Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 5, 2023 - Rubin Report - Dave Rubin

49:46

WWIII Warning & the Moment the Democrats Became Corrupted | Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Participants

Main voices

dave rubin

05:29

robert f kennedy-jr

42:45

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		We're on the brink of a nuclear war.
		Lebanon could come in.
		Syria could come in.
		very very, you know, Lebanon could come in, Syria could come in, Egypt already has 350,000
		troops staged to come in. They're threatening to, Turkey, Sisi is saying that he's going to come in.
		And if that happens, Russia will almost certainly come in and we could easily sleepwalk into World
		And, you know, the United States, the people who are running our government now, Anthony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Avril Haines, Victoria Nuland, I don't think any of them have a healthy fear of nuclear war.
		We also have a diminished armory and we're fighting a two-front war.
		And it's going to be tempting to go to the punchline, to the endgame, because the Israeli
		army is not equipped for a very, very big war like it was 10 years ago.
		They've been doing police actions.
		They have the new ring rail fighting.
		And those Arab countries are now very, very well armed.
		It's not the same countries that they were fighting in, you know, 67 and 73 and all these
		other wars.
		It's a very, very different countries that they're fighting now.
		So I'm very worried.
		It literally keeps me up late at night.
unidentified		And I'm going to now bring in the real star of the show, Dave Rubin.
		Thank you.
		Thank you.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼		Switch mics.
		All right, we're switching mics.
		Make some noise for Bobby, everybody.
		I have to say, I fled California very publicly about two years ago.
		I campaigned.
		It's Mike.
		I campaigned.
		Oh, there.
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		Holding the antenna.
unidentified		Holding the antenna, okay.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼		So, I'm going to go ahead and get the camera.
		I'm going to go ahead and get the camera.
		Sorry, it's my first time doing this in front of an audience.
		I fled California very publicly.
		I campaigned, actually, for the recall alongside Larry Elder.
		Which obviously did not end up going the way we might have wanted here in Cali, but I got audited by the state three days after the recall, and that's actually the day that I put my house for sale.
		I mention that only because this is one of the few things that would bring me back to California, because I've soured on this.
		I now live In the free state of Florida, but it's a pleasure listening to you and my friend Dennis Prager.
		And I thought we'd start with something a little bizarre, because obviously there's plenty to talk about, and the world seems to be in a bit of a chaotic place.
		But on the way here, as I was in the car, I looked at your Twitter, and I want to read your last tweet, because I think this encapsulates a lot of people's frustrations with what's going on here in California.
		You wrote, yesterday an intruder climbed the fence at my home and was arrested.
		After being released from police custody later in the day, he immediately returned to my home and was arrested again.
		So twice in one day at your house.
		You mentioned that your wife Cheryl was doing a Facebook live stream at that moment.
		of the frustrations that people are having in this town, in this state, and really, really across the country at this point.
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I was, you were with me a few minutes ago when I learned that that was up on my Twitter, and I didn't really want to put it up on my Twitter because I didn't want to seem like I was whining, but my wife saw him come over the fence when she was doing a Twitter space with, I mean, a Facebook Live, or Instagram Live, And then she saw these wonderful guys from Gavin De Becker, the security guys, with their guns drawn, chasing him and putting handcuffs on him.
		but he was an intruder who had written me over 400 emails over the recent months, including
		many menacing ones a week ago, one that threatened to put a bullet in my head.
		And so, you know, it's one of several instances that have happened recently, including a guy
		guy who showed up in LA at a at a theater in Wilshire when I was doing a rally and asked for me.
		He was wearing a U.S.
		Marshal badge, a lanyard badge, and a federal ID.
		These guys spotted him because they thought the badge was too shiny and he asked to see me.
		And they pulled him aside.
		He had two shoulder holsters on that were fully loaded with, each one with the magazines loaded with eight bullets.
		He had a backpack on with another gun in it loaded and he had, I think, four or five extra
		magazines and knives and other weapons in there. And his house later on was filled with rifles.
		And he had given a TikTok, created a TikTok that said, if I don't come back from this,
		contact your commander in chief, et cetera. So it was, you know, we've repeatedly asked the
		the Biden administration for Secret Service protection.
