Charlie Kirk LIARS, JD Vance Rogan FALLOUT & Proof McConnell ALIVE | Julian Dorey

(dramatic music) - What's up everybody and welcome back to another episode of the Joy and Dory podcast. I am, Joy and Dory. - Well, I'm Joey Dave, how you doing? - How you doing? All right, apologies. We're doing a lot of construction today. Obviously, it's very normal. Normal wear for construction, all that. But, you know, didn't have time to get a shower before this. But it was because we had to hop right on air because we have a worldwide exclusive. And, I, Dave, we're honored today. - Oh, thank you. - Absolutely honored by, to be in the presence of someone who has been incredibly missing and no one's known where this person is or what's going on. And, now we have proof of life. So, Senator McConnell, it is great to see you. Thank you so much for joining us. All right, yeah. So, obviously, I know talking's gonna be a little bit of an issue today and everything for you. For sure, I know you've been through a lot, maybe like a stroke, six head injuries. But, just keep it down. I gotta be able to talk, Senator. I know you're used to talking a lot. But, like, you know, we'll get through it. Dave is a brilliant translator of you. We were obviously able to get all the proper communications out. - Yep. - A head of time to make sure that what you were saying was accurately reflected. So, you know, Dave, obviously, I got a lot of questions. So, first of all, Senator, you are alive. This is actually you. So, what happened when everyone took you out of your house? - Dave, what the fuck is he saying? - He just got in back from the Lollipop Club. Okay. - The Lollipop Club. - Yeah. - What's happening at the Lollipop Club? - Senator, that's a place where you might make some deals on Capitol Hill. - Make some deals on Capitol Hill. There are a lot of senators from both parties at the Lollipop Club a lot. - Oh. - Oh. - Oh, Senator. - Don't get too excited. - Please, take it easy. We don't have any biographer for you. It's not that kind of place. - All right. All right. So, obviously, you know, the Iran war has still been going on while you've been away. I know you're a big fan of that. What are your thoughts there? Like, what should we be doing? - Oh, I don't like that. - You don't like that, Dave. - What's he saying? - He said, "Level it?" "Level it." You want to make it a fucking parking lot. Well, I got that one. - Yeah. - I got the transit. - I know what. - Right. Right. So, what do you think of the, whoa, was it 103 people in the house who voted against funding Israel? It just really curious what your thoughts are there. Obviously, that's the kind of buildup would then go to senate that you'd be handling. But, you know, I'm sure you're gonna go back and vote at DC, but what are your thoughts about that? Every single one of them is treasonous. Which ones are treasonous? The 300 that voted for it? Or the 100 that voted against it? The ones who voted against it? The one that voted against it. Right. So, you think that, well, I mean, this was gonna be my next question, but we should merge the United States and Israeli militaries that is your position. Dave, I got nothing. - He said, "Not only should we merge the militaries, "we should merge the countries together." - I got you. You know what? - All the, all right, shut up. That is all the confirmation I needed. I knew Mary Madison was visiting you in the hospital. So, it's nice to know that she cares about you when you're at your lowest moment, too. More than your wife does it, apparently. Didn't that bitch go to China while you were in there? Ooh, I think there's some marital problems in the McConnell House. So, what do you say, Dave? - Yeah, let's just say they're gonna be spending their honeymoon in Shanghai. A little CCP for the, yeah. - What's that? - I go past that. - There was another man involved. - Another man involved. Oh, this was straight up, how's the card shit? So, you're Kevin Spacey. You're into that. Oh, gotcha. I should have probably guessed that. - I'm sort of think I heard enough out of this guy. - Well, actually, no, there's some news. I got a break to the Senator. I don't think he was aware. So, Senator, I'm very sorry for your loss, but Lindsey Graham, dead. Oh, so he was, he frequented the Lollipop club a bit then. No, you can't back your way out of this one, Senator. So, they called him the candy man. - Candy man. - Lindsey Graham, the candy man. Did he say, did I hear him say "Rest in Peace" to a great American in there? - Yes, he did say that. - That's very respectful of you to say that. - I respect that. - Patriot, I think, is what he said. - Yeah, they say the Russians got him. - It sounds like you know what I mean. - Yeah. - You got to read it on that picture. - So, they came and read it at your hospital bed. All right, you know what, I've heard it. - Yeah, I like it. - Let's listen, I'm happy you're alive, but like please leave the Senate and, you know, thanks for the approval. All right, let's get him out of here. All right, just, yeah, that's Senator. It's gonna be painless. Yeah, let's get him out of here. All right, do you just open that up right there? Don't make a fucking noise. - Okay, yeah, stop him right there. All right, hours. Yeah, you just stay comfortable, Senator. We're gonna, we got like an hour and a half at a show. So, it'll be all right. - All right, let's spec it up. - Yeah, let's spec it up. - So, obviously that was Senator Mitch McConnell. I hope he is alive apparently. Gonna hang in there till August 3rd or August 5th. Whatever it is, I'm sure. And then, you know, maybe he'll be healthy after that too. I don't know. But, you know, hey, hey, hey. - You don't talk, Senator. Shut up! What the fuck did I tell you? No talking back. Shut up! We already gave you five minutes. - All right, we're gonna pause for a second. We'll be right back. All right, we're back for regularly scheduled programming. Obviously, Dave, we had to take the opportunity to get the Senator in here. Obviously, to show proof of life. I think that was very important for the American people to see. - Yeah, I mean, like you've said, he has an incentive not to show. - That's right. - This is a satirical show. We have fun with things. - No, that was 100% real. - Yeah. - Everything. - He's always real. - That was all real. But, would you have a bunch to go over today? I had a lot of people hitting me up this week saying, "JD meds went on Rogan, you guys were just talking about this." I don't think that's really the case, though. We were literally just going through that New York Times report from June that was talking about when JD might go on the show. What I will say is that, you know, and we can talk about this later when we actually go through it. But I thought there were a lot of things, Joe, did a really good job, like pushing back on and making him give an answer for answers that were probably not totally satisfactory to all the people listening. I know they weren't to me, but like that's also how you get those types of answers