Dave Smith and Rob Bernstino dissect Joe Biden's State of the Union, labeling it a political charade that ignores lockdown-era freedoms while falsely claiming democracy faces unprecedented assault. They critique the administration's alleged funding of Gaza's genocide and expose contradictions in Biden's immigration rhetoric, specifically his proposal to legalize 5,000 daily entries versus hiring 30,000 judges for faster deportations. The hosts argue the speech serves only to shame opponents rather than address high inflation or border security, concluding that the administration's team sport approach prioritizes political survival over substantive governance. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Government Dysfunction and Spending00:10:48
Fill her up!
You're listening to the gas and humor.
We need to roll back the state.
We spy on all of our own citizens.
Our prisons are flooded with nonviolent drug offenders.
If you want to know who America's next enemy is, look at who we're funding right now.
Every single one of these problems are a result of government being way too big.
You're listening to part of the problem on the gas digital network.
Here's your host, Dave Smith.
What's up, everybody?
Welcome to a brand new episode of Part of the Problem.
I am Dave Smith.
He is Roberto the Elfredo Bernstino.
How are you, sir?
Dude, Chicago this weekend, baby.
Back at Zaney's.
Back at Zaney's in Rosemont and Chicago.
I will say one of my two of my absolute favorite comedy clubs in the country, particularly that Chicago Zaney's.
If you've never been there and you're in the area, it's just such a great, I love like old school comedy clubs like that.
Very, very excited to go back there this year once again.
And then after that, we'll be down in Key West, Florida for many days, evidently, at Comedy Key West.
And then big one, the Aladdin Theater in Portland.
First time I've ever headlined a theater show.
I've done a couple with, I've opened for people at theaters and I've done some with Lewis and Jay, but this is the first time I've ever headlined one.
Me and Rob, first time we've ever done a theater gig together.
So please come grab tickets for that one.
And then we're back at another one of our favorite clubs, which is the Funnybone out in St. Louis.
Also got Atlantic City, Nashville, Tennessee coming up.
So a lot of fun stuff.
Go to comicdave Smith.com for all of those ticket links.
And of course, for all of Rob's headlining stuff, you can find that at robbythefire.com.
And you can also check out Rob's other fantastic podcast, Run Your Mouth.
All right.
So last night, Joe Biden gave his State of the Union speech, which is something presidents do from time to time.
I guess we could start zooming out with our macro analysis of it.
I'm curious to get your thoughts, Rob.
I would start by saying Joe Biden, he did, and this is just political analysis, not like, you know, my opinion on it.
We'll get into all of that.
But I would say he did good by the outrageously low standards that we have for Joe Biden.
And that really is where him and his team are at.
It's that he did, in fact, deliver a speech and he did not call him into himself.
What do they drug him with?
How is it that when we get the big stage moments where you think he's really just going to crumble, he seems to get through it?
Well, look, I mean, look, he struggled in several moments of the speech, and he very clearly, I thought at least very clearly, had a far weaker second half than first half of the speech.
There were more stumbles and more stuttering and more, you know, stuff like that in the second half.
Look, I mean, of course, we're speculating here to some degree, but it's very obvious.
They have him on some cocktail of stuff that is able to get him up to be able to do what he pulled off there, which again was not a good speech.
It's unbelievable the curve that we're grading him on.
It really is like the, you were grading him on an old man with dementia curve and then going for an old man with dementia.
That's pretty impressive that you got up there and talked and some of the words even made sense putting them next to each other.
He did have a ton of gaffes, major ones.
We'll get into one in particular, but he, but again, it's, it's where we're at with Joe Biden is that because you're the standards are so low,
when you see Joe Biden able to like, I mean, I'm not even exaggerating this, walk up to the podium without falling, speak at least part of the time without stumbling and read words off a teleprompter.
There is, I mean, it's funny because all the MSNBC and CNNs and they're like, unbelievable, knocked it out of the park.
But essentially, that's what they're saying.
They're going, he walked up there, put one foot in front of the other, he got behind the microphones, and he read a speech off a teleprompter.
He's able to pull that off.
Yeah, I don't know exactly what they get him on, but it is.
Joe Biden is in a situation where that is a win.
If he's able to do that, then as far as his campaign is concerned, that was a win for us today.
The reality is that the overwhelming majority of Americans recognize that Joe Biden is too old for this job.
Them being able to pull off that he gave this speech without collapsing into himself like a dying star is not going to do anything to change that.
And that tomorrow and the next day and the next day, there will be more moments of Joe Biden looking clearly diminished.
And those concerns are going to are going to stay.
And he's going to still have the very real fundamental problems that he had going into the speech.
So he did not, I don't think he did anything to help himself with this speech.
I will say he probably didn't do much to hurt himself either.
And I think if you're in Joe Biden's campaign, you're counting that as a dub.
What are your thoughts on the speech as a whole?
I find the State of the Union to be such an incredibly stupid charade where one side gets up and goes, guys, no one's ever done it better.
We're doing amazing.
The country's headed to the best places.
And then afterwards, someone does a rebuttal and goes, we're all going to die.
And the fact that the other side has to sit in the room and be in the room while you pretend like everything is going and lying and shaming them for being at fault for what's going wrong is an odd charade.
But and I was first kind of piecing this together.
It also just highlights the dysfunction of our government structure that it is a team sport, that you've got one side and every and you can kind of go down the list of what they're trying to accomplish in government.
If you're on the Republican side, I don't know, on paper, you want to reduce spending.
And if you're on the Democrat side, you want to increase spending.
So by nature, it's not like they can ever show up in the room and go, we worked together and we got this solved.
They're always kind of trying to play a game to make the other side look bad and not let them move forward on their core agenda because they don't agree on a core agenda.
It's listen, it's a great point, but there's also so many like little contradictions that get exposed during this team sport.