		I'm the only candidate in history who has asked for a presidential candidate who has requested Secret Service protection and been denied.
		most people get your they legally have to give it to you hundred twenty days
		out but customarily is given i don't go got it five hundred days out teddy
		on kennedy you know they they made secret service uh... available to candidates
		uh... before during the primaries after my father was killed
		and ever since then people are are just uh... pro forma given i'd i think obama got it five hundred days out on now
		you know one three hundred sixty five days out so many many candidates have
		gotten much earlier is disturbing to me because i'm watching the
		the next one.
		You know, politicization of the other law enforcement agencies.
		And when my father got into the Justice Department, the first day in the Justice Department, he called all the attorneys together and the one thing he said to them is, we are not going to politicize justice in this country.
		And during my tenure at this agency, that there's going to be no politicization, you know, Democrats and Republicans are going to President Biden has a statue of my father behind him in the Oval Office, and his family members get Secret Service protection.
		Anthony Fauci has a million dollars of Secret Service protection a month.
		People don't like him.
		You know, he's entitled to it.
		John Bolton, years after retiring, has Secret Service protection, as do many other officials.
		And it's politicization.
		You know, I imagine, I don't know why they're doing it exactly, but I think that they understand it's very, very expensive for me and that they'd rather me be spending money on my protection rather than, you know, on advertisements or organization or field organization.
		So that's wrong.
		Now, I want to say, I just want to say this, that I'm involved in a number of lawsuits against the administration, against the government.
		One of those suits is now in front of the Supreme Court, Kennedy versus Biden.
		And it has a companion case, Missouri versus Biden.
		We got a lower court decision from Judge Doty that's 155 pages long.
		That decision is, you know, Americans should have to read it in civics class because it shows what happens when you politicize the law enforcement agencies.
		It shows that President Biden, I was the first person censored by the administration 37 hours after he took the oath of office.
		President Biden, the White House was ordering Twitter and Facebook and Instagram to remove my accounts and threatening them that if they did not do so, that they were going to, the White House was going to try to remove their Section 230 immunity, which is existential for them.
		They could not, their companies would die if they didn't have that Section 230 immunity.
		And what we found from the Twitter files and from our discovery documents, Is that the White House, because of pressure from the White House, Facebook and the other social media sites provided portals to the FBI to go in directly and censor material.
		And the FBI gave access to the CIA, the DHS, to the IRS, and to about 12 other federal agencies.
		So you had, you know, listen, I've been censored for 18 years, but not officially by the government.
		And, you know, the New York Times and CNN, CNN won't put me on, none of them will do that, but they're allowed to.
		That's not, that does not violate the First Amendment.
		If you own a printing press, you can choose what to print and what not to print.
		If you own a cable station, You know, you're not using the airwaves, but if you go on a cable station, you can decide what to censor and not to censor.
		But when the government begins telling you to censor things, now the First Amendment is implicated, because that's exactly why we passed the First Amendment, to make sure that the government could not silence its critics.
		And I'll say the last thing, that a government that can silence its critics has license for every atrocity.
		Because, you know, if you can quiet criticism about yourself, there's no end to the power that you can then
unidentified		claim.
unidentified		So I guess that's a great segue.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼		I know a lot of people obviously want to talk about what's going on in Israel, and we'll get to that.
		that but that's a great segue to the What has happened to the Democrat Party?
		You know, the day that you announced, I said on my show, and my audience tends to lean a little more conservative now, I said to my audience, by the end of this thing, I don't know that he will be a Republican, but he will not be a Democrat.
		And you are now running independent.
		I said it on my show.
		We'll send you the clip.
		I said it the day you announced.
		It was obvious.
		I had seen, Dennis mentioned the why I left the left video that I did.
		I've seen that path, even just from chatting to some of the people here this evening.
		They're on that path as well.
		I think a lot of people are waking up.
		But what do you think happened, really, to that party that has led to the radicalism and or, I would argue, utter incompetence that we're seeing right now?
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		I think a couple of things happened.
		One is, the Democratic Party was interesting because the Democratic Party I grew up in
		could not, I watched this evolution happen because I was involved in the medical freedom
		issues and that was really the spear tip of what happened to the Democratic Party.
		And the Democratic Party I grew up in always had trouble fundraising because the groups
		that it could fundraise were very limited.
		They could fundraise from trial lawyers.
		They could fundraise from unions.
		But most of the big corporations were off limits to them.
		A really pure Democrat wouldn't take any corporate money, which meant it's hard to win elections.