so that we can judge that. And I do think this also has to be said, I don't know Joe Rogan at all, but I did talk to someone who knows him well, who reached out after my episode where we were talking about that story a few weeks ago and they assured me 100% no pre-approved questions whatsoever. And I think that was blatantly obvious. Like if you listen to that podcast, it was very free-flowing and I've never known, Joe to do pre-approved questions or anything like that, that would be kind of crazy. So, hey guys, if you're not following me on Spotify, please hit that follow button and leave a five-star review. They're both a huge, huge help. Thank you. - Yeah, we'll get to that and talk through that, but also we do need to address the podcast the other day where obviously Joe, you and I did one talking about some of the latest news in the five-day hearing that occurred for the Charlie Kirk trial last week. And even before I get to the second podcast, I'm about to talk about, you know, case in point of what a mess this thing is, the fact that you and I came in here to record five minutes before going on air. That video of Jack Pasobietz drops, talking to the camera, reporting what he saw in court. And I've never been a fan of Jack Pasobietz in the least. I think the guy, I mean, is an Epstein binder guy, like I use a paid shill, all that stuff. But even I didn't think that someone would stoop so low is to walk out of a courtroom and lie about a video that was shown to the entire courtroom that I guess like 150 people were in there to watch who could easily refute what he was saying. So we played the video on air. I did say on air, luckily I was like, listen, there's an Epstein binder guy. I don't know, I need to see the video. But then we get off air and we immediately see on Twitter there's community notes on every post saying that there is, he claimed that on the video, you could clearly, I believe his words where you could clearly see Tyler Robinson line up and pull the trigger. That apparently, again, I wasn't in the courtroom, but that apparently is not the case. There's even a video of the prosecutor telling the judge a couple of days before in the hearing that no such video of the actual shot were tight where you see Tyler Robinson shoot Charlie Kirk exists. And yet guys like Pasobietz and he wasn't the only one. There were a few others come out of there and just lie to you and it just underscores how fucked up a lot of this is. So I when I was the next morning, when I was put up. the episode together to like get it ready to go on air on Saturday because we filmed these on Friday evening usually and then put it out Saturday afternoon. I put in a b-roll before that of me saying, "Hey, no information. Sounds like you lied. I don't know you guys decide." But I just think transparency for whatever trial may or may not happen here is going to be so important because that has been the number one thing lacking in this case to this point. And for people out there who complain about people running with every possible theory, my response to you is, you know, what do you expect? When you're not telling the truth, when you're not at least giving the people something and not just trying to open shut the case, people are going to speculate about things and they have a right to do that. And I think that there have been people, whether it's obviously like Candace Owens or Baron Coleman, more on him in a second, whether or not you agree with all the things they say is one thing. But they're at least asking some questions that you should want to ask. You know, Joe, we had Joe Ken in here yesterday for four hours and 15 minutes. That podcast will drop on Monday. And he's talked about this part before. We talked about it for a little bit at one point in the show, but he was kind of stonewalled from looking into this from a counter intelligence standpoint. That's a question that needs to be asked. He didn't, Joe didn't jump to any conclusions on that and say, "Therefore, this must be true or that must be true." But he's like, it's dumb and not smart and certainly not good optics that like when I, Joe Ken was the head of the counter intelligence center, you know, I wasn't, I was stopped from looking all the way into it. I mean, this is the biggest political assassination or political related assassination in modern history. That's not good. You don't want to hear things like that. Now, I'll get to Baron Coleman in a second, but I put out a podcast with my friend, Joseph Scott Morion. And I, you know, we had spent maybe, I think the longest we ever spent on this case in here before that other than when the day it happened when we reacted to it for 10 minutes. I think the longest we spent on it was like 12, 13 minutes with Clint Russell on, well, that would have been like mid-May. So it was pretty recent. And, you know, I followed the case from afar on social media and seen a lot of noise around it, some things I listened to, some things I don't. But it's a major story in the public interest and I try to do fact-finding things here as best I can. And so, Joe Scott Morgan, long-time fan favorite on the show. He's been on a ton of episodes. We lost Mitch. Mitch was going to be camera five over there, but yeah, we'll fix him. We'll fix him later. Sorry, Senator. There was almost telling of what could come in the future. Yeah. Look, he's he's rolling over and while he's not in his grave, he's not in his grave. So he's not rolling over and anything. Right? It's just, I don't know. I do, I do wish to send it all the best, and I'll say it's nice. I hope he is healthy. I just think it's kind of weird that they're not, you know, there's an AI picture floating around and they're not saying that, you know, he's alive because he is supposed to be serving the American people. So, you know, maybe it's some people around him, Dief. Maybe it's not his fall. Maybe he doesn't know what's going on, but they should do a weekend at Bernie's type. A weekend at Bernie's type thing would be great. But where was I with this? Joseph Scott Morgan. So, Joseph Scott Morgan was on episode 146 back in my parents' house over three years ago. He was on one of the first ones we did in here. 170 and 171 breaking down the entire JFK case. This is something he has looked into since he was 15 years old before he was ever involved in forensics or death investigations because he's from New Orleans. And New Orleans, obviously, is one of the ground zero places, if you will, of the JFK assassination. And so, obviously, he thinks that whole thing's fucked. The Lee Harvey Oswald story and magic bullet is hilarious. And by the way, those are two of the best breakdowns, you know, between those two episodes. I've ever heard on the case by anyone. So, he was on those episodes. Then we had him in here for, I want to say, it was 3.22 last year, right when the co-burger, sentencing was coming down and he broke down that whole thing and also broke down how crazy the Epstein thing, the scene when he was found, you know, having unalived