Like one of the most wild things that you, what Joe Biden is literally, and we're going to go through some of the moments here, just a few of them.
Because as you said, it's not as if there's just no substance in these things.
There's nothing that interesting.
It's political theater and it's not even good political theater.
It's always every single president always has a list of things.
And by the way, they're always spending bills in one sense or another, even when they're Republicans, you know, but it's always like, I passed the this act that helped this many people.
And I passed the this and the this and the this.
And because of this, things are so much better than they otherwise would have been.
But my opponent wants to do this and this and this, which would make it worse.
And right here in the crowd is a little girl who drank some poisoned water, but my bill made sure that that water wasn't poisoned anymore.
Stand up, little girl who has clean water.
You know, it's all just the same stupid things.
And one of the major flaws in democracy, it's the great old George Carlin bit, right?
Because think about how dumb the average person is and then think about the fact that 50% of people are dumber than that.
And I don't mean to like sound like a fucking elitist or something, but there are just, let's just say the low information, low IQ voters far outnumber the high information, high IQ voters.
And so of course they're just, they're, they're playing to, you know, to that reality.
But there is something profoundly contradictory in how crazy the rhetoric's gotten now so that Joe Biden actually has to somehow stand up there and say, we are basically in a World War II-like moment.
Democracy is in great peril.
I mean, according to Joe Biden, right?
The narrative is that a Hitlerian figure who will destroy democracy is right now the favorite to be the next president.
And also, I want to tell you that the state of the union is good.
The state of the union is so strong.
There is this little problem that the odds are we're about to meet our ultimate death, but like, but everything's great.
You know what I mean?
Like it's, when you think about that, it's kind of amazing.
And then also, you, you have this dynamic where there are some, there's a small group of Democrats who are calling the war in Gaza a genocide, the Rashida Talib, Elon Omar types.
And they're sitting there basically saying, or not basically saying, they are saying that Joe Biden is actively funding a genocide, but then they'll still fall into the team game for everything else.
They'll sit there and clap for the man for everything else and fall right into your, you know, like you're talking about how much it demonstrates that it's just like a team sport.
It's like even the guys who say my team's aiding and abetting a genocide sit there and clap for everything else he has to say.
And it's just, I mean, I'll wear a little, you know, Gaza pin or something like that, but then I'm just going to be on board with the guy who's funding a genocide.
It's wild to see.
Putin Threatens Global Freedom00:17:13
And the contradictions like this are all over the place.
I mean, look, you know, as Hans Hermann Hoppe would always point out in his writings, like the, you know, government, by the very nature of it existing, is a hilarious contradiction.
It's a self, you know, it's a, it's like a self-defense organization that robs from its customers.
Like it's just a blatant contradiction within its very existence, you know, like it's, we will rob from you to build a police force to make sure no one can rob from you.
That's, that's what the state is.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is X-Bar.
We all know we need to exercise, but going to the gym can take hours a day and home gyms are expensive.
What if you could get better results than the gym in just 10 minutes a day and everyone, come on, everyone can find 10 minutes.
Our sponsor, X-Bar, is an exercise bar that uses heavy resistance bands instead of weights.
They guarantee you better results in 10 minutes or they'll buy you a full year gym membership.
What's their secret?
The X-Bar uses variable resistance.
So you only need to do one set per exercise versus three or four sets at the gym.
Your X-Bar comes with five to 480 pounds of muscle-building resistance.
It's a full gym you can take anywhere.
It's safer for your joints.
It comes with a lifetime warranty.
And right now, our listeners can save 15% plus receives X-Bar's $199 12-week fitness program for free with the coupon code problem15.
Just go to xbar.com or click the link in the show description one more time, xbar.com, promo code problem15 for 15% off, for 15% off, plus the full 12-week fitness program for absolutely nothing.
All right, let's get back into the show.
Okay, so let's go into the speech a little bit.
I want to literally just start from the top because I thought this, the way Joe Biden opened it, really says it all.
Of course, we all know that Joe Biden is not writing his speeches, but this is really the, this is the democratic establishment's narrative about where we are in the world.
This is what's going on.
He opens with it right away.
And there's just so much here to examine.
So let's just start from the, this is how Joe Biden opened his State of the Union.
Good evening.
Good evening.
If I were smart, I'd go home now.
Mr. Speaker, Madam Vice President, members of Congress, my fellow Americans, in January 1941, Franklin Roosevelt came to this chamber to speak to the nation.
And he said, I address you at a moment unprecedented in the history of the Union.
Hitler was on the march.
War was raging in Europe.
President Roosevelt's purpose was to wake up Congress and alert the American people that this was no ordinary time.
Freedom and democracy were under assault in the world.
Tonight, I come to this same chamber to address the nation.
Now, it's we who face an unprecedented moment in the history of the Union.
And yes, my purpose tonight is to wake up the Congress and alert the American people that this is no ordinary moment either.
Not since President Lincoln and the Civil War have freedom and democracy been under assault at home as they are today.
What makes our moment rare is the freedom of democracy under attack both at home and overseas at the very same time.
Overseas, Putin of Russia is on the march, invading Ukraine and sowing chaos throughout Europe and beyond.
If anybody in this room thinks Putin will stop at Ukraine, I assure you he will not.
So that is Joe Biden's opening claim.
This is the narrative that we live in unprecedented times.
He, of course, compares somewhat implicitly Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler and then also somewhat to the Civil War.
But essentially, Joe Biden is making the argument that, look, we had the Civil War where freedom and democracy were threatened at home, and we had the Second World War, where freedom and democracy were threatened abroad.
But what makes this time so unique is we've got both.
We've got freedom and democracy being threatened both at home and abroad.
And he points to two obvious, you know, his two obvious reasons for that are Donald Trump beating him in the polls or whatever represents the threat to democracy and freedom.
And Vladimir Putin's on the march.