		Meanwhile, the big money was going from the oil industry, the coal industry, the pesticide
		industry, the big food, big ag industry, was mainly going to Republicans.
		There were a lot of Midwestern ag state Democrats that were taking money from Cargill and Monsanto and Smithfield and Purdue and Pilgrim, etc.
		But Democrats wouldn't take pharmaceutical money.
		And then when, in 2016, when they were fighting, when President Obama was fighting over Obamacare, or, you know, in the years preceding 2016, 2012 to 2016, the Democrats, the Obama administration had to make a deal with the pharmaceutical companies in order to get Obamacare through.
		Because if the pharma is the biggest They pay twice in lobbying what the next biggest, which is oil and gas, and about five times what the military contractors pay.
		So they are off the charts in how much they invest in lobbying.
		And the Obama administration had to make a deal with them and the deal they made is that we're going to do Obamacare and we are going to buy your, without bargaining, we're going to buy everybody your drugs and you're going to get really rich and we won't bargain for them, we won't push you down.
		So they got them on board.
		At that point it became permissible for Democrats to take pharmaceutical money and they just started taking it.
		And then President Trump ran in 2016 and President Trump said on three
		occasions while he was running, at this time, Democrats and Republicans
		were evenly split over vaccine safety.
		So you could go and talk to Democrats about it.
		And President Trump on three occasions said that he believed
		that vaccines caused autism.
		He knew people who had mothers, and he told me this too, three mothers
		who had gotten, uh, whose kids had gotten autism from vaccines.
		So he said that, and Democrat, that issue then became a tribal issue.
		Democrats put that issue in the same dumpster, the anti-science dumpster, as climate denial and the other stuff, and it was just part of, you know, Trump's insanity.
		So after that, after 2016, you could not talk about vaccines to Democrats anymore.
		And it became, you know, they started protecting the pharmaceutical company.
		And then we saw this complete insanity, which people call Trump derangement syndrome, which is Donald Trump began dictating the entire platform for the Democratic Party.
		So the Democratic Party always hated NAFTA.
		And as soon as Trump said, I don't like NAFTA, they started loving it.
		As soon as Trump said, I'm anti-war, the Democrats started loving war.
		And, you know, and it happened with every issue.
		It was extraordinary.
		It's like, it's like the kid who hates their parents and becomes their parent because they hate him so much.
		The Democratic Party became the, you know, the very thing that, you know, the tyrant and the, you know, censor, you know, they were mad at Trump for You know, the Republicans were censoring books and they became the biggest censor in American history.
		So all this weird, I mean, that's the evolution that I watch happen and I think a lot of it now is just driven by anything.
		You know, people are angry at me, the Democratic Party, because they say it's dangerous.
		They keep using that word, it's dangerous.
		I've never heard anybody say, any Democrat, say We want President Biden because he has a vision for this country and he has the vigor and energy to really lead this country in this critical period.
		Nobody ever says that.
		They say, you gotta vote for Biden or Trump will get in there.
		So it's all about using fear.
		And you know, the Democratic Party, the byline of the Democratic Party The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
		The reason he said that in 1932 is because he was watching what was
		happening in Europe with, you know, in Spain and Italy and Germany, where
		totalitarian systems were emerging and right-wing totalitarianism and left-wing
		totalitarianism in the Soviet Union and other states, they were all using fear
		to disable the capacity for critical thinking, to disable the, you know, the
		affection and affinity for democracy.
unidentified		Thanks for watching!
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		And he said, you know, we can get through this, through this economic depression, As long as we don't collapse in fear and we'll get through it with our democracy intact, with free market capitalism intact, and he was able to save capitalism at that time.
		About a third of the people in this country wanted fascism and about a third wanted communism.
		And only a third wanted to hold, you know, everybody thought the system was broken.
		And he was able to get through that period.
		by calming us and saying, don't give in to fear.
		And that was, you know, the Democratic Party was not the party of fear.
		Now it's the party of fear.
		We saw it during COVID and we see it now in the elections.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼		So speaking of those thirds, what does the coalition look like to you,
		that you could put together that maybe some of the other candidates can't?
		Taking, say, the disaffected liberal.
		I suspect there's a bunch of them here.
		Taking the more moderate conservative.
		What does that actually look like?
		What are the common points that could lead you to the White House?