himself, big air quotes there, how crazy that was and how it didn't make sense forensically. So, this is a guy who's been on just about every network for the last 14 years, something like that online all over the place, discussing all kinds of death investigations. Doesn't mean he's right about everything that nobody is. But one of my favorite people in the world and he just shoots it as best he can, as straight as he can to go through cases and break it down. He takes it very seriously because if you've seen him on my podcast before, he will still get emotional about death notices that he had to give people 25 years ago. When, you know, he'd go to loved ones and say, I'm sorry, your brother, your son, your father has been found dead and he had to be the guy to lay that news down and it's a very, very heavy thing. So, he takes the responsibility of respecting the dead to a whole nother level and I do admire that a lot. And that's why, by the way, like we can have fun and joke around with a fake Mitch McConnell mask and stuff like that. But like, even a guy like Lindsey Graham who, let's be honest, I was no fan of his. I don't know that there was a single political position, particularly with foreign policy that he had that I would agree with. And, you know, if he had just been naturally not in Senate, that would have certainly made the Senate somewhat of a better place for a minute. But, you know, I'm not going to sit here and and reign on on someone when they're dead. Death is a serious thing. And, you know, I think it has to be like bin Laden or something like that for you to be that way. I don't know. That's kind of where I'm at. But, Joe Scott Morgan has an extra level respect for that. And so, we had talked about bringing him in here. We were going to discuss a bunch of cases that he's working on right now. And then we were just talking before the podcast a little bit out there in the kitchen and, you know, the Kirk case was just we were going back and forth on a bunch of weird things with it. And so, Joseph looks at cases not from what are all the noise around it, what's all the circumstantial evidence, which when you add that up, by the way, always important to any case. What is all the the motives and stuff like that? That's not what he does. And I should have done a better job that laying this out in the podcast, I guess. But what Joseph does is he looks at the forensics. He looks at the ballistics. He looks at the scene. He looks at the chain of command and the investigation stuff like that. And so, you know, comment sections always run a little extra wild because every comment section pretty much I've ever done is it leans negative. That's just how it is in the creator world. So I'm quite used to that. But some of the shit that Joseph was getting, I don't think was fair at all. This case with Charlie Kirk is a mess. You know, a guy like Baron Colman has forgotten more about this case in the last day than you arrive and know about it. You know, he should be commended for really looking into this all the way. It's amazing. The the knowledge guy like that has of everything that could be going on here and might have gone on there, whatever. And Joseph knows some of it from a from a depth investigation standpoint. But yeah, in a three hour and eight minute podcast with a case that has, I don't know, a fucking 200,000 moving pieces. Yeah, there might be a few things where it's like, oh, he's missing that or he's jumping to a conclusion on this because he doesn't know this little piece of evidence right here. And that's fair. And that should be discussed because obviously like someone has died here, someone prominent, we got to take that extremely seriously and the investigation has been a total cluster fuck and some of the people around it obviously have been sus as fuck completely agree with all that. But I do think the conversation on it is like at a point where I worry about us even finding anything out in the long run because it's so deep into like, I don't know, it's been like kind of toxic to where people if they hear one thing that's different than a piece of evidence they may know or may have interpreted it their whole world views thrown off. And I don't know if I were trying to flood the zone and someone who wanted to cover up what really happened here, that's what I'd be rooting for. I'd be rooting for people to just be tearing at each other's neck over every little things and no one could come to a somewhat of a conclusion. That's just my two cents on it. But Joseph is my guy, awesome dude, and you know, what was the other thing he was like being called a massage agent or something like that? Yeah, like fed slop. I'm gonna speak for Joseph Scott Morgan on this for a second. That's not his lane, but you know, he's a good friend. I have conversations with him with him off air. He's no fan of what has happened in Gaza and Lebanon. I'll just leave it at that. I don't really like speaking for people, but not a fan of that. So that was kind of a funny label they got put on him. So I did have a chance to speak with Baron Coleman for I think like an hour and a half the other day. And I've never talked with him before, but I was connected through some mutual friends. This was someone that we were looking at bringing on before Joseph was even in here because because over the past, I told Baron who's over the past month, but like when you really look back on it, it's really been over the past two or three months. There's been a lot of people requesting to have him on in the past month. It's been at a volume that I don't know that we've ever had someone so requested to come on. And I have seen some of Baron's clips on Twitter, usually along the way. Obviously, if you're unfamiliar with him, he has basically been live streaming, I don't know, three, four nights a week for three and a half hours, usually about an hour and a half, going through different pieces of the case and then two hours talking with superchatters on YouTube, but just going through this entire case. So I didn't know what to expect 'cause I had never met him before, but I got on the phone with him. Very nice guy, very intelligent guy, like very clear from the jump, extremely intelligent guy. And he just started laying out to me piece by piece first like his career and how he got to where he is today and what he's doing, which I think is a really, I mean, it's an interesting trajectory. Like when you look at all the different types of specialties in law he did and then had this amazing career and then just said fuck it and started doing this full time over the past nine months just because he's been going on every day and doing well with that. But obviously had been a massive success in his career long before he covered this case. And I really believe the guy just wants to get some sort of truthful answer. And so we are going to do a podcast together, that's coming up, I'm really looking forward to that. And I'll just say this, there might be a second podcast. We're working on there, I've talked with