And so there's like a few things to just take apart here.
Let's start with at home, because we live here.
So that kind of makes it important to us.
Is it not wild that just after the, look, you think about the, let's say, the last year of Donald Trump's presidency and the first three years of Joe Biden's, the last four years, 2020, we're in the year of March right now, right?
So let's say March of 2020 to March of 2024.
Look at that time period.
And the idea that freedom and democracy are under threat, it's like, oh, okay, sure, I'm listening.
But why is it under threat?
Because Donald Trump is running for president again.
But if you were to actually examine either freedom or democracy, in this period, in the last four years, all American freedoms, all American freedoms that we took for granted were completely undermined.
Within this period of time, you had the lockdown regime where we instituted totalitarianism in the United States of America.
Again, I know there's a point I've made many, many times on this show, but there really is no other word to describe what the lockdowns were than instituting totalitarianism.
I don't think you could find any example in like if you were listing the characteristics of totalitarianism, I don't think there's any way you could consider the lockdowns not to meet that criteria.
Like, I mean, you could say it was justified totalitarianism.
I mean, you'd be wrong, but you could say that.
But you're, I mean, it's just to talk about freedom in a country that literally had a situation where people were listening to their governors on television to find out if they were allowed to see their parents or go to work or have a funeral for their dad or send their kids to school.
And it was being dictated by the government every inch of your life.
They were dictating at one point how many people you could have in your home.
I mean, they were dictating how late you could stay out.
There's totalitarianism.
Now, look, if you were to argue, hey, that happened under Donald Trump's watch in 2020, and that's why we're talking about freedom.
That'd be one thing.
But that's not their case.
These were the people who were criticizing Donald Trump for not going further there.
So for them to talk about freedom being undermined is just pretty wild.
And then to talk about democracy, another thing that happened in these four years period is that you blatantly rigged an election.
We could go through all the examples of this, but overhauling the way that people vote, having the entire deep state and media class knowingly spread false information with the attempt of affecting an election,
and of course, silencing dissenting voices, culminating in shutting down Donald Trump's October surprise, which by the way, we've figured out at this point is, as me and you knew the week of, is very real.
And the scandal that the people that are implicated by it is a very real scandal.
And that story was shut down.
So to sit here and say freedom and democracy are under threat sure are, but not from the source that you claim they are.
And then, of course, I mean, as we've just kind of knocked this down a million times, but this just ridiculous assertion about freedom and democracy being under threat abroad, it is certainly true that after deliberate instigation from the West, Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine.
But the idea that Ukraine represented freedom or democracy is absurd.
Absolutely absurd.
One of the most corrupt countries in the world, probably the most corrupt country in Europe, whose the U.S. backed a coup overthrowing their democratically elected government 10 years ago and who are currently have suspended elections and are conscripting all the men in the country to fight.
That is neither a bastion of freedom nor democracy.
And so this narrative is just ridiculous.
And then, of course, it's just the assertion that Vladimir Putin will keep going into other countries and we will have to send our boys over there.
And so this is why we have to stop him here is based on nothing.
And it's amazing how much they are able to create these narratives and then just like repeat them over and over and over again.
I could not tell you how many times I've heard people say that if Vladimir Putin is allowed to invade Ukraine, then Poland is next or then Estonia is next or whatever it is.
And it's backed up by nothing.
There is not one thing that Vladimir Putin has ever said that you can point to that indicates he would then try to pick a fight with NATO.
It just makes no sense whatsoever.
And so, again, just all utter nonsense and all necessary for the framing of Joe Biden's essential pitch, which is that if we let Donald Trump win or if we don't keep funding the war in Ukraine, then everything is going to be ruined.
The freedom and democracy go away.
And it's just all complete bullshit.
Any thoughts?
Yeah, well, to start with the Putin thing, if it's inevitable that he's going to march to Poland, why aren't we just fighting him in Ukraine?
Why aren't we just sending troops?
If it's completely inevitable that we're marching towards a full escalated war, well, why are we just slowly letting it march towards that?
Like, is that the plan?
Are we just trying to stall it as much as possible so we can live on Earth a little bit longer and be further away from nuclear war?
Like, is that the strategy?
Basically, trying to have the slowest possible war in Ukraine so that it doesn't come to Poland?
Like, what exactly is the strategy then to avoid all-out nuclear war with Putin if you're completely convinced of the fact that this is just a slow march to Poland?
And then maybe that should be your pitch.
We need these specific supplies here so we could keep him at the front line and not moving any further because as he marches towards Poland, we're an all-out nuclear war, which brings me to the other point, which is what you were saying with, hey, Donald Trump is Hitler and we've got Hitler coming up on the ballot.
I love this world that we live in where it's kind of we all have to make pretend.
And it happened last week when the Supreme Court overruled Colorado and said that Trump needs to remain on the ballot.
It was a nine to zero decision.
And then I hear these Democrats screaming, the Supreme Court just removed the rights of states to protect us from violent insurrectionists running for president because in the future, we might have more violent insurrectionists running for president.
Wait a second.
You really think if there's a violent insurrectionist, Congress wouldn't take action?
We're all supposed to pretend right now that we have a broken governmental system where violent insurrectionists can run for office.
And it's the same thing here where we all have to pretend like democracy is on the ballot because if we don't remove Donald Trump, this little parasite from our democratic system will never have democracy again.
During COVID, we all have to believe that if we don't stay in our homes, then we're all going to die of this virus.
It's amazing how the president basically dictates, hey, here's what I need everyone to go out and believe.
And how much of the Democrats and the corporate media machine are willing to repeat that and how many people are going to go, oh, they might not even believe it, but go, oh, this is what I was told we all have to believe.
It's like everyone in the country has become a lawyer where they take the most extreme position.
Everyone realizes, okay, we got to live that lie because that's the only way that we can push forward our agenda.
Yeah.