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		People ask me who my constituency is, and I always say that it's the Milgram Experiment constituency.
		It's the 30% of people who walked out of the Milgram Experiment.
		The Milgram Experiment was the MKUltra, the CIA experiment that was done at Yale, where they brought people into a room and they shocked them.
		The subjects were told to turn a tile that would shock the That guy was a confederate of Dr. Milgram.
		He was screaming and shouting and struggling and pleading when they turned it up.
		And Dr. Milgram would say, turn it up, turn it down, turn it higher, turn it down.
		And the people were crying and saying, don't make me shock him again.
		He was wearing a white lab coat and a doctor and all these accoutrements and vestiges of the medical authority.
		And so they were doing what he said, and 67% of them ended up putting it to a 250-folds where it was marked potentially lethal.
		And so they were vowed, and what Milgram concluded is they were that people, when ordered to by a person of authority, will violate their most closely held values.
		But the good result was that 33% of the people got up and walked out and said, I'm not doing this.
		And those were the people who did not have their capacity for critical thinking disabled.
		And I would say that would include almost everybody in this group.
		Those are the people who walked out of the Milgram experiment.
		And I think that the last three years was just this giant Milgram experiment where we had This guy, you know, who was an authority, we were told, trust the experts.
		Which, by the way, isn't a thing.
		Right?
		I mean, it's definitely not a feature of democracy.
		It's not a feature of science.
		It's a feature of totalitarianism and orthodox religion.
		Trusting the experts.
		I mean, I've had 500 Lawsuits, all of them have involved scientific controversy, and every one of them has experts on either side.
		When I sued Monsanto, Monsanto came with experts from Harvard, Yale, and Stanford.
		And we had experts from Harvard, Yale, and Stanford.
		And they were saying exactly the opposite thing about the same data.
		You can't trust the experts.
		In a democracy, you know, one of the big pains of a democracy is that you actually cannot, you have a duty to maintain a posture of fierce skepticism toward anybody in authority.
		That is part and question everything.
		And so I think the people that are, you know, are drawn to my campaign are people who are
		They're people who are questioning, you know, everything.
		And I think there's more and more of those.
		The Harvard-Harris poll that came out this week had me at 22%.
		And what the people that are, you know, joining my campaign are people who watch long-form interviews and podcasts.
		Oh, if you watch, if the only thing that you watch is CNN, MSNBC, and read the New York Times, if I read that, if I was in that information bubble, I would have a very low opinion of myself.
		And so, but what we find is, and that's mainly Democrats, like hardcore Democrats, what we find is that when we can get them to listen to a podcast, that within 10 minutes, most of them convert.
		So they start rethinking.
		If I can maintain my polling numbers over 15%, they're going to have to let me
		into the debates and I think I will do very well in that circumstance.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼		So let's talk about the thing that's obviously on everyone's mind,
		what's happening in Israel.
		But I thought maybe before we do the macro sort of political version of that, we could maybe talk about how people are feeling here in America, because there clearly is a new level of fear.
		And you addressed fear earlier.
		We're seeing what's happening on the college campuses.
		We're seeing the radicalism.
		within the Democrat Party, with the eight members who I call the Hamas caucus.
		What do you think is happening here in America connected to what's going on in the Middle East?
		And then we can talk about it sort of politically and geopolitically.
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, I think there's this insanity going on on the campuses that, you know, was already,
		and what Dennis said, in the left wing of the Democratic Party, where there's,
		you know, there's this, where they've just adopted this false narrative about Israel,
		about the entire history of Israel, where people, you know, and I see it,
		I'm shocked to see, because my kids are very well educated, and they, and they, I'd say most of
		their friends are Jewish, and even with their Jewish friends, there's this kind of, there's an
		ignorance about, you know, the history of Israel, and they all adopt this.
		This narrative that Israel is a white oppressor nation that was dropped down on these indigenous Palestinians and has been dominating them and stealing land, and is an apartheid state, is engaged in ethnic cleansing.
		We all hear this stuff.
		I think that one of my jobs is to make the moral case for Israel, and I think it's an easy case to make.
		I was talking in an interview that we did in the previous YPO group that was here before you guys.
		There's a really good speech that was done by Prince Bandar, which I urge you all to get a hold of.
		It was done in 2020.
		At that point, Prince Bandar and I met.