Baron about it, talked with someone else about it. And so we'll see for the time period where I do have Baron coming into town if we can do that. But at the very least we're going to do one with Baron and my goal as someone who is a YouTuber, I'm not an expert by any stretch on a case like that. My goal is to get as much information out there as we can from different types of people. Joseph Scott Morgan is a forensic guy. Obviously Baron Coleman is a lawyer, how it by trade and how he looks at this and looks at investigation and has spent a lot of time on it. Allow people like this to just put out everything that they would see in the case and then let you guys decide at home. And I really do hope we actually get something that like in the long term some sort of answer here or some sort of clarity. You know I get cynical on stuff like this, unfortunately, I am an optimist, but when it comes to like cover-ups like this, I've just seen it again and again and again and again where something is clearly off, clearly wrong and they never fucking end up telling us, you know, but it is definitely disheartening when you literally see people who also claim to be have been friends with a guy like Charlie Kirk walk out of the courtroom and just allegedly lie about it. Again, I haven't seen the video, but there's other people who did and according to the prosecutor himself, like there's no video that exists that shows exactly what Jack Pizzoviets and some other people were saying. So you really got to watch the information that's flowing about this. It is very hard these days. That is the price of free speech though and it's a price that I've talked about many times before over the years, I am very willing to pay. When you have a lot of noise coming out and a lot of things that are true and untrue or nice, not nice, and everything in between, as tough as it can be, sometimes you've got to let the good speech win and sometimes it won't win in the short term, that's life. But it, you know, the alternative, I don't need to lay that out for all of us, we know what the alternative is there and I think that's one of the best parts of living in America. We can talk about things like that. - Fucking right, fucking right, baby. - Fucking right, but yeah, stay tuned on the Baron Coleman podcast. We will figure out when that's coming out, but that's not like he's coming into town somewhat soon. So that's gonna be coming. I'll talk a little more about the Joe Kent thing in a little bit. We certainly have the JD Vance story to cover here. So JD talked with Rogan for two hours and I think 53 minutes, something like that. So it was a good full podcast. I have seen bits and pieces of the first hour and then I looked at the timestamps in the third hour and didn't watch like a ton of that. The second hour is where they got to the real soup de jure issues at the moment that people are concerned about and that was obviously what's going on in Iran and what is going on with the Epstein case. So here's the thing about this and this is the world we seem to live in now. When I look at the reaction to something like this, before I did that, I went and watched on like 2.0 speed the that middle hour yesterday. Before I saw anyone talking about it and like I said at the outset, I think Joe did a really, really, really solid job and I think it's very clear that it was free-flowing. I thought he challenged JD and let some of the answers speak for themselves which was quintessential Rogan. Then I went and looked at the reaction of the masses and it's like he was stuck between a shit and a fart. He couldn't win. On one hand, you had people like, "You're just cutting them off the whole time, just trying to take the other side, couldn't even let them say anything." Then you had other people saying he was glazing them the whole time. Unfortunately, this is how the internet works. It was on a whole nother level with this podcast and I don't say this whether this is a good or bad thing. It's just an observation. It makes me wonder if we've gotten to a point where Joe has already lost the minute JD even walks into the studio. I'm getting some nods over here. Yeah, I mean, that's what it feels like. Now, my little corner of the internet aside, you know how I feel about bringing in politicians and I don't do it. I've never done it. It has been a rule to this point. I don't say never on that because you don't know, but man, for me to change that rule, it would need to be some serious, serious, serious moment. I've brought on people like Joe Kent who resigned from office and was working in this administration and is no longer in it. I think that's okay. But people that are actively running for office, I turned one down the other day again, where people that are in office in a political position, I just think there has to be a Chinese wall there. The reason that I have that rule, by the way, is because I had the luxury of watching things play out and having the example of people in front of me starting with Joe Rogan. I have seen some of the no-win scenarios in my opinion that he's been put in in the past strictly by bringing on politicians, even if he might have objectively done a great job and on many of them, I think he did. It was like it became a no-win situation and then once it also got all the way up to the point where obviously he has the biggest show in the world and then invites on both candidates running for president last year. Kamala turned it down. Trump, to his credit, accepted it. Then it becomes like, oh, you're swinging the election or something like that by having a guy on, which I don't think is fair at all. But this is one of those things where when I sit back and I look at the guys who have to trailblaze in front of me, then I have, again, the luxury of watching their example, it gives me way less of an excuse to make mistakes if I see things that turn out to be mistakes that they may be making right there. I'm not saying whether or not that's a mistake, but I'm saying the way I have seen it play out with having these politicians on over the years is that it's been a negative for Joe to be able to not be accused of like being in the tank for someone or as I said with the JD thing, there were even people saying like, oh, he's just cutting them off, trying to take the other side just to do it or whatever, it's stupid. And so I don't, I just want to be very, very, very, careful with that. But obviously Joe's already done podcasts like this. So he's continuing to do them. I said at the outset that someone really close to him did call me and assure me after he listened to a podcast, I did that none of the questions are pre-approved. And again, I kind of knew that. I had to look at the New York Times story and ask proper questions like that. That's why we do it. But I think anyone accused him of having pre-approved questions with JD Vance is not looking at it objectively. It's very clear that that is not the case. And we're going to look at some of these clips here. We're going to do it like Joe and some of