No, I mean, there's a lot.
There's a lot of good points there.
And there's, you know, first of all, just saying on the, you know, to your point, it's a very good question.
You're like, well, if you're saying, by the way, and Ukraine is struggling so much right now.
And if you're saying it's inevitable that he's going to invade Poland, and then it's like, okay, well, why are we just waiting for that then?
Why aren't we?
Then wouldn't that justify doing everything we can to actually drive the Russians out of Ukraine?
The truth is that it was, as, by the way, you can look in, it's not my words or your words.
I'm saying by the government's own words, like by all of the people in the highest levels of government positions, in their own words, in the words of the head of the CIA, the current CIA director, in his words when he was the Russian ambassador, he said that Ukrainian entry into NATO is Putin's brightest of red lines and that it's unanimous.
His exact quote was something like, he goes, I've spoken to everybody in Russia and everyone from the furthest right-wingers to Putin's sharpest liberal critics are all unanimous to a man, that Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of red lines.
It was his words.
And he also said that in the NetMeans Yet memo, that the idea of Ukrainian entry into NATO was very likely to lead to a civil war.
And in that case, Vladimir Putin would have to decide if he wanted to intervene.
And it was a choice he did not want to have to make.
Okay, this is all according to them, as we just talked about in the last episode.
The head of NATO said that Vladimir Putin made that he said his condition for not invading was assuring us that you're not bringing Ukraine into NATO because it sure looks like you're doing that and that they refused to give him those assurances and people kept floating out the idea of bringing Ukraine in and then he invaded, right?
So it's this is all over that this was the this is what the war is about.
It's not just that Putin's been saying it.
It's that everybody on our side, when they've been honest, has said it as well.
And that was a bright line to Putin.
Ukraine being admitted into the anti-Russian American empire wing in Europe's military alliance.
Poland joined NATO in 1999.
Poland's been in NATO for 25 years and Vladimir Putin has never said that that was his bright line, that he was going to attack Poland to what?
Bring them out of NATO and back into his realm of influence, sphere of influence.
That's never been on that.
This is just totally made up.
It's totally ridiculous that Vladimir Putin's going to want to do that.
There's absolutely no reason.
And in fact, Vladimir Putin, just a couple of weeks ago, very explicitly said that short of Poland attacking Russia, he would not go to war with Poland.
Now, again, I'm not saying you have to take him at his word, but I'm saying, why do I have to take Joe Biden and all these guys at their word when they can provide no evidence that this is Vladimir Putin's plan?
No even like reason to suspect it might be.
They just assert it.
Unjected Rallying Point Explained00:04:45
And, you know, as far as what you were talking about with the Trump stuff, I think one of the reasons why this pitch just falls so flat, because I do remember there was this, there were hysterics about Donald Trump in 2016, that if he were to get in, he would have like a trigger finger with the red button, that the stock market would crash, that all these disastrous things would happen.
And while they were a little bit far-fetched and, as I said, hysterical, there was at least a plausible way to sell it where you're like, look, Donald Trump is kind of a wild guy.
He's never held political office before.
He certainly speaks in a very like haphazard, unguarded way.
He's not careful about what he says.
So maybe won't be careful about what he does.
And, you know, maybe if someone insults his small hands, he's going to want to nuke him or something like that.
You at least kind of had the like the factor that this was the unknown.
And so you could kind of play on that.
But this time, it's just, I mean, all of them, they're like, it was a Robert De Niro said to Bill Maher the other day that was yesterday.
He said to him, he goes, if Donald Trump gets back in, you won't be on the air anymore.
You won't have your show anymore.
He goes, I'll be arrested.
He's going to come round us all up.
And it's just like, dude, we had four years of Donald Trump.
He didn't even make a move to have Hillary Clinton locked up.
If you remember, that was his whole rallying cry through the whole election.
Never even tried, never even thought about it.
He's like, that was just a fun thing to say on the campaign stump speech.
I'm not going to arrest Hillary Clinton.
You know what I mean?
Like, and so this idea that we already had four years of Donald Trump, nothing fundamentally changed about the American system of government.
The only thing that fundamentally really changed was that the leftists got more hysterical than ever before.
And then, of course, like the COVID stuff, but that wasn't, again, this was something that the Democrats were fully on board with.
And in many ways, looks more and more like the plan to remove Donald Trump than anything else.
But there is just, it's just very hard, I think, to sell to any, I mean, I'm sure, again, the hysterical leftists who are hysterical about Donald Trump will buy into whatever the latest hysteria is.
But the idea that you're selling this to any independent or any Republican or any libertarian or anything like that, it's just like, I don't know, we already have a track record.
I actually kind of know what will happen if Donald Trump becomes president again.
You know, I don't know.
He'll still put really bad people in all types of different appointment positions.
He'll maybe do one or two all right things and he'll basically get rolled at every step by the deep state.
That's kind of what I, you know, and so it's just, it's hard to like sell people on this.
Like, no, it's going to be a transformational undermining of this democracy, which we don't even have, which we don't even live in a democracy.
I don't know.
I just find it such a stretch.
It's so hyperbolic that it's, it's hard to be believed.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is unjected.com.
I got a lot of people asking about this.
Rob Bernstein confirms to me they are in fact real.
This is the world's first and largest COVID-19 unvaccinated dating site.
If you withstood the insane psychological operation waged on the entire human race with your DNA intact and you're single and looking for your homesteading apocalypse partner, or maybe you're happily married, but you're looking for an unvaccinated person in your area to build a community with, well, you can go create a profile at unjected.com today.
Unjected was born in the spring of 2021 in response to the persecution that was felt by so many of us who chose to not take the mRNA COVID injection.
And Unjected is creating a safe place for the unvaccinated to find each other and has successfully matched people, leading to relationships, marriages, and uninjected babies, all from having met on unjected.com.
