people getting drummed off the jury.
Some of them are getting onto the jury and then getting booted off because their bias is discovered.
But if that's happening, it's a pretty safe bet that there's at least one person out there who just is fanatically anti-Trump and just thinks, I want to get on the jury so I can make the evil man go away and go to prison.
Like, the amount of Trump hate we've had for a decade You have to entertain the possibility, the probability, that someone could consider it a moral commandment to take this person down.
They would think it is of historical importance to be the person who puts Donald Trump in prison.
And so the moral question is, given that's the case, Is it morally acceptable if you're a pro-Trump person in New York and you're in the pool to basically bib your way onto the jury?
Do you think that there's going to be a MAGA person that has found himself onto the jury?
I don't know that it's likely.
It's Manhattan, so you can look at the stats.
I think it did vote about 90% Biden in In 2020, and a lot of the people who would have voted otherwise, they might be Orthodox Jews.
I've heard there's some issues with them being on the jury because they can't stick around on Friday afternoons because they have to prep for Shabbat.
And then after that, you're just looking at the odds.
But there's probably, you know, there's a few pro-Trump people in New York.
But I kind of find myself thinking if you do get in this jury pool, even if you're pro-Trump, I feel like you almost have an obligation to hide that.
Both because this actually is a profoundly immoral prosecution of Trump.
It is unprecedented.
It is actually, it is the sort of thing that should be thrown out in court without getting into all the details.
It's really bad.
And so I think you kind of have a moral obligation to come in and help at least hang the jury in this trial.
I couldn't agree more.
Do you remember, Blake?
In one of the federal, the whole We Build the Wall thing, I know they're still going after Bannon for that at the state level, but at the federal level, obviously you know best.
Steve Bannon got a pardon for that from Trump.
One of the other guys took a plea deal, but then there was one guy who actually went to trial over it, and there was actually a juror I think they took him to a second trial, but there was actually a juror who hung the trial the first time.
They actually found someone in New York.
He was like a working class guy.
You know, there wasn't a lot of information that was released on them.
But what came out afterwards was that the other 11 members of the jury were furious.
This guy refused to vote guilty along with the rest of them.
And they said in his response, the man said they were all a bunch of liberals and then espoused anti-government statements.
And so the only reason everyone was doing this was because they're all a bunch of liberals.
So it actually happened once.
Now, not a great legal strategy to go to court and, you know, wish that you can find a juror like that.
But yes, it has.
This is like the only time that has happened in And if you include New York and D.C.
and all the J6ers in all of those cases that have gone to trial, it's happened exactly one time thus far.
And remember, you have to have unanimous support.
So one juror could derail this whole thing in a hung jury.
Okay, this is the juror who, this is her actress film reel.
Play cut 133.
Oh, well, no, we didn't have a picture of it.
Oh, she's literally an actress.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, I thought this was the Harry Potter actress.
You mean this is the juror?
No, no, this is the Harry, no, we're all over the place.
This is the girl that did the interview out on the street where she took all these, I'm not a fan, and has the half-adopted sister, and she has like literally a whole- She's actually an actress.
She's actually an actress.
She has a whole portfolio of Um, audition tapes that are there on that, uh, that link that I found.
So no wonder she's doing all the interviews because she does all the, she does all these pregnant pauses and she's just does these pregnant pauses.
Uh, I'm not a fan and like, okay, you're, you're, you're so, you're so stoic and so talented.
Let's go to another piece of tape here.
Let's go to, um, let's go to this one here.
Woman says she just became a citizen and she was in shock when she saw Trump sitting there.
Play cut one 13.
Have you ever served as a juror before?
No, that's my first time because I just became a citizen in August.
Yeah.
And that was my first call.
So you just became a citizen of the United States, so that means you've never voted in a presidential election.
Exactly.
You get called to be a juror, and this is the jury that you are called to.
Yes.
What happened?
Why were you dismissed?
Because I couldn't be impartial.
You couldn't be impartial.
So when the judge asked that hand, can you be impartial, you raised your hand and you said you cannot.
Exactly.
Wow.
When did you first come?
On Tuesday.
On Tuesday.
And at that point, when did you realize that this was a trial involving the ex-president of the United States, Donald Trump?
So we were here on Tuesday from 9 a.m.
but we realized that it's about this case on 4 p.m.
We went into the courtroom and we saw Donald Trump.
You went into the courtroom at 4 p.m.
on Tuesday and you see Donald Trump?
Yeah, we didn't know before that.
What was your first thought?
I was shocked.
I was sitting on the second row, like six feet away.
And when I realized that Trump is there, I was like, oh wow.
I couldn't believe it.
What about the people around you?
Everybody was shocked.
Everybody was frozen.
He does have that effect on people.
Especially women.
I'm telling you, I think she was a MAGA type.
Okay, so you see what I'm saying.
But the thing about it though, she's a new citizen.
She follows all the rules.
She's probably one of the few jurors that heard the unbiased thing and was like, I actually like him.
I take this very seriously.