the big, like all the big shows on YouTube. It'll automatically tag some stuff. So we may be having just audio or it may be smaller on the screen, but you're going to hear some of the main things that were said and we're going to break down some of those things. There were some interesting lines that JD had. There were some interesting reactions. The body language was also kind of interesting. And like I said, in that middle hour, I thought there was a lot that Joe was able to get to and get him to say, including some things that. I think kind of contradicted, talking about JD, I think kind of contradicted himself. And what I will say is that JD Vance is in a tough position because as the vice president, a part of his literal job description. which, like everything, this does have a limit on it, but it's a very, very high limit. Part of his literal job description is that he's going to support the president, even when behind closed doors, he disagrees with them. And I understand that doesn't change the fact that if very, very bad decisions are made that affect the American people, even if that's a part of his job description, people are right just so you're going to look at him and say, "What the fuck?" And I do think some, there's a part of him to me that understands that, but, you know, there was a lot of speaking out of both sides of his mouth here. And where we've criticized him, we were actually just, deep and I were just on my buddy John Rondi's podcast, great show that's very close to us and, and we're good friends with John. But we go on there maybe every six months or so, but we were talking about that on that episode where it's like, yeah, it's nice to see a guy like JD Vance in the past three, four weeks come out and actually say some things that we've all been thinking for a long time now. And that's certainly better than nothing, but two things, A, you need to see long-term actions that prove that he means some of those things he's saying and, you know, changing course on stuff. That's number one. And number two, yeah, it doesn't change the fact that this administration, the last administration at the very least will just stop there. But I could go way farther than that with other things related to the Middle East. These past two administrations, you know, they could have said something a lot sooner. And there's been a lot of human suffering and damage that has happened because they didn't do that. And we've talked about it on this show about how I feel like the most pole conscious president of all time, Donald Trump has been incredibly unaware. Actually, let me take that back. Has been incredibly ignoring of two very big poles where even his base is very against him to say nothing of the overall American people, which is our entering the Iran war, particularly through our relationship with the Israeli government, which people in America by the percentages do not like, obviously, the very old people are still kind of on that. But looking at some of the boomers there, not our boomers stuff. Not the ones listening to this. We love them, right? Yeah, we love them. Yeah, the boomers listening to this get it. But, you know, your friends who maybe only watch CNN or Fox or, you know, enter whatever new station here, obviously like they a lot of them still kind of don't get it. But people below age 55, buying and large, like they're starting to kind of question some of that stuff. And so Donald Trump has until at least very recently has completely ignored that. And you have to ask the question, why that it, why that is? And you will see where in some of these clips, who we go through, Rogan does get it that. And I don't know, I'll let you guys decide. But from my perspective, there were some points there where you could see, and I don't blame him, JD Vance, very uncomfortable with like, Oh, fuck, here we go. Like, all right. Yeah. That's a bad question. But how am I going to answer this and make this look clean? But I think there were also some points where he had to break with him a little bit. And meaning break with the president in some ways, or whether he knew that or not. Again, when you're talking for three hours, I think anyone who sat in this seat will tell you, I've sat in this seat on other podcasts as well, like it becomes free flowing. And if you're trying to not have it be that way, like it's going to be that way. And at some point, when it's, when you're the vice president of the United States, and there's a lot of very intricate details about some serious situations, you're probably going to end up saying things that show your hand a little bit that may not be the exact hand that that say the president has. But when Joe Kent got in here, he had listened to it on his drive up here, that podcast. And we talked about it a bit on the podcast as well. But my vibe from Joe was JD, who obviously I believe he's friends with him. I don't know if he said that legit, but he'd, in the way he's described him, it's appeared like their friends, you know, there were things that JD said where he's like, I wish he would have said this instead of this or I don't know, but I'll kind of let that part of the podcast do the talking and you guys can, can make your own judgment there. But deep, let's, let's start off with the clip at the 10635 timestamp where, where, where Vance is laying out the goal as no nuke. And yeah, that should be perfect right there. So if you only see me or deep on the camera right now, that's because we cannot play the actual video by copyright, but you're going to have the audio here at the very least and maybe we'll end up having the videos, well, but go ahead, deep 1.5, right? This the way that you just described it aligns with our campaign in Iran, well, I think that the goal is certainly good, which is to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. And I think that there are obviously a lot of questions about how best to achieve that. Okay. So he's saying right there, the clear goal is to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. We have heard at different points throughout the process of this Iran war that goes in the fucking time as a flat circle over over the course of it. We have heard them move that goal post and say the goal is regime change. So now you have the vice president laying it out. I think saying I and this is the guy who just negotiated the MOU that also turned into a mess saying I think clearly the goal is just no nuke. Let's keep going. Long term piece of it. I think the short term piece of it is effectively what's already been done, which is you destroy the nuclear sites and you destroy and eliminate the ability to rebuild the nuclear sites. I think there's a longer term thing, which is where a lot of debate is focused on right now, which is that building a nuclear program is hard, but it's not impossible. And it's expensive. But it's actually not even that expensive. If you look, I mean, you can go on YouTube right now and find out how to build an atomic bomb. So part of our Iran policy, this is