Unjected also realizes it wasn't just about romantic companionship.
There needed to be a platform that brought together the entire community of free thinkers who were not buying into the agenda.
Unjected has now become a rallying point for unvaccinated people from around the world to unite.
So go sign up at unjected.com and use the promo code P-O-T-P for 20% off.
That's unjected.com, promo code P-O-T-P for 20% off.
All right, let's get back into it.
Border Crisis and Nazi Comparisons00:15:13
Okay.
One of the biggest moments in the debate and one of Biden's biggest flubs was when it came to, you know, again, this was in the second half of the debate where Biden started having a lot more trouble.
And whatever that sweet cocktail of uppers that he's been given seemed to be fading off a little bit.
This was the point where Marjorie Taylor Green heckled him.
And by the way, there was a lot of heckling, more so than usual.
You know, these Supreme, these State of the Union addresses did not used to be this hostile.
At least when I was younger, they were usually at one point.
I remember when someone yelled, you lie at Obama.
That was like a huge story because people didn't really do that that much.
But a lot of this, you know, of course, famously, Nancy Pelosi stood up and ripped Donald Trump's speech after one of them.
Now that's like the level of disrespect keeps going up and up.
But anyway, let's go to the clip.
This was Joe Biden having a rough one.
About me, I'd be a winner.
Not really.
Lincoln Riley, an innocent young woman who was killed by an illegal.
That's right.
But how many of the thousands of people being killed by illegals?
To her parents, I say, my heart goes out to you, having lost children myself.
I understand.
But look, if we change the dynamic at the border, people pay these smugglers $8,000 to get across the border because they know if they get by, if they get by and let into the country, it's six to eight years before they have a hearing.
And it's worth taking the chance of the $8,000.
But, but, if it's only six months, six weeks, the idea is it's highly unlikely that people will pay that money and come all that way, knowing that they'll be able to be kicked out quickly.
Okay, so there you have Joe Biden being heckled, taunted to say her name by Marjorie Taylor Greene.
He then looks around for where the button that she gave him is, picks it up, says the wrong name, and then proceeds to prosecute the Trumpian case against Biden in the middle of his State of the Union.
It was a wild moment that really made no sense at all where he starts go.
He goes, yeah, sure.
Her name was Lakin, and he says Lincoln.
So he gets the name wrong.
And then he starts to say, yeah, but think of how many thousands of people are killed by illegals.
And the whole thing is because we have this policy of where they have six months until they have to face a trial and all this.
But imagine if it was six days, then they wouldn't have to do it.
And it's like, yeah, there's just no way.
Again, I've talked about this.
To be fair, though, you can give Biden a pass for being confused having a NASCAR driver yelling at him while he's trying to give a speech at Congress.
That's confusing.
Yeah, that is a little off-putting for Biden.
I'll grant you that.
But look, look, there's this, there's two major fundamental aspects to the Biden pitch for reelection that are just fundamentally flawed.
And we've talked about this a bunch on the show, but there's two of them that it's been clear at this point.
It's been signaled that this is what Joe Biden's running on.
And these are really two of the major ones, because if you look at polls, the top two issues to the American people are very clearly the economy and immigration.
And I've seen a few polls where immigration came first and the economy was closely second.
And I've seen several where the economy is first and immigration is second.
But the one thing that is constant is that those are the two things.
And when it comes to the economy, it's primarily inflation is what people are concerned about.
But it's the economy and it's immigration.
And Joe Biden's pitch on the economy goes something like this.
The economy is great.
You just don't know it.
And that's a very, we've discussed this quite a bit, but that's a dead on arrival pitch.
And his pitch on immigration is essentially like, okay, yeah, there's the, the border crisis is horrible and we need immigration restrictions, but it's Donald Trump's fault because I, in my fourth year, had a proposal that he called all the Republicans and told them not to not to vote for.
That's basically his pitch.
And I'm not, I really don't think I'm strawmanning.
Like, that's the argument that he's making that, yes, I came in and for three years, I didn't do anything, but on the fourth year, I had a proposal to solve this whole problem.
And he's kind of counting on you not to look into that proposal because it wouldn't have solved any of it.
But he had a proposal and Donald Trump got on the phone and called the Republican leadership and told them not to support it.
And so, yeah, this is horrible, but it's on Trump.
And by the way, his proposal was bullshit.
He was essentially legalizing what's currently the illegal immigration of, what was it, it was 5,000 people a day and then he met or 66,000 and then he magically had the authority to stop the border and it makes no vent, no mention of pardoning because what they currently do is they're so overwhelmed in their facilities, they just keep pardoning everybody.
So as to what that would change in terms of not incentivizing more people to come into the country, if he's admitting right now, the issue is now that there's a financial incentive to people to come in and so it's worth the cost, you would only be increasing that if you actually passed the proposal that he had pushed forward.
Yes.
Yeah, you're 100% right.
But look, even if he can count on the fact that you're not actually going to look into the details of that proposal and he's just going to say, hey, I had a border enforcement bill, but Donald Trump wanted everyone to vote against it just because he wants this problem to continue, which by the way, let's just say it like this.
The reality of politics is that it incentivizes everybody to be evil.
And so if Joe Biden did have a bill that was going to solve the border crisis, right, you can see where Donald Trump would be totally incentivized to not want that to get passed.
Because no, this is, he's running on this disaster.
He doesn't want you to fix this problem.
I'm just saying like those are the incentives of politics.
You're incentivized to be evil.
But anyway, regardless of that, there's just a few major, major problems in even attempting to sell this.
Number one, it's your fourth year in office.
This has been a crisis since your first day in office.
So they're still this girl who got murdered, it's still on you.
It doesn't, you know what I mean?
It doesn't do anything to say, oh, but we would have stopped this going forward, but Donald Trump won't let us.
It's like, yeah, but the fact that you didn't stop it in the past is why this girl got murdered.