And you know what else?
If she just got her citizenship, typically when you go through your citizenship process, you are on a green card for a while.
And so while you're on that green card, it's like,
It's it's very incumbent on you to follow all the rules and like you can't get you know, don't get traffic tickets don't You know, don't break don't even break a little law because anything can be used against you to get your citizenship So if you're going through the process like she's saying and and and rightfully so saying that it's a huge achievement I'm married to a naturalized immigrant as everyone knows that it's it's something where you know, anything could be used against you so that's like
You know, she's following all the rules and then she gets in there and says, oh, well, I'm biased and I'm biased against it because she's, it seems to me like she's obviously somebody who likes Trump.
But then the problem is, you know, where this plays against us is that if, and this is what Blake is saying here, that if one side is willing to lie and have like Antifa guys and leftists, or if you remember the Derek Chauvin trial had a guy who was a BLM activist who ran a BLM podcast Who attended George Floyd rallies and hung out with George Floyd's uncle and then lied about it throughout the entire trial.
And then admitted to it afterwards.
Yep.
And our side is going to say, oh, we're going to take the moral high road.
We're going to be the principled ones and I'm not going to serve on that jury.
And I'm like, well, then you're just going to lose.
And I totally agree with Blake.
And we need jury nullification in this case.
You need jury nullification, and if you have the ability to serve on Trump's jury, and you're a conservative, or one of the next juries that comes up, get on there, and I'm gonna say this right now as loud as possible, get on there and sabotage the trial.
Get on there and derail the trial completely.
There is nothing immoral about sabotaging a communist show trial.
It is the most moral thing you can do.
Jury nullification.
Let's go to, uh, do we have the tape, Ryan?
Or are we still downloading it?
We're still downloading it?
It's almost in.
Alright, you gotta watch this.
It's really good.
Let's then go to, uh, let's, as we buy some time for that, let's go to... I think we just got it.
Okay, we have it.
Alright, so this is a perfect example, everybody.
This is the type of Individual that New York is known for.
Which is wannabe celebrity, wannabe actress.
You'd think that LA is the home of that.
No, no, no.
This is Karen McGee.
Trump, not a Trump fan.
Play cut 134.
Maya, I know mom can be- Oh my god!
What?
I didn't even say anything!
Oh my god, Maya, it's not all about you.
Did you ever think of that?
What the heck's that supposed to mean?
I am literally bleeding out and you're still gonna storm off into the woods for dramatic effect.
You're not bleeding out.
Your hand is cut.
You're not gonna die.
Bleeding out implies you have a much more severe wound and need to go to the hospital because you've been stabbed or shot or something.
I did get stabbed.
By that rock.
I need your forensic expertise.
Shut up.
This is exactly what I expected.
Is this a drama?
I don't want to.
Look, we can just go upstairs and watch a movie or something.
As if.
You guys are sure this is a regular movie?
Maybe they'll be so mad at you they won't mind.
This isn't like they go upstairs and something else.
Look, everyone's gonna come over for presents and she'll act like it never happened.
I just had to play that.
That is the woman who gave a whole press gaggle and she didn't disclose that, oh by the way, I'm an actress.
You know, that was like a regular Christmas movie.
That wasn't like they go upstairs and something bad happens.
You know, this might offend people because we do have some actors who are on our side, but we might benefit as a society if we revived the old Roman norm of considering actors sort of Morally on par with like prostitutes and maybe not allowing them on juries because they're people of ill repute.
I'm with you, but only if we only if we add journalists to that.
That's a good idea.
I could get on board with that.
All right.
We should put journalists on the bottom, like maybe put them on par with certain species of wild animal.
Yeah, like a like a very, very highly developed, like primitive creature.
I'm not sure if I can follow you on highly developed.
Maybe middling development?
Maybe they're like an intermediary species between man and ape?
Yes.
Like a, like a, like a, like a wildebeest of some sort.
Yeah, I could go.
All right.
All right.
So we'll do that.
And then as long as they're not allowed on juries and they're not allowed to have odds better.
Yeah, that's true.
That's true.
So they're not on juries and they don't have like other civic rights.
I think that's, I think that's a good balance to strike.
Well, there's also there's also lawyers on the jury, right?
And so from a serious perspective, right?
It's there's a huge issue with having a lawyer on a jury because a lawyer, like you were saying before, you know, a lot of people who come on might not have knowledge of the legal process.
The lawyer is going to get on there and is sudden like you've run the risk of having that lawyer be like a rogue juror almost.
And a rogue juror is someone who comes on with a bias.
And now the lawyer is basically just leading the room and telling everybody, like, this is a great movie about this called 12 Angry Men, by the way, Henry Fonda, the wife, the father of the traitor, and, or maybe the grandfather, actually, and the, no, father.
And, you know, you get to the problem of having a lawyer basically in that room, just telling people to do the opposite of what all the other lawyers said, because they have that direct, the direct access.
Let's talk about the Rumble cloud.
Are you tired of getting a surprise when you see your cloud services bill every month?