where I get frustrated while you say you should never do. Isn't that fucking wild? We're living in a world where someone's like, oh, how do I build a nuke and they can fucking do it? Or you know, it's it's crazy. Go ahead. You can negotiate with Iran part of our Iran policy is like solving the long term problem. But if we could create the sort of circumstance where Iran would commit not just to not have a nuclear weapon right now, but over the long term, but not try to rebuild that capacity. Like, yeah, I think that that is a good and valuable thing. If it was your call, would you have done exactly something? Great question. Well, what did the president said publicly that JD was less enthusiastic about it? I think it was the exact phrase that he used. I mean, my attitude towards this man, as you know, is the vice president, I'm not a public commentator. My job is to give the best advice I can to the president of the United States, say a little. It can't be both, though. And I'm not trying to read into his words too much here, but he said this at least a couple times in across this sequence where you're saying, listen, I'm not a public commentator. My brother and Christ, you are sitting here for three hours on the biggest podcast in the world, commentating publicly about what's going on behind closed doors. So light. We went on the IRM CEO, we went on fucking Megan Kelly, we went on all these shows. Maybe his argument could be, well, that's always been the case. People in politics. I mean, there's shows like meet the press. There's fucking news every night where you see a senator on there or fucking sometimes the vice president, whatever. So in that capacity, I'm just talking about things, you know, that are normal just to get the word out or whatever, rather than commentating on it, but it's very clear in a three hour free flowing sit down his own commentary is entering the chat. So we'll keep it going. But that was interesting. A little bit about what that advice was, but once the president makes a decision, so long as I think that it's legal and ethical and all that stuff, and I certainly think what you agree or disagree with it, what we've done has been, has been legal. My attitude towards it is I try to make it as successful as possible. And I've got friends, of course. I think, you know, you've expressed some skepticism of this. I've got a lot of friends, both in part private and public expressed skepticism of this who say, well, this is terrible. We disagree with the decision, et cetera, et cetera. I'm not a public commentator. My approach to this is not a Monday morning quarterback decision that was made three months ago. My approach to it is try to make it as successful as possible, which is why I poured my heart and soul into these negotiations, which is why I've tried to make that goal, Iran not having a nuclear weapon, something that's not true, both not just now, but it's true in the long term. And that's the way that I try to approach it. Okay. Let's pause that right there. All right. So again, it kind of goes back to that same point, but like, what are you doing right here? Now, I want to go to the one twenty four, fifteen, one, deep, because this is where there's going to be a lot of content and we're going to stop it and roll through because he's talking about the influence of this war between the war hawks who are calling for it, but or the Israeli government who felt this war was in their best interests and was lobbying Trump to do it. And he's talking about some of that influence coming into America and where it's a problem. And before I get to this, you know, you've got a guy like Ben Shapiro who, you know, will just take opposite day on anything that is related to certainly Israel's best interests as well, coming out immediately after this. And how did he describe, can we find that tweet, deep, how did he describe JD Vance? He said he had the foreign policy of Obama, the talking points of a socialist. And like the most ridiculous, anyone with to quote myself two eyes in a brain or maybe I should say two ears in a brain listening to this can know at no point the JD Vance talk like a fucking socialist or I would say even like Obama with foreign policy. policy. But yeah, what can you go to his actual Twitter? I want to get the, it'll be a recent tweet that Ben did hit his, he's linked up there. See him right there, Ben Shapiro. I want to get the exact tweet. Go down a little bit. Boom, boom, boom, right there. So I tuned into Joe Rogan yesterday and heard Bernie Sanders economics, Barack Obama's foreign policy and Rokana's conspiracy theories. And then I realized JD Vance was talking. I want to candidate in 2028 who doesn't mirror the Democrats and who can win. Mr. VP, this is not the way. So it obviously, it's extremely important to all 10 of Ben's viewers for them to hear that as well. But, you know, again, read the room, read the room, my man. It's, it's just, it's just a blatant lie. JD Vance even, but you'll hear it at one point, like he's speaking out of both sides of his mouth with this saying, like, oh, Israel can still certainly be an ally and stuff, fully understand why they do all the things they do. And actually, by the way, I think to give him credit, being fair, but he's, you're going to hear him describe them as they should be an ally, no different than the British and the French, which is that sometimes we're aligned, sometimes we're not, everyone's going to operate in their own interest. And that includes us in America. But let's run this 12415 clip and we're going to break down some of this as we go. Right that before. So I think it's a combination of things. But I definitely think you have seen this very discreet, extremely well-funded campaign to try to derail the negotiation and try to derail the deal. And, you know, there was, again, there's this time article that came out yesterday, for instance. Well, this is this, by the way, when you're looking at talking points like things that people have in their head, he had mentioned this time article a few minutes before this in the interview. And he goes, again, the time article starts to talk about it. And you're going to hear him in two and a half more minutes say, again, going back to the time article, he really wanted to hit this. And by the way, the time article that he's referencing, he's going to explain some of it, but to give you the full context, essentially they were laying out pro-Israel campaigns that have been paid for in America through influencers to influence the political process and the negotiations in this war against the interests of what a lot of Americans want, which, you know, to any of us who have fucking been on the internet, obviously this was obvious, but to see time, a mainstream place report this, I think that's great. The issue here is he's hitting that as a talking point, but 25 minutes before this, which is a clip we're not going to play. Joe Rogan brings up this speech that a general made to his, through a, through a, through a report in the mainstream