		I spent yesterday, I think it was, oh no, the day before yesterday, I spent the day
		with Prince Bandar's successor, Prince Turki in Washington, who is the Saudi prince who
		took over as chief of the intelligence agencies and also ambassador to the United States.
		We talked a lot about this and about the history of Palestine.
		They're very pro-Palestinian.
		They also are very sanguine about what the history is.
		They understand, and Bandar goes through this history, that the Palestinians, he says, and
		this is what I think people have to understand because everybody's made it this binary narrative
		that it's the Israelis against the Palestinians.
		Israel is therefore guilty of all the things that are wrong with Gaza.
		Gaza is an open air prison because Israel made it an open air prison.
		And nobody understands the history of Gaza.
		in 2006, 2005 handed Gaza, not didn't want Gaza.
		You know, they tried to give it to the Egyptians in 73.
		Egypt wouldn't take it.
		Nobody complained incidentally when Gaza, for 20 years when Gaza was part of Egypt,
		nobody wanted a Palestinian state then.
		And when Sharon gave it independence At that time, Xi Jinping said, we want to help Gaza.
		We want to turn it into the Singapore of the West.
		We will pay, Israel will pay to develop the port of Gaza so that they can be the greatest port in the Caribbean.
		They gave, Israel donated 3,000 greenhouses that were state-of-the-art greenhouses to make Gaza self-sufficient in food.
		Gaza became, you know, the greatest recipient of international aid of any people in the world, getting more than any people.
		And instead, and Hamas came in there in 2006, The Palestinian Authority people kneecapped him and threw him from the roofs and said, we don't want anything from Israel.
		Anything from Israel is dirty.
		And they smashed all the greenhouses.
		They rejected the money for the port.
		They've taken almost every penny that they've gotten and they've turned it and used it to buy weapons instead of making things better for their people.
		And of course Israel is going to put up a fence.
		They've sent 30,000 rockets and mortars to Israel since 2006.
unidentified		30,000.
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		There's no country in the world that would put up with that at civilian targets.
		And imagine if Cuba sent one missile on Miami.
		How long would it take us before we occupied the full island?
		It would take two days.
		And then they do this raid.
		Americans can't even remember what happened to us on 9-11.
		We got ahead and we immediately went over and found the guys who did it in Tora Bora.
		And of course Israel has an absolute right to go into Gaza, and they have a moral obligation to protect their people, like every country in the world has that moral obligation.
		It's the number one moral obligation.
		Now, I hope they won't go into Gaza, and for a number of reasons.
		One, I think it will be a terrible battle, and the more rubbly, I think it will be like Stalingrad.
		And as Hamas fights dirty, it likes to make its civilians human shields.
		They're going to have their fighters hanging out in the tunnels.
		The hostages are going to be in the tunnels.
		And there's wormholes all over the place and rabbit holes where they can come up and fight.
		And it's like Stalingrad.
		The more rubble there was, the easier it was for the resistance to operate.
		So I think a lot of Israeli kids are going to die.
		Potentially tens of thousands of them.
		And the publicity around the world is going to amplify all these voices of anti-Semitism that are happening now all over the world.
		I think the saddest part of this was what Netanyahu did with allowing $1.5 billion to
		reach Hamas, which really injured the moral case for Israel.
		And it makes it more trickier to have this pure case, which I think we had prior to that.
		But also, we're on the brink of a nuclear war.
		Lebanon could come in.
		Syria could come in.
		But we could, if, because it's very, very, you know, Lebanon could come in, Syria could come in,
		Egypt already has 350,000 troops staged to come in.
		They're threatening to, Turkey, Sisi, is saying that he's gonna come in.
		And if that happens, Russia will almost certainly come in and we could easily sleepwalk into World War III.
		And, you know, the United States, the people who are running our government now, Anthony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Avril Haines, Victoria Nuland, I don't think any of them have a healthy fear of nuclear war.
		We also have a diminished armory.
		And, you know, we're fighting a two-front war.
		And it's going to be tempting to go to the punchline, to the end game, because
		you know, we were not, the Israeli army is not equipped for a very, very big
		war like it was 10 years ago.
		They haven't been, you know, they've been doing police actions.
		They have the new ring rail fighting.
		And those Arab countries are now very, very well armed.
		It's not the same countries that they were fighting in, you know, 67 and 73 and all these other, you know, wars.