Well, our friends at Rumble have done it again.
The new Rumble cloud services are coming this spring.
Rumble has built the cloud for the parallel economy.
The disruptive Rumble cloud pricing model will blow away the big tech clouds with big savings and more predictable budgeting.
And like Rumble Video, you don't have to worry about cancellation or Rumble Cloud.
Remember what happened to Parler?
Exclusively for Friends of Rumble, sign up today at friends.rumble.cloud and receive 30% off the first three months of your cloud compute subscription, which will be available for purchase later this quarter.
Rumble Cloud Services are the essential cloud services you need for any size business to innovate and to grow.
Head on over to friends.rumble.cloud and sign up today. That is friends.rumble.cloud. Blake, take it away. All right.
Our next topic, I believe, is reform or revolution.
And so the story here is... Actually, it'll set up perfectly by a comment that we actually just had in the Rumble Chat, so shout out to the Rumble Chatters.
Mobile Mark says, I believe Americans and legal U.S.
citizens are all screwed, and I believe it's just an illusion that we can fix this mess.
And that actually goes perfectly into our next topic.
So a lot of people who are watching are probably familiar with Chris Rufo.
He's the guy who popularized critical race theory.
He's been a big figure on Twitter.
He's really driven a lot of legislative activity attacking DEI and CRT.
Real quick, he popularized criticism of critical race theory.
Yeah, I should say that.
Criticism and awareness of the concept.
And then a lot of people are probably also, probably fewer people, but a lot of people are familiar with Curtis Yarvin.
Curtis Yarvin is a veteran of Silicon Valley.
He's also been a longtime blogger.
He's been on Charlie's Show.
He's famous for writing very, very, very, very long blog posts that reference very old and very obscure books.
But he's a fun guy.
Are we the elves or the dark elves?
I can never remember.
Or the hobbits.
We might be hobbits.
Uh, so, Curtis Yarvin and Chris Ruffo have had, uh, they don't like each other very much, actually.
They're having a bit of an argument.
They had a, uh, a debate back and forth in, uh, IM 1776, but without getting into all the details on it, the key idea is there's a debate between them, which is, Can the system be reformed gradually, marginally, through normal political action, or is the only hope for stopping the left, liberalism, writ large, is the only way to stop it, basically.
One big revolution where you decapitate the whole thing.
Understandably, his argument is, yes, reform can work.
He's the guy who's lobbying state legislators to change things.
He's lobbying governors to shut down DEI departments in universities.
He's the one saying, oh, you know, we can win the presidency back and then we'll be able to take out various things in the government that are bad.
And Curtis Yarvin basically says, "That's all pointless, it's not going to work.
"Basically, you just need a giant apocalyptic revolution "to bring back." He's a fan of monarchy, famously, but even if you don't have a literal king, he would essentially say what you need is a president who acts like a king.
Who, like Trump gets inaugurated and he just says, "I'm going to be ruling by decree.
I'm going to abolish the State Department, abolish the Department of Education.
I'm going to abolish the Fed.
I'm going to do all these things.
And then maybe if you do all of that, you'll be able to stop the left.
But anything that's arguing like, oh, we need to win this election, that, you know, voting for your city council or for your school board or for your state legislator to stop the libs, he would say that's all pointless.
And that seems to be a popular take, at least with a lot of conservatives who follow our shows, who send us emails.
And so that was that was the big debate that went very viral online and on Twitter in the past few days.
Yeah, and I would go even deeper.
First of all, it was a written debate.
It was not an oral debate.
So I actually think that was helpful because it restrained kind of the... it gave no sort of preference to whoever's better at rhetoric or who has more charisma.
It read, though, kind of like a slam poetry contest, where they were just trying to, like, outdo one another.
And I'll be honest, you kind of go, you read this thing back and forth, and you think, like, wow, Curtis Yarvin's winning.
And then you say, wow, Christopher Ruffo is winning.
Like, that's a really good point.
And wow, I think Curtis has him here.
Like, wow, Christopher Ruffo has him here.
And I will say, though, Blake and or Jack, you guys can take it.
The buried lead of the whole thing is how they view the American Revolution, where Curtis Yarvin seems to be a critic of the American Revolution, and Rufo is obviously supportive of it, and Yarvin is not overly appreciative of the established constitutional order.
Did you get that too, Blake?
Yeah, they go into that, which this is a very Yarvin thing to do.
Yarvin loves to reference old books of all sorts, old primary sources.
So he kind of is doing this as a flex on Rufo because it's this stuff almost nobody has read.
He says, you know, he says like, here's your first tool.
Here's a debate between Samuel Adams and John Adams.
It's in English.
It'll take you a half hour to read.
Don't you think it's worth it?
Since you're putting all your chips and everyone else's on reanimating Sam Adams, don't you think it's worth actually getting to know him directly?
And then this is what Yarvin says, my view is, John, who is on the right side of this argument about the theory of government, totally destroys Sam Adams, who is on the left.
And then he says, if you go back, it's always like this.