So that doesn't solve it anyway.
But the other problem is that it's like Donald Trump wasn't president that long ago.
You know, it just, it wasn't that long ago.
And you cannot, again, this is, I mean, it's not quite as bad, but it is like Fauci turning around and saying, I never recommended lockdowns.
What are you talking about?
Lockdowns?
I wasn't for lockdowns.
And now he was saying this like two years later.
So it was like so much, but look, you could just go back to 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019.
I mean, 2019 went in the Democratic primary, which we covered extensively.
Look at how all of them were talking about immigration.
Look at how all of them were demonizing Donald Trump's Nazi border policies.
That like you were on record saying that Donald Trump is wrong for wanting to build a wall and wrong for wanting more border security.
And that the only crisis on the border is that people are being separated from their families and that there's not.
And now, because Donald Trump has been so empirically proven correct that this was a crisis with immigration and that we cannot have these de facto open borders, now you're all coming around to, and you're trying to like pivot and not make the fundamental admission that he was right.
He was right that the borders are out of control and you have to have secure borders.
And the fact that they're going to try to pivot without that admission is just, listen, they, I don't know if you remember this, Rob, but when we used to cover this when we were doing the studio episodes in 2019, Joe Biden himself and all of the Democrats on stage put their hands up when they were asked a yes, no question, should the immigrants' health care be covered by the taxpayers?
They all put their hands up and said yes.
And by the way, so much of the problem with the influx of illegal immigration is just, it's not just the border policy, but it's the message that you put out.
And when the guy who says, oh yeah, you get free health care if you come here gets elected president, that sends a signal to a lot of people like, oh my God, we can go to America and we'll get housing and healthcare and these things, you know?
And so like, it's just it, Joe Biden is in an impossible situation on both of the two biggest issues.
He's, he's in an unsellable situation where he's got to sell you on like, there's just no way you could say, hey, you know, the guy who was like border security, border security, border security the whole time.
And remember, we were like, that makes you a Nazi.
That makes you a Nazi.
That makes you a Nazi?
Okay.
Well.
It's his fault that we don't have border security.
Actually, we really want it, but, you know, like it's, this is just unworkable.
Like if you brought this to like a big PR company, they would just be like, oh, I just don't think there's anything we can do here.
It's, you've already set up, you've set it up so in the strongest possible language, you've set up the narrative is that this guy wants to build a wall and that you oppose him for wanting to build a wall.
Now you want to try to pivot to this guy's the bad guy because he won't let you build a wall.
Like it just, how are we even going to sell that?
I just, in my opinion, from everything I've seen, it appears that the amount of illegal immigration that's taken place through the Biden administration is intentful.
I can't tell you exactly why they want it, but go listen to my Meyer Carditis every time he's talking to the Senator Congress and he's weaseling and squealing and saying everything he can to lie and say it's not an emergency, blah, blah, blah.
It's pretty clear that there's been intentional policies and coordination with non-governmental organizations to move as many people over the border as possible and to incentivize that.
Oh, dude, listen, 100 million percent.
Look, just think about it like this, okay?
Our government in Washington, D.C. is the most powerful organization in the history of the world without dispute, without dispute.
They can touch anyone anywhere in the world.
If there's a wedding in Yemen where we suspect a guy who we don't like is at, we blow that wedding up.
The amount of power that our federal government has to do what they want to do is near godlike.
If they wanted to cut off this flow coming into this country, they could do it.
Look, when they wanted to clean up the streets of San Francisco, they did it like that.
That's how easy it was to do.
There's no question that they could do what this happening, people pouring in by the millions.
Okay.
I mean, and the numbers they even estimate are way lower.
When they say it's been 7 million since Biden's been in office, they're not counting.
They have no way of counting everyone who gets in here.
They know it's been at least 7 million is really what that number should be.
This is intentional, 100%.
And I'm not claiming to know exactly why they are intentionally doing this.
I mean, there's clearly certain things we can speculate about, but the fact that it is intentional is obvious and beyond in question.
And you know that just because, look, you can deduce this from the fact that they have the power to stop it if they wanted to, right?
So like if I if I have an AR-15 and I'm holding it, it's loaded and ready to go in my home and an unarmed man breaks in and assaults my family.
It's there, you can clearly deduce that I allowed that to happen because I had the means to stop it and I chose not to.
So that's that's the same situation here.
This is intentional.
What exactly their plan is?
Well, I'll tell you, you know, it's This is one of the things Murray Rothbard, brilliant, the most brilliant libertarian thinker in history.
One of the things he wrote about when he, because he was like initially an open borders guy, and then he rejected it later in his life.
And he wrote in this great piece called Nations by Consent.
He wrote that he started rethinking his position on immigration when it became clear that the Soviets had been flooding their satellite countries with ethnic Russians.
So like they were flooding Estonia and Ukraine and some of these other satellites of the Soviet Union with ethnic Russians.
And he's kind of like, yeah, okay.
So what's going on here?
Am I really as a libertarian supposed to cheer this on or something or be like, oh, this is great or this is what he's enriching them with diversity or something like that?
You know what I mean?
Immigration Benefits and Strategy00:02:26
When it's very clearly like, no, I mean, anyone, when you look at it from when another government's doing it, it's very obvious.
You're like, no, okay, he was trying to break down their ability to resist him, right?
And that if there were more ethnic Russians there, they would be more loyal toward Russia and they would, it would, it would break up the kind of nationalistic tendencies that ultimately led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.
So it was in, to some degree, kind of wise strategy.
And likewise, you know, just because our government tells us that they're enriching us with diversity, what's really going on here?
And I think it's much more likely that what they're trying to do is fracture the resistance against them, that when you have a situation where you're in this kind of crumbling empire and your monopoly on information has been broken and so much higher a percentage of the population recognizes your corruption.