		It's a very, very different countries that they're fighting now.
		So I'm very worried.
		It literally keeps me up late at night.
		If I were in the White House, I would be reaching out to President Xi.
		I would reach out to Putin.
		I I would reach out to these other countries and say, how do we make this not turn into a nuclear confrontation?
		The Russians have a thousand more nuclear weapons than we do.
		They have much better nuclear weapons than we do.
		They have defensive weapons, which we don't have.
		They can shoot down our weapons.
		We have a hard time shooting down theirs.
		You know, they have a defensive strategy.
		So they know how to shoot down our stuff.
		And, you know, Russia only has one base around the world.
		It has one base in Syria.
		China has one and a half bases.
		And also then you get a complication if we're fighting this two-front war, it's the perfect time for China to go into Taiwan.
		And we cannot live without Taiwan.
		Taiwan makes the microprocessing chips that are necessary for every smart U.S.
		weapon.
		Every missile has them.
		All of our weaponry needs these DSMC microchip, microprocessing chips that are only made in Taiwan.
		It's like the oil of the past.
		If China gets a hold of that resource, we simply, they will outweapon us.
	So, and it's a perfect time for them to go into Taiwan if we're involved in a front war.
	So I have all these scenarios going on in my head and thinking about, you know, if I had that job, what I would be doing.
	And I don't think the people now, I think the people who are in that job now are inept.
	And that it's really scary.
	Now, I want to, I just want to say one last thing.
	Is that Bandar's speech, which I urge you to read, he talks about the fact that this long history going back to, you know, to 1947 and to, you know, into the grand mufti of Jerusalem who was working with Hitler on, you know, the final solution.
	And that in 37, they were offered a two-state solution.
	47, they're offered a two-state solution.
	67, they're offered a two-state solution.
	And they come up with, all the Arab countries come up with the three no's.
	No peace, no negotiation, no recognition.
	And in 84, they again offered a two-state solution, and he goes through, in 2001, the Tava and Camp David Accords, Ehud Barak offers heartbreaking concessions, including a complete return to the 1967 boundaries, except for 3% of the West Bank, and giving 3% of Israel land.
	Barak didn't do it.
	didn't want to do it. Nobody in Israel did. Clinton twisted his arm, made him do it, but they offered
	it to him. And Yasser Arafat walks away from that without a counteroffer. And then six years later
	at Oslo, Andor is talking to him and he goes through, his descriptions of Arafat are really
	interesting and insane. And he goes through, he goes through, he says to Arafat at that time,
	he says, you know, the deal you got at Oslo was not near as good as the deal they
	offered you at Camp David in 2001, that Clinton on his way out offered.
	And Arafat said, that deal was ten times better than what we just signed.
	And Bandar says to him, why didn't you take it?
	And he said, because my own people would have killed me if I did.
	And he said, that's the problem.
	At the Palestinian leadership have all taught themselves the fact that the only solution is the extermination of every Jew and the obliteration of Israel.
	And that is anybody, like Hamas and its charter, says negotiations are fruitless.
	anybody who engages in them should be killed.
	It's a treachery to Islam to even negotiate.
	How do you have a negotiation partner?
	The kids at Harvard, what do they think that?
	Here's what I always say.
	If you want to stay calm, there's a good technique for staying calm
	if you're in an argument about Palestine.
	Ask the person, what do the Palestinians want?
	What do they want?
	They want an extension of the governments they have, which are apartheid governments.
	Jews have no right to run for office in Gaza or West Bank.
	Or Christians.
	Christians and Jews have no rights in those countries.
	apartheid regimes, those countries are, you know, are, are genocidal
	countries, they're their own populations.
	Oh, what do the Palestinians want?
	Do they want a democracy?
	No.
	There's never been any claim by any Palestinian that we want a democracy.
	They want two state solution.
	What do they want?
	Nobody can answer that question because the question, the answer to it is they
	want to eliminate every Jew and they want to obliterate Israel.
	And it's been the same answer since 1922, 1937, 1947.
	It's always been consistent.
	1937, 1947, it's always been consistent.
	We own the land, Islam, the Koran makes it an offense against Allah to give up land that
	was once conquered by Islam.
	It was conquered by Islam during the Ottoman Empire, and it's a crime for them to give it up.