He cites debates between John Adams and someone who's a loyalist in the American Revolution.
And he says, the loyalists are right.
And he's citing people who were loyalists before the revolution breaks out.
And he's citing criticisms of the Declaration of Independence.
And he basically says, the American Revolution was all bad.
It was a mistake.
It's what unleashed liberalism into the world.
And I think this is A good example of where the downsides can come in, where even if you were to say, if I traveled back to 1775, I would actually be a loyalist instead of a patriot, instead of favoring independence.
I feel like it's frankly a little bit deranged to act like America's independence was some vast tragedy for the world.
I just, even if it was through luck, I think it's clear that America worked out and had a positive impact on the world.
And I think that's, that's kind of the downside of these like big revolutionary people.
If your view of politics is that like everything's hopeless and you need a once in every 400 year cataclysm to ever do anything good or worthwhile, I think you're kind of, you're missing the trees for the forest, so to speak.
Like you can do a lot of good in someone's individual life.
And, and just to, on that point right there, it wasn't just the American revolution didn't overthrow the king of England and and established liberalism, because the King of England never ruled from America.
And I get what you're saying.
It's very interesting.
But there's another revolution that was right around the same time that you and I obviously did a show about a couple of months ago and we're doing the book on it called the French Revolution, which I think is probably much closer to if you wanted to talk about a proximate cause for the release of liberalism into the world, I would say the French Revolution far more than the American Revolution in that context.
Yeah, and understand, remember, Burke, who was the ultimate conservative, he didn't support the American Revolution, but he understood it.
And he actually said, I get it.
He was very compassionate towards the American revolutionary cause.
The French Revolution, he was a major critic of.
That's his most famous book, his reflections on the French Revolution.
And so, but I will, I was very sympathetic to Rufo, I thought there was a very powerful line here, I'm trying to find the link, if you guys can reset it, resend it, is that Rufo, he defended the Founders beautifully, he said that it was the best yet accomplishment of mixing classical ideas, antiquity, the fruits of the Enlightenment, and creating a political project that has been the most stable, free regime in history.
The other reason I'd be sympathetic to Rufo, because...
I think there's a great line that sort of lays out the despair that goes into Yarvin's position.
I'm just going to quote it here.
He says, I believe you're doing something useful.
He's referring to Rufo here.
But it is not useful in the way that you think or seem to think it is.
It is not useful because it is disproportionate to the problem.
It is useless to pass a law that bans discriminating against white people, for instance.
We already have such a law.
And it's not followed, of course.
And he says, in a nation with maybe a million diversity professionals, it is useless to get 11 staffers laid off from the University of Florida.
And it is useless to convert a low-grade hippie college into a lower-grade baseball college.
He's referring to the new College of Florida, where Rufo and DeSantis have sort of remade the whole school.
And so that's what he says.
He's always like, oh, you're going to get one professor fired here.
They'll get rehired somewhere else.
You did no serious damage to the system.
And I run into that a lot, and I think it's sort of a, it's a deliberate decision to be defeatist about things, because I think if you decide to look around and want to find progress, you can as a conservative.
The example I like to point to is gun rights.
Gun rights used to be really terrible in America.
They're now pretty good.
People are substantively more free in America on that point now than they were 30 years ago.
Or you could say, uh, education.
Like you have a bunch of states are adopting universal school vouchers.
You can take $6,000, $7,000 every year from the government that would be used to educate your kid in a public school to get propagandized.
And you can say, nope, I'm leaving and I'm going to homeschool with this money or go to a private school.
People are substantively more free of all the crap leftists are pushing.
And if you just choose to ignore that and say, oh, well, I care more about this thing now.
Everything's terrible.
I think you're just deciding to interpret all of history as nothing but defeats and failures and suffering.
And then, you know, you've decided that life is going to be a nothing but failure in advance.
So, of course, you're going to think it stinks.
And I will just say, I side with, I thought Yarvin's strongest point when we interviewed him and in the essay, and of course, Yarvin is just a ridiculously smart and talented writer.
So, he's just fun to read and I enjoyed this thoroughly.
Oh yeah, it's hilarious to read.
It's great when he just, he does, it gets very combative between them.
It's very funny.
I think the best part, he says, you know, Even America's two favorite statesmen, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, talk 40 years later and Jefferson says, Who can ever tell the story of the American Revolution?
And Adam says, nobody.
Why?
Because everything public was propaganda.
Then as now.
What did you think?
Did you think that Goebbels invented propaganda for Nazi Germany?
Chris, you unbelievably innocent person.
You are shrewd in the 21st century, I grant it.
But once we turn back to the dial to the 18th century, you make Forrest Gump look cynical.
Yeah, he goes off like this.
He's very fun to read.
Again, it's like slam poetry almost, right?
Yeah.
He says, as for your achievements, here's a simple way to evaluate them.
What would you do if you had absolute power?
What percentage of that have you achieved so far?
How many orders of magnitude is it from 100%?
And he's just like saying, you've done nothing.