Well, then one way to deal with that is to flood in a, and I know this is a buzzword, a replacement population that is not as furious with your corruption and is in fact is kind of just happy to be huh?
Benefiting from it.
Benefiting from it and also benefiting from, you know, like the crumbs that we throw them may not seem like much to you or I, but to people who have come from where they've come from, there's, they're certainly in a much richer country now and getting, you know, taken care of on the taxpayer's dime.
And like this is they're certainly not, they're much less likely to be the sworn enemy of Nancy Pelosi and much more likely to thank her for the free health care, you know?
And so there's, and then look, there's other benefits, big business benefits from cheap labor.
Democrats benefit from minority grievance groups, you know, like there's other things too, but I think it's all of that is a part of it, to be honest.
But you're 100% right.
It is intentional.
And but let's just imagine for a second that it wasn't intentional and they didn't realize how big of an issue the illegal immigration was.
And it's four years later and he's realizing we have to solve the illegal immigration.
And now he's putting forward the biggest issue is that we've created a system where it takes six years to deport these people.
And so we have to change the incentive structure here so we can deport them faster.
Then put that forward.
Phoenix Ammunition Proposal Details00:02:53
It's not what he put forward.
Put that forward.
Hey, I need enough judges to be able to prosecute people out of the country immediately so they're not staying here for six or seven years.
So it takes two maneuvers.
It's one, we're getting rid of the parole system where we just basically can't keep people in our centers.
So we're just releasing them.
And we're going to hire enough judges so that we can get people into a trial within two days.
You can even sell it.
You can go, listen, there's some people that are coming to this country because they're going to die in their countries because of inhumanity or whatever.
And we'd like for those people to be able to remain.
We don't think that a wall is moral or efficient.
And so we're going to be policing the border in this way instead.
But you know what I need to solve the system?
I need $10 billion that I can hire 30,000 judges and be able to send these people back within two days.
That's not what you put forward.
You put forward that we're going to prosecute 5,000 people a day.
You made no mention of the parole system.
And then you said you had to hire more judges, seemingly, so that more people could probably stay legally.
Yeah.
No, that's right.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It was a, it was right.
Even if all of that wasn't intentional, it's like, then obviously he would have just put that forward.
And by the way, you could, and if the government wasn't so corrupt and dishonest, you could propose that bill on one page of paper.
That could be a one-page.
Yeah, you don't have to tie it in with Ukraine and Israel funding.
Right, exactly.
You could literally just put that out, tweet out the bill.
This is my proposal to Congress.
You put, send this to my desk and I will sign it tomorrow.
Here's the bill.
You could fit that into three, maybe four paragraphs.
You know what I mean?
Like it's the and but of course, that's not what's actually happening here.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our wonderful sponsor for today's show, which is Phoenix Ammunition.
This is the premier supplier to the militia industrial complex with 100% of their sales going directly to American citizens.
No military contracts, no law enforcement deals, simply the highest quality American-made ammunition served directly to the people the Second Amendment was written for.
Phoenix Ammo uses the highest quality component parts and the most advanced quality control system in the country to deliver exactly what you expect while at the range or when your life is on the line and performance matters above all else.
Phoenix Ammunition is the trusted supplier for top-level competitive shooters, world-class training companies, including Haley Strategic Training and Warrior Poets Society and recreational shooters nationwide.
They ship directly to you with no middleman or distributor, just the best quality ammo made by American workers in Detroit, Michigan.
So head on over to phoenixammo.com, subscribe to their propaganda newsletter and follow them on Twitter at Phoenix Ammunition for the latest in product updates, high quality trolling, small L libertarian commentary and world-class meme warfare.
I will tell you, I followed them on Twitter.
They're very great.
That's at Phoenix Ammunition.
Two State Solution for Gaza00:10:48
And also you can save up to 25% off all day, every day with their automatic volume-based discounts.
Come for the ammo, stay for the memes, phoenixammo.com at phoenix ammunition on Twitter.
All right, let's get back into the show.
The other, of course, major theme or major topic there, there were several, but it was Donald Trump, the threat he represents to democracy.
It was the list off of things Joe Biden's done, the war in Ukraine, immigration.
And then, of course, he had to get to the war in Gaza, where, of course, Joe Biden is also forced into yet another profoundly impossible sale where he now is in this position politically where something,
I mean, I've seen a couple of polls on this, but evidently about 50% of Democrats believe that Israel's war is a genocide.
That's a pretty tough thing to deal with if you're Joe Biden.
And you've seen already some of these like undeclared or the little protest votes within the primaries where he's running against no one.
And Joe Biden has a real problem on his hands here.
God damn, by the way, it is such a shame if you just run the counterfactual, how much like RFK, if he wasn't so horrible on the war in Gaza, the force that he could have been.
Like, because there's this huge movement of left of center to left people who are totally opposed to this.
And man, if the Kennedy was actually the anti-war candidate, how much he would just be scooping up all of this support.
It would be, it would have been the most amazing thing in the world.
But instead, he's traveling around with Rabbi Shmooley.
Anyway, so Joe Biden's got a big problem on his hands here.
50% of his own voters think he's funding a genocide.
And so what he's now, he's also, he's caught between a rock and a hard place because Joe Biden cannot come out against Israel because then APEC will cost him the election.
So he's got to walk this tightrope, which is we're going to keep supporting Israel.
We'll give them everything they need.
We're going to give humanitarian aid to Gaza.
And we're going to try to make their lives a little bit better.
Like we're going to give you the bombs to drop on them, but then we'll rush in with a glass of milk for anybody who isn't killed by those bombs.
This is an impossible situation to be in.
He's trying his best to sell it.
It's an impossible sale, and he's a god-awful salesman.
So it's just at a certain point, you almost feel bad for the guy.
However, then there was a totally organic hot mic moment that happens after the State of the Union.
And here, let's play the clip.