	Oh, you know, when Israel was created in 1948, there were 548,000 Jews in Israel, and there
	were 390,000 Arabs.
	And the way that they divided it is they said, we're going to give all the parts of balance.
	First they gave most of Palestine away to the Palestinians in Transjordan.
	And then they brought in a foreign government, the Hashemites, to run that.
	So that is the real apartheid government.
	You know, it's got a minority running that.
	They did the same thing in Syria with the Alawites.
	It's the Alawites running a Palestinian country.
	Nobody cares about that as long as it's not Jews running it.
	Anyway, there's no answer to that.
	In every case, the only thing that they've asked for is, you know, when they gave it away, when they divided up, the Peel Commission came in and they interviewed the Grand Mufti and they said, can you live with Jews?
	And he said, no.
	He said, we'll exterminate them.
	He was very frank about it.
	So they said, the only thing that we can do is have two states, and so we'll take the parts of Palestine that are majority Jewish, and we'll give those to the Jews.
	We'll take the parts that are majority Arab, we'll give it to the Arabs.
	They were both indigent.
	The Jews had been there continuously for 3,700 years.
	The Arabs had mainly arrived in the 20th century, because they were attracted by the economic development of the Jews, they were attracted by the By the British oil industry, and that's how most of them ended there, but they're, you know, look at their names, they're Egyptian names, they're Moroccan names, they're not... So they had all arrived around the same time, the same time that the Zionist movement started.
	But there was a majority of each, and that's how they did it.
	And it was there, and that's what they did with the rest of the Ottoman Empire.
	They said, we're going to divide the Ottoman Empire now that there is no Ottoman Empire.
	We're going to divide it up until we're going to give it to the indigenous people.
	And in Palestine, there were two groups, and they gave it to them.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼		Isn't it refreshing hearing a politician who actually knows history and dates and reality and geography?
		We play clips of all the politicians on my show, obviously, and I always find in the few moments,
		and I can get it with you and I can get it with DeSantis, where it's like, oh, there's somebody
		that's telling the truth.
		And when you hear the truth, you're not contorted, you're not twisted, it's easy to hear the truth.
		And everything you just said there was true, and unfortunately, with the algorithms of TikTok
		and everything else, they've brainwashed a generation not to believe any of that.
		But what it was making me think, as you were talking about the history,
		because I don't know how many people we can win over in the history.
		Maybe there's something else we can win them over with.
unidentified		Can you talk about why you think it matters?
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼		Israel may matter to some of these people who are Jewish here, but why does it matter for America and Americans?
		Because I also see another version right now of sort of the libertarian version of, oh, just forget that land, forget all that, it has nothing to do with America.
		I personally see it very differently.
		I'm wondering what you think about that.
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, you know, my philosophy with America is that we need to unravel the empire.
		We have 800 bases abroad.
		We pay 10 times for our military.
		We pay more for our military than the next 10 nations combined.
		Oh, you know, we can cut our military expenditure in half.
		It's now $1.3 trillion if you include the national security expenses, USAID, and the
		National Endowment for Democracies, which I will – my uncle started them, I will end them because
		they are completely perverted, what they've become. They don't do anything good for our country.
		But I'm going to cut our military budget substantially down to $500 billion, which is
		the same that it was when – during the height of the Cold War when Eisenhower in 61 was in there.
		and um...
		And what we need to do is arm ourselves as thieves at home so we can protect our borders, make ourselves too expensive to ever invade, and then protect the sea lanes, protect the neutral We have the resources that are critical to us, including the oil resources that are critical to the world, that we have a strike capacity to make sure to be able to protect those.
		And Israel is critical.
		And the reason it's critical is because it's a bulwark for us in the Mideast.
		It's almost like having an aircraft carrier in the Mideast.
		It's our oldest ally and it's been our ally for 75 years.
		It has been an incredible ally for us in terms of the technology, the exchange.
		And you know, in building the INDOME, which we've paid a lot for, has also taught us enormously
		about how to defend ourselves at home from missiles.
		So those military expenditures are all going, 75% of it goes to U.S.
		companies under the agreement, under the MOU.
		But if you look at what's happening in the Mideast now, Iran is now, the closest allies to Iran are Russia and China.
		Iran also controls all of Venezuela's oil.
		Hezbollah is in Venezuela.
		They have propped up the Maduro regime, and so they control that oil supply.
		Saudi Arabia is now joining BRICS.