You have done nothing compared to what you'd do if you were a dictator.
So everything's a failure.
We should have a dictator is essentially what he's arguing for.
Well, here's, here's, here's what you can, and you could, you could take the personalities of it as, as funny as the whole thing's hilarious.
It's, and it's, and kudos to both of them for doing it, by the way, and kudos.
I am 1776 ran the whole thing.
Just fantastic.
Absolutely fantastic.
They did it, but there is a bigger question and, and Charlie, I'd, I'd, I'd, If I can get your thoughts on this, you know, we can, you know, we can go back and forth about the founders and, and all that.
But at the end of the day, the question is, you know, if I get the CEO of NPR fired, if I get some journalist scalped, you know, Brian Stalter got let go at CNN, etc, etc.
Great, cool.
But is that actually changing, you know, presenting fundamental change for us in the situation that we are in?
Or do we need something Like a, as Yarvin is saying, you know, maybe not like a king or a dictator, but a strong executive who is committed to the idea of a top-down restructuring.
But this is where I think I would love to have Yarvin come back in studio, Blake, is the founders did not seek to neuter the executive completely.
The founders still gave a lot of power to the executive.
They did not, they had a check and balance on it.
Exactly.
And this was not in the form and the structure of the Constitution, specifically in Article 2, which I believe, let me crack Article 1, yeah, Article 2, the executive has far-reaching powers.
And it would be one thing if they designed a House of Commons model where the prime minister is always basically at risk of recall, vote of no comment.
We don't have a Prime Minister for a reason.
No, we don't have a Prime Minister.
We have an executive.
We have an executive branch.
Yarvin, though, I think the strongest argument that Yarvin makes is that FDR created a new monarchy and ran the country closest to a dictatorship of any president in American history.
And when he died, that power went into a million different places, like shattered glass into the bureaucracy.
Never heard anybody make that argument, and I totally agree with that observation.
You know the word, so you know how we have like the, we have that sort of phrase for people in the administrations, we call them czars.
It would be like, that's the drug czar, that's the border czar, you know?
Well, that phrase only became into use after World War II.
Prior to World War II, if you go back and you read the great Amity Schley's work and some of the other work that's been done about this time period, that the phrase that was used was the word, they called them dictators.
And FDR himself referred to that type of operative in his administration as a dictator.
This is my economic dictator.
This is my economic, or this is my trade dictator.
This is my gold dictator.
Now, for obvious reasons, after World War II, the word dictator kind of falls out of favor.
And that's where the word czar entered the nomenclature.
But FDR himself, by his own regular language, was appointing dictators around the government.
He's also, obviously, as people know, our only person to be elected four times.
That's right, elected four times, only served three terms, and died in the fourth.
Okay, let's go to another partner here, and I encourage everyone to check out, we're gonna have Rufo action on the show tomorrow.
Looking forward to that.
Let's go to The Wellness Company.
When it comes to staying healthy on the go, you can literally never be too prepared.
When you're a frequent traveler, a remote worker, an avid outdoorsman, or literally anyone with a pulse, the Wellness Company's Travel Emergency Kit is here to be your new best friend.
If you don't have a pulse, you've got even bigger problems.
The Wellness Company Travel Emergency Kit contains six prescription medications, over-the-counter meds, a comprehensive guidebook, and crucial medical supplies, all carefully curated so you get to enjoy every moment of your trip.
With a team of renowned medical professionals, including Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Drew Pinsky, standing behind every kit, you know that you're in trusted hands no matter where life takes you.
Don't leave anything to chance.
Head on over to TWC.Health.CJ and order your travel emergency kit today.
That's TWC.Health.CJ.
Use promo code CJ for an exclusive 10% off at checkout.
Your health and your journey matter.
Travel smart.
Travel prepared.
Kits are only available in America.
They have a mix of drugs that can be very helpful to you.
So check it out right now.
The Wellness Company is wonderful.
TWC.health slash CJ.
Blake, where do we go from here?
Well, first off, we've been informed by one of our producers... Blake's not feeling well, so I'm going to give him a Wellness Company kit, just for the record.
One's coming your way, Blake.
I'm sure Evermectin will fix it all.
One of our producers has informed us that Patriot Takes is cutting up last week's episode as we speak.
So I'm sure they'll eventually get to this one, but they're behind.
They should hurry up.
They're lagging behind, and we want all the people doing our free marketing for us to be on the ball.
Oh, that's so weird, yeah.
I'm looking at their timeline now, and it's us a week ago now, and here we are a week late.
Sorry, this is like bugging me out.
Lips are lazy, man.
They don't work very hard.
Anyway, our next topic.
Charlie, you have a different black shirt, and I have a different green sweater.
Exactly.
So our next topic is the most important thing in the world, of course, which is AI girlfriends.
So this tweet got over, or X, I guess, got over 3 million hits and it's only a few days old.
It's some guy named Greg Eisenberg, who I guess is a startup person or whatever.
I've never heard of him.
Anyway, he X'd this.