media made to soldiers saying, God wants us to bomb Iran and, you know, whatever. And he's like, well, whenever I hear some from from the mainstream media, I don't assume it's true, but here he is assuming this one's true. Again, I'm picking apart his words here. By the way, I think it's very clear from evidence. The time report is true, but like, you can't really have it both ways if you're going to do that as a talking point, but let's continue. It's like worth reading because it lists a bunch of people who have quite literally been paid by a former Trump campaign person who was himself paid by certain elements within the Israeli government. And this couple are attacking me, viciously, for quite literally trying to accomplish the negotiation objective that the president set for the country. So what is their position, like, are they attacking you? Oh, it's, it's social media posts. It's, you know, they're leaking to reporters. They're attacking me obsessively saying that we should not be negotiating with Iran. We should just keep the military campaign going indefinitely. And that is, that is their explicit position. And coming after me saying that, you know, people have come after me and said, I'm influenced by Qatar, that I'm influenced by foreign governments that, you know, I take my marching orders from Tucker Carlson. And there, there's just so much bullshit out there. When what I'm actually trying to do is accomplish what the president of the United States told me to accomplish, which is a settlement of this that accomplishes our objectives. The Iran does not have nuclear weapon. We have a free flow of oil and gas. And like, I should be clear, you know, I don't actually mind. I don't mind that the, you know, let's say certain elements of the Israeli government want to criticize the deal or have disagreements about the deal. I don't even mind an effort to try to influence, you know, foreign governments try to influence the United States all the time. You know, Israel does it in other countries do it. It's just sort of the nature of the beast. What bothers me is actually when Americans allow, meaning American leadership allows that influence to affect their judgment and to affect what they are advocating for. That's what really bothers me. Okay, point is going to try. That's a, that's a great point. And he's being very fair and diplomatic about that. He's not ripping them. He's not saying it's only them, which he's right about that every government around the world tries to influence the United States. I think where people have taken issue with the Israeli relationship is that they're the only ones that have legalized arms like a pack, the RJC and, and other super packs, we, like we just saw with Thomas Massey to quite literally pay money to influence our politicians, which holds something over them. And that's what to be fair to JD. That's what he's insinuating there as well, but he's being very diplomatic about it. And I appreciate that. The influence of the United States of America, whether they're allies of ours or whether they're enemies of ours. But again, when I open up the pages of Time magazine, and I see that there's a literal foreign influence campaign being funded to tank the very deal that I was pursuing. And oh, by the way, many of the people who are receiving that money were actually attacking me in completely dishonest ways. You know, my response to that is, we'll go to hell. I'm going to do what I have to do for the American people. I represent Americans first. And that's the way that I've tried to do this job. And I, you know, the crazy thing is, I'm like, people realize this. I'm actually in this, you know, there's this massive pro-Israel anti-Israel debate in the United States of America. I'm like the reasonable moderate. And I think that's what so many people don't realize is, you know, I've been accused of being an anti-Semite. I've been accused of what reason, quite literally for, I've been accused of trying to, I guess some people say that I've insulted the Jewish religion, which is insane. Like I, like I have a ton of respect for the Jewish religion. And if you talk specifically, did you say I don't know? I've never heard of it. I'm good at telling argument for why I'm an anti-Semite. Even though I've been accused of being an anti-Semite by many people, but it's what always, what I say to these guys is, look at public opinion, look at the way young Republicans versus Republicans over the age of 65 approach this issue. Like right now Israel is losing the public opinion battle in the United States of America. It is a simple and obvious fact. Donald Trump has said that publicly. It's a simple, obvious fact. Why do you think that is? Well, we've just, okay, my attitude is towards this is, Israel is an ally. Like France or like the United Kingdom. We're going to have disagreements with them. We're going to have agreements with them. There are areas where we're going to have similar interests and areas where interests are going to diverge. So my approach to this is to say, you know what? When we're partnered, great, let's work together. And we're not. Let's just be honest about it. Okay. For that. There's people who want them to come out and say, fuck you and shit like that. I know that would feel fun. And yeah, I mean, selfishly, I think that would be great. I actually understand why he's handling it that way. This is a, this is a very polite, respectful, public undertone. I'll call it a threat. And we'll see if it's actually, you know, some dogs like to fucking snarl and then they run away the minute you fucking clap on the dogs they bite you. We'll see if this dog's got biting them or if he's even allowed to have a bite. But what he's saying there is listen, you can still be an ally like France and England. But we are a separate country. We have our own fucking issues. There have been a subset of your government and people related to it, speaking to Israel that have not followed that protocol or recognize that as reality, especially over the past few years. But I could go a lot farther than that. And if you don't figure this out, look at the support or should I say lack thereof support of people who have the longest life spans in this fucking country right now. If you don't read the room and take a hard fucking look in the mirror and recognize that and play your role, we're going to have a problem here. And I thought that was fine. There were people who were giving them shit about that answer. But like, again, I do want to be positive in that where I see things where it's like, yo, this is a start. It's something like I want to be fair about that. And this is at least verbally a start. Let's keep going. People attack me for being an anti-symmid or anti-Israel and they don't see the writing on the wall. I'm actually just the guy advocating for a normal relationship with a normal country that's based around shared interest as opposed to based around, you know, something else. So why is Israel losing American public opinion? Well, the narrative