You know what?
I probably should have thought through how awful the audio on that is because we have some decent amount of people who listen to this audio only.
But anyway, the hot mic moment, if you didn't see it, was him saying that he told Benjamin Netanyahu that he has to have a come to Jesus moment, which is a hilarious thing to say to the prime minister of Israel.
I just like, if that did really happen, I do believe that that's the way Joe Biden would have said it.
And every Jew in the room would have been like, did he just seriously?
Okay.
Anyway, I don't believe this was real.
I think this was totally like staged.
And I think that Joe Biden's got to find a way to say that, you know, that he's doing his part to try to get it.
I'm trying.
I'm trying my best.
Yeah.
That's my guess on it.
However, I mean, even if it wasn't, even if it was completely organic and real, that would, you know, that would say something else.
That's pretty crazy.
Well, if you were to tell him to stop, it would be, you got to stop the gosh darn malarkey.
What are you doing?
You got it, the thing.
Don't do it.
Look, I'll say this, right?
This is what's pretty interesting.
I know that with the exception of Donald Trump, who, you know, Donald Trump had his own thing.
Donald Trump said something about, like, he said something on the campaign trail early in 2016 about how like we shouldn't, I forget exactly what he said.
It was something like we should be neutral to Israel and the Palestinians as America.
Like we shouldn't, you know, like pick between the two of them, which to Zionists is basically like saying, I made off Hitler and I'm here to kill all of you.
Like that's literally what they take that as.
And so they really got on him for it.
And then he went and gave a speech at APEC and basically just told them how he was going to do absolutely everything for the state of Israel because he's the best friend of Israel and then followed through with that, all the stuff they wanted, whether it was the Abraham Accords, moving the embassy to Jerusalem, all that stuff.
So he and just, and of course, kept, you know, all the foreign aid going toward him.
But so I don't know this about Trump, but I will say that every other president since Jimmy Carter wanted a two-state solution, or at least at some point in their presidency, they wanted a two-state solution.
And I will certainly say that Joe Biden's administration really wants Netanyahu to stop doing this because it's really hurting them with domestic politics.
And so there's something kind of interesting to understand here.
And by the way, if you want to understand this, John Mearsheimer wrote a really fantastic book that's called The Israeli Lobby.
But this is a very powerful lobby.
And the fact is that even when the president of the United States wants Israel to do something differently, they simply can't make it happen.
They don't have the political capital to make it happen.
And that in itself says something pretty crazy about how the whole system runs, that even though Jimmy Carter and George Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton and George W. Bush and Barack Obama, even though all of them wanted a two-state solution done, and even though they're the commander in chief of the United States of America that gives Israel more foreign aid and more weapons than any other government,
and we prop them up and put them in the position in order to deny a two-state solution, even though we're there, when our president wants one, he simply cannot get it.
And look, I mean, of course, the way it always works with the pro-Israel crowd is if you even start that what we've done everything we can to train everybody's ears that if you start talking like this, everyone's supposed to go, you hate Jews.
And that's why you're saying stuff like this.
But the fact is that there is this enormously powerful lobby in the United States of America that can ruin any politician.
And they are working on behalf of a foreign government.
How is that acceptable?
You know, like, how could anyone just on the face of it not oppose that?
Even if you support Israel and think we should be giving them foreign aid and think we should be funding this war, you could still say, yeah, but like, if there is to be a thing that we call democracy at all, or like if there is supposed to be a government at all, you can't have that.
You can't have a situation where if the elected officials oppose this policy, well, too damn bad because there's this powerful lobby that will ruin them if they come out opposing it.
And it is amazing.
I mean, it's like the tactics that they use.
I mean, it's just, it's despicable.
Watching the other, this Rabbi Schmooley going back and forth with Candace Owens and calling her like the most vicious name.
Dude, John Podhoritz, son of famous.
He should stick to selling dildos with his daughter.
That's Shmooli, not Podhoritz, we're talking about.
But yes, that's right.
But no, John Podhoritz, who is the son of, oh, what's his first name?
Oh, Jesus, that's doing a whole Joe Biden thing here now.
Norman, Norman Podhoritz, who was like the, you know, one of the real deal original neocon guys.
But John Podhoritz is at Commentary Magazine, which you probably know.
They're Jewish neoconservative, like pro-Israel, but American pro-Israel neocons.
But he goes, Thomas Massey tweeted out.
I ended up getting blocked by John Podharts.
I've met him a few times, but he blocked me over this because I called him out for it.
But I'm not exaggerating.
You can go look at this exchange.
I can't now because I'm blocked.
But Thomas Massey tweeted out that he was voting against the funding of Israel's war.
And he went, oh, he goes, we're $34 trillion in debt.
We're broke.
We don't have it.
We can't be borrowing money to then give it to other people.
That doesn't make any sense.
And John Podhoritz quote tweeted him and called him anti-Semitic filth.
Like, that's the language they use over you.
Just if you just say, we're broke, I don't think we can fund this thing, which is objectively a reasonable position, whether you agree with it or not.
Or you just go, Hey, I don't think there should be like an enormously powerful lobby that's advocating on behalf of a foreign government, anything like that.
The response is, you're anti-Semitic filth.
You are filth, you Jew hater.
That's just any decent person, I don't care what side of this issue you're on, should look at that and go, That's crazy, and that's wrong.
That can't be how we operate.
You know what I mean?
This is just two nuts.
Um, all right, I think we'll wrap up there.
Thanks, everybody, for listening.
Uh, come catch us in Chicago.
That wasn't a very good one.
I turned it in Chicago, that bears.
Okay, we'll be out in Chicago next week.
Please come check us out there.
And then Key West and of course, the big theater show out in Portland.
Please come on out to that.
Portland, the home of libertarianism.
All right, comicdave Smith.com, robbythefire.com, run your mouth podcast.