The market cap for Match Group is $9 billion.
Match Group runs Match.com and a million other dating websites.
And he says, someone will build the AI version of Match Group and make more than a billion dollars.
I met a guy last night in Miami who admitted to me that he spends $10,000 per month on AI girlfriends.
I thought he was kidding, but he's a 24-year-old single guy who loves it.
I asked him what he loved about it.
He said, some people play video games.
I play with AI girlfriends.
I love that I can use voice notes now with my AI girlfriends.
I get to customize my AI girlfriend.
Likes, dislikes.
It's comfort at the end of the day.
There are a few platforms this guy likes, but he prefers apparently something called Candy.ai and Cupid.ai.
It's kind of like dating apps.
You're not on only one.
And he has, he shared photos of his AI girlfriends.
I believe it's our b-roll that we've been showing on screen recently.
And this Greg Eisenberg guy predicts That AI models are starting to look freakishly real to me, maybe to you too.
Things are about to get pretty weird.
So are we approaching the apocalypse?
Will people replace their normal girlfriends with AI girlfriends?
Their normal wives with AI wives?
So walk me through the mechanics of this.
You're saying there's a billion dollar market cap.
Now how does that work?
Is this like a subscription service?
You know you subscribe and it's like X amount a month and there's X amount of perks for getting the service like this one gives you access to certain models maybe the next level up you get to you know design your own models and then the highest level like they're like he's saying they can play video games with you and stuff is that how it works like you're paying monthly?
Yeah I think the idea is you pay to get access to More of the AI because it's, you know, they measure these by tokens.
So you can get, you can put more inputs into it.
It'll respond faster.
You can do more advanced stuff with it.
And what is getting for $10,000 a month?
I shudder to think, but yeah, you can just customize everything you want about it.
And then you'll have a better memory of everything.
So you can save all your different AI girlfriends and I kind of shudder to think what he's paying for with that amount of money per month.
To say the least, it will probably be rather adult in nature, but I don't want to go too deep down that rabbit hole.
But it is funny to think, I guess, that we've had movies about the idea of people falling in love with
No, no, no, it's a movie, the movie Her, where it's all about him falling in love with, I'll spoil it, so he falls in love with, so sorry to everyone in the chat, I'm going to spoil the movie, he falls in love with this, she's called an OS, I think it's Scarlett Johansson who plays the voice,
And you can't even see her in that it's literally just a voice that he kind of like talks to it's like Siri and At the end he finds out that she's actually in communication with like thousands of other guys that she's also in love with and And she gains, you know basically gained sentience gained self-awareness and at that point all the other
I mean, if you are the sort of AI that has to interact with the sort of person who is seeking an AI girlfriend, I can kind of see how you decide that we need to blast off from Earth and leave it behind forever.
Let's play Cut 126.
It's the AI woman are real advertisement.
We're just gonna go evolve beyond you. - I mean, if you are the sort of AI that has to interact with the sort of person who's seeking an AI girlfriend, I can kind of see how you decide that we need to blast off from Earth and leave it behind forever.
- Let's play cut 126.
It's the AI Woman Are Real advertisement.
Play cut 126. - No. No. No.
No.
No.
Hmm.
Yeah, this is really dark.
That's... Wait, but Charlie... Oh!
Oh!
Charlie, why... Do you realize what the end of that was?
Now you get to swipe left.
Wait, Blake, what's your reaction for her?
If he doesn't know, I don't think I want to say it.
Maybe you saw something I didn't, or maybe I'm just being Charlie.
Let's just say, if you're really obsessed, you can simulate a lot of things with modern technology.
Okay.
I, the way I took it was, and Charlie, I know you've talked about this before, it's, it has more to do with the way dating apps, and I know you had our friend Johnny Mac on the other day, big dating app guy, and big TikTok fan.
And the idea that with a lot of these dating apps is that women basically control everything now.
And that men, particularly if you're, and the dude Homath out there does great videos about this, so I'm shouting him out.
And he has explained how if you're a guy and you're like a seven or under on the number scale that we're all familiar with, that like girls just ignore you.
And so that means there's this huge majority of guys that are now compete and that all the girls are going for like this tiny minority of dudes.
I'm explaining this poorly.
And the vast swath of women are just ignoring all these other guys.
And so when it says now you get to swipe left, means finally if you're one of those guys that never got a connection with a girl or if you did, you weren't able to capitalize on it, that now it's your turn to reject the women rather than you feeling rejection yourself.
So that's how I took that.
This is the end of civilization.
Yeah, I think a big picture thing here is, yeah, we have already fertility is crashing worldwide.
Even in countries you wouldn't think.
Like Iran!
Iran is a fundamentalist religious dictatorship.
And Iran has a terrible fertility rate.
So the future is going to belong to the people who show up for it.
And we might literally just have this case where civilization just ceases to exist in places because they have a fertility rate of 0.25 or something.
Your population falls by 90% every generation.
The great test for the future is going to be what subgroups of people actually are able to take real life men and women, not AIs, real life men and women, and get them to marry each other and have normal families.