		So those countries will control 90% of the oil in the world.
		If Israel disappears, the vacuum in the Mideast, which is, you know, Israel is our ambassador,
		it's our presence, our beachhead in the Mideast.
		And it gives us ears and eyes in the Mideast.
		It gives us intelligence, it gives us the capacity to influence affairs in the Mideast.
		If Israel disappeared, Russia and China would be controlling the Mideast,
		and they control 90% of the world's oil supply.
		And that would be cataclysmic for US national security.
		So that's the answer.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼		Why don't we hit one more topic and then I think we're gonna take a couple
		questions from you guys. You mentioned a little bit in your talk about big tech
		and you've been fighting big tech as hard as anybody for for quite some time.
		Do you ever feel that we're too deep in it now in some ways to reverse some of
		the effect of the censorship and what we learned from the Twitter files and the
		algorithmic tricks that we know of but as I always say I'm more worried about
		the ones that I don't know of and how they might be shadow banning you at this
		very moment and how much the...
		The agencies are still probably entangled and even Elon has said he thinks he might have moles still at Twitter, even now.
		Do you really see a way out of that juggernaut?
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		I think it's very dangerous and we can't really afford to be at war right now with Russia and these kind of conflicts with China and even Iran.
		We need to be sitting down with each other and figuring out how to control AI.
		You know, and we can't, we cannot chase AI out of this country.
		We cannot make this a hospital environment for AI because super intelligence is coming.
		It's terrifying.
		But we better have it better here than anybody else if we want to protect our national security because we don't.
		We're going to be owned by somebody else.
		Whoever controls that superintelligence is going to control the world and humanity may not be able to control it for long.
		We have this kind of turnkey totalitarianism that is waiting there in the wings where if a bad dictator took over, now they've got AI, GPS, that's following you everywhere.
		Even your cell phone is listening to your conversations and recording them and knows everything about you.
		All of us have this experience.
		I was talking to my wife about we need a new mattress.
		We've got three mattress ads on our phones the next morning.
		And it's not just the mattress company is listening to you.
		It's the NSA who is storing all these conversations.
		So it is terrifying.
		But I think if we get smart people in a room, like Elon, there are things that we can do to at least mitigate the intrusive impacts and the controlling capacity of this new surveillance technology.
		I had dinner with Jack Dorsey the other night and I asked him that very question.
		How would he control it?
		What he said to me is, you need to have absolutely transparent algorithms and we need to give
		people a choice about what their algorithm is and make it completely transparent.
		If you want to have a Republican algorithm, you can have that.
		If you want to have a Democratic algorithm, you choose it yourself.
		If you want to have an algorithm that is neutral and produces the most red news or science
		news, whatever.
unidentified		You're welcome.
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		You choose it.
		And you know what it says and you know what it's going to do.
		That makes it much more difficult for them to manipulate you.
		We're now all being manipulated.
		We're all being manipulated by algorithms that we don't understand.
		And right now the algorithms have nefarious And the agenda may be just to keep you interested, to keep your eyeballs on the site.
		That's the least sinister agenda, but it's very sinister.
		Because as we know, the way that you keep people on the site is by reinforcing their biases and their prejudices.
		And that, you know, amplifies the polarization that is now tearing our country apart.
		If you and I are living right next door to each other and you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat, We both asked the same question on Google.
		We're going to get entirely different results.
		Because the Google algorithm is sending us things that it thinks are going to hold us on the site.
		And as it turns out, people like reading things that reinforce their existing prejudices and their existing biases, their existing worldviews.
		You've got all these other people, the intelligence agencies, who are now designing the algorithms that are manipulating us and saying, you can't see this information.
		We don't want you to see this.
		We want you to believe this.
		And those things are really sinister.
		What Dorsey said is that the best solution to that is to have us able to choose our own We're manipulating ourselves rather than having some nefarious group manipulate us.
		And I said, that's a brilliant solution.
		Why don't you tell Congress about it?
		And he said, I've testified five times before Congress, and I've said the same thing every time, and it doesn't make a ripple.
		So anyway, if I get in there, I'm going to do that stuff.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼		If you're looking for more honest and thoughtful conversations about politics instead of nonstop screaming, check out our politics playlist.
unidentified		And if you want to watch full interviews on a variety of topics, watch our full episode playlist, all right over here.

▲