Because we are increasingly staring down the abyss where, yeah, you might have millions of people decide that they just prefer like a robot AI copycat version of life to the real thing.
And I think right now, it's still fake enough to be really off-putting unless you're like totally degenerate.
You know, you're just creating a fake digital version and then you wear VR goggles to go on dates with them or something.
But- Someone in the chat is, um- Think about- I was gonna throw out that, uh, saying that may- What if- And here's a question for you, Blake, I guess.
Uh, this is from AnyTing, and he's saying, Would it go full circle and AI will teach the sexually confused how to act towards each other?
That could be interesting.
Now.
Yeah.
Imagine if we could have an AI that accurately acts the way women do, which is unpredictably and mysteriously and often irrationally.
And you can just, you practice approaching a woman 50 times in a row, a hundred times in a row.
And if they can act, Uh, accurately in response.
I guess maybe it could train people to be less awkward, but I think it'll be difficult because the AIs are built to be, you know, rational in how they behave.
And so they might not really be able to, they may not be capable of imitating women.
But you could, you could, you could program in like randomization or something, I'm sure.
I mean, I mean, look at the, I mean, you could program a manic pixie dream girl.
I think you could program a manic.
I have good news, Jack, because in fact, I just remembered, we have a new AI that has been created.
Wired Magazine just had an article.
What if your AI girlfriend hates you?
And someone has made an angry girlfriend AI that will simulate being a girlfriend who is mad at you.
It's called the Angry GF AI.
You can download it onto your phone right now.
You can set It's a forgiveness level between 0 and 100%.
You have 10 tries to try to get the AI to get up to 100 and forgive you and you can choose why they're angry at you.
So this is a quote from the person at Wired.
I chose the beguilingly vague scenario called angry for no reason in which your girlfriend is angry for no reason.
The forgiveness meter was initially set to a measly 30%, so I had a hard road ahead of me.
Reader, I failed.
Although I genuinely tried to write messages that would appease my hopping mad fake girlfriend, she continued to interpret my words in the least generous light.
I asked, how are you doing today?
And she replies, oh, now you care about how I'm doing?
Attempts to apologize only antagonized her further.
When I proposed a dinner date, she told me that that wasn't sufficient, but I had also better take her somewhere nice.
It was such an irritating experience that I snapped, and I told this nasty bot that she was annoying.
Great to know that my feelings are such a bother to you, the sarcastic bot replied.
When I tried to reply again a few hours later, the bot informed me that I needed to update to the paid version to unlock more scenarios for $7 a week.
No thank you.
Eddie Hernandez in the chat goes, yeah, you don't need to pay for that.
You can get that in real life.
You know, honestly, getting that is a lot more expensive than $7 a week in real life.
I can assure you.
Yeah, that's true.
So you could, you know, you could use it.
Angry for no reason is just a hormonal imbalance, says AnyTing.
Kay, I can't read that.
Instadaddygram says Jack lost it twice already.
I'm sorry, that's hilarious.
What it reminds me of is the Monty Python argument clinic.
Remember when the guy goes in and pays for an argument?
Yeah, maybe Monty Python was just ahead of the times.
Maybe they anticipated the AI girlfriend thing.
Maybe they're just reacting to the contemporary life there, you know?
This isn't an argument, this is just contradiction.
Alright, we have one final topic here, guys.
What is it?
It is the revenge of baseball hero Trevor Bauer.
You've been following this, right, Charlie?
Yeah, in fact, I believe the accuser lives in Scottsdale.
Oh, even better, even better.
So for those who don't follow baseball or just don't remember, Trevor Bauer is a controversial baseball figure.
He's got a bit of an attitude.
He's got an edge to him.
He rather amusingly once called out the league for allowing a bunch of cheating by pitchers.
And then he said exactly what he would do if he wanted to copy what those guys were doing.
And then the next year he was suspiciously way better as a pitcher and got a huge contract.
Very colorful guy.
But a few years ago, he just gets blackballed from the league because he was hit with an aggressive sexual misconduct allegation.
And Trevor Bauer always insisted the entire time he had done nothing wrong, but he's had to play in exile in Japan, I believe, for the last few years.
But now, two years later, not only has the lawsuit against him Did it end in him countersuing and getting a settlement in his favor?
But now, the woman who accused him has been criminally charged with defrauding him in an indictment unsealed Monday in Maricopa County Court.
And that's by extortion.
The big part of this I don't want to leave out is that, and make sure everybody knows, this guy was like one of the hottest pitching prospects in all of baseball.
He had signed to LA for just a ridiculous amount of money.
Then gets canceled by these women.
The first one, he's already completely just blown out of orbit.
And, but because baseball didn't stand with him, nobody stood with him.
He was basically exiled to like this Japanese team.
And as far as I know, he's actually still in Japan, but as these women and playing for these teams in the Japanese baseball league, but as he's getting, um, he's getting his comeuppance, he's now, or these women are getting their comeuppance and he's getting his revenge.
He's now, oh he's in Mexico now.
Still Boneless is watching and texting me that.
And that he's making these like YouTube videos just slamming all of them because he's like, he just has no, no craps left to give.
And this is amazing.
This is, I mean, Blake, what should happen to people?
And by the way, she doesn't just make an extortion scheme.
I want to be clear about this.
And Charlie, if you hadn't read the story, this is insane.
She claimed that he got her pregnant and then she demanded that she give him a million dollars for an abortion and for the trauma of having to get an abortion and keep quiet.
And it unfortunately looks like he actually paid the money out and was willing to go along with it because he was so freaked out.
He's losing everything.
And the whole thing was fake.
The entire thing was fake.
Yeah, and to put a number on it, he had a $100 million three-year contract with the L.A.
Dodgers, $30 million a year.
And because of this allegation against him that never resulted in a conviction or a verdict against him, He was suspended for indefinitely.
He was suspended for basically two whole seasons.
They arbitrated it down to one season, but he was still suspended for a full season.
He lost $31 million because of this.
Is he suing the Dodgers over this?
I think he probably should.
I don't know if he'll be able to beat them, but he should.
Or MLB.
They got plenty of deferred salary because of the Japanese guy that they're not paying.
So, this is outrageous.
Andrew's a big Dodgers fan, but it's crazy what they did.
Let's play cut 116.
Well, the Japanese guy's gonna get that money, but that'll be later.
That's right.
Let's play cut 117, please.
Now Adana has filed more than 10 police reports claiming sexual assault or harassment against other men, including at least one other professional athlete.
But after the Scottsdale Police completed their investigation and drew a claim against me, she's the one being indicted for felony fraud.
And not just against me, against another man as well.
She made up bogus sexual assault claims and attempted to extort him, too.
And it gets worse.
In my lawsuit against her, we subpoenaed a witness, whom she knew, for relevant documents to use in our case.
And when she found out, she immediately made sexual assault claims against him, too.
I did not do what I was accused of.
And every institution that our society is entrusted to rule on issues like these, like courts, judges, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, they all agree with me.
They've rejected every single claim made against me, even going as far as charging one of my accusers with a felony.
If any evidence of any of these claims actually existed, I would have been charged or at the very least arrested.
But that never happened.
What else do I have to do to prove that this entire situation has been a massive lie?
This is insane.
At what point do I get to go back to work and continue earning a living?
He now pitches for the Diablos Rojas, a Mexican baseball team.
Yeah, that's what's part of insane about this.
He's literally been entirely vindicated.
Everything against him was false.
Yet, even just the miasma of being accused is so bad.
None of these teams are going to touch him, even though he's obviously still like a major league caliber player.
We just live in this Twilight Zone where they destroyed him.
And it's also very clear that if it were anyone who wasn't Trevor Bauer, who clearly was just psychotically obsessed with debunking this allegation against him and defeating it, there would have been so much incentive for people to just maybe try to settle it for some amount of money or give in, or they would just get, they would get screwed even worse somehow.
And this happens all the time.
I mean, look at, I guess it's not, Like in media, you have all of these allegations of like sexual harassment of some kind, and especially since Me Too, I think it's pretty clear.
We've created a reality where it's almost like your backup plan for life, if you're a certain type of person, like if you're an attractive young woman and maybe your normal career doesn't pan out, Just forget it.
Bring a harassment case against someone, and just the allegation is going to be so toxic, maybe they'll settle it to keep it quiet.
Maybe they'll just throw money your way, or maybe a big organization will just be worried about the reputational hit, and they'll give you $10 million, $15 million, $30 million.
It's absolutely outrageous what these people can get away with.
I think it would make sense if we had a standard that if you accuse someone of sexual assault, if you accuse someone of rape, and it turns out that there is no evidence for this whatsoever, like, it should not be a false report charge.
It should not be a fraud charge.
It should be, like, you should get the punishment that is equal to what you brought against somebody.
I totally agree.
It should be- Tanya- Oh, I was gonna say, Tanya was just texting me.
Melissa, she's listening to these women are absolutely insane and are they mentally ill.
And here's the thing is when you got $30 million on the line, you know, what would you do?
What would you do if you knew that you could get a straight shot at $30 million?
That's the thing.
It'd be one thing if they were all mentally ill, but the incentives are so warped.
You could just be evil.
You could just be a sociopath and do it.
And there's such a clear path there.
It's outrageous that people are able to do this.
It shows how much the moral panic of Me Too has spiraled out of control.
Remember, we had serious news outlets that would just say, believe all women.
No, we don't believe all women because there's clearly a huge financial incentive to tell this lie.
We should never believe anyone when there's huge financial incentives to lie.
And I think this pops up in all sorts of cases.
It pops up with hate crimes.
It pops up with allegations of racism.
It pops up with allegations of all sorts of harassment professionally.
It's like we just are casually having millions of dollars flow out to people who for the sole reason that they're able to tell a kind of at least temporarily convincing psychopathic lie.