is that Israel has a very disproportionate effect on American politics. I see that narrative. I mean, I actually think that they, look, do they try to influence American politics? Yes. Like I said earlier, a lot of other countries do. I think some extent that Israel does have. Some are better at it than others. I think the Israel's are definitely more effective at it than most, but I wouldn't say that they're the only effective country by any means that tries to influence American politics. I just think you have to be self aware about it. I mean, why wouldn't you? It's a country nine million people. We have three hundred three. He's had you in there. He's had you again, like he's he's trying to be fair publicly, but like, I just laid out a few minutes ago. But the only one that have some legalized arms to do it. We see, you know, we see China buying mayors and fucking California and shit, you know, sending in spies to fuck senators and congressmen or whatever. Like obviously other countries try to do this for sure, but they got to do it the old fashioned way, the illegal way. And the Israelis do that as well. But they have a money talks way where they are legally through our code, our legal code allowed to do it. And that is why that answer of like hedging is since not totally fair. But go ahead. 30 million people. And so, of course, they're going to try to persuade Americans. They're going to try to move Americans in one direction or another. I think that's just the nature of the beast. But it's more than that. The concern is that they're spying on their quotations and that they're there's there's concerns about funding, there's concerns about influence, there's concerns about whether or not politicians are whether they're aligned with Israel or whether they're aligned with the United States first. Well, there's certainly like, I definitely get those concerns. But my sense is that the way that all foreign influence works in the United States is people try to manipulate American public opinion. And then from manipulating a public opinion, they try to get the outcomes that they want. And this thing is a very good example. example of this. So, you know, like we know, I'm telling you, beyond a reasonable doubt. We know that the negotiation strategy that the president has asked us to pursue. And again, with limitations, like when the Iranians hit ships, the president has been willing to knock the hell out of the Iranians in response. This is not just a negotiation. It's negotiations, military, it's all these things. But I know it would be on a shadow of doubt that there have been people within the Israeli government who are trying to, like, actually shift us away from that policy because they want to continue the military campaign. And by the way, like there are people within the government that I love, I've got relationships with, I hope, and I don't think that they're a part of this. I mean, you know, the ambassador of Israel to the United States, I think is actually a really good guy. Obviously, he cares about Israel first. I care about America first. But there are some people within their system. We know beyond a shadow of the doubt who are manipulating and trying to change American public opinion to keep the war going on indefinitely, again, not towards any objective. All right. So we're going to, deep we're going to cut to 134, 43 in a second. But I do have to say, Marco Rubio could never do this for me. Marco Rubio is, you know, well, you know, we're going to make a decision. It's in the best interest of the American people at the house. You know, that's how he talks. He talks like a prototypical politician, boo, boo, boo, like this or whatever. Like I don't think Marco Rubio would have the ability to kind of like, for lack of a better term, all shucks it in some ways. Like JD Vance does just this is, this is an opinion on him like with his positions or anything like that. But like as a communicator and this kind of format and the modern day with shooting the shit with a comedian, he's a talented guy. You can see where he's getting uncomfortable on some stuff. But like when you listen to him talk, I would admit, there's points where I'm listening to him and I forget he's like the vice president of the United States, which you can't say that about a lot of politicians. I'll give him that. But let's cut to 134 43. Rogan asked a question that we all have right here. It's just not true. I've seen the decision making up close again. Whether you agree or disagree with our negotiation or whether you agree or disagree with the decision to launch the campaign epic theory to begin with, the idea that Donald Trump is being like back blackmailed is crazy to me. He brings it up. I see the way that he makes decisions. I see the way the process is this stuff. Like the idea that he picks up the fun with anybody and says, Hey, like I'm going to take orders from you. No, that's not how Donald Trump operates. Can you understand, though, why people would come to that conclusion, especially because of the Epstein files? What do you mean? Well, the Epstein files were supposed to be released. We're in there was a tremendous amount of resistance to those files being released. That's certain a lot of people want to know if you're done. You see that? What do you mean? What do you mean? There's clearly like a, oh, shit. Here we go. Go ahead. Talking about very wealthy, powerful people that were engaged in crimes. I see. I see. You're basically saying like there's a, the fear is that whatever's in the Epstein files was used to blackmail, like the administration or at the very least, the people that were involved in the Epstein files that didn't want them coming out had undue influence. Well, again, like say this fall candor like we absolutely screwed up the comms of the Epstein files, like we just did. But do I think the reason we screwed up the comms is because we were trying to hide something no. I think the reason we screwed up the comms of the Epstein files is one, you know, Pam said. Pam body said the client list is on my desk, right? Well, she they had binders. They were on the right front, but those binders were largely documents that had already been released. Right. So here's let me try to let me try to purpose of that performative display of the Epstein files and she was saying there's tens of thousands of hours of film. I don't know what the purpose of it was, but I know that the effect of it was to make people mistrust the entire effort. And I think what I think was happening, look, I know Pam, I like Pam, I don't think there's anything malicious going on. I think Pam was trying to respond to the political moment. I think she overstated what we had and what we didn't have. And okay, pause over. We found out in that New York time story, what a lot of us have suspected, which is that it is very clear that somewhat early on the exact moment I couldn't tell you. Maybe it was from the beginning of the administration. That part, I can't tell you, but it's very clear that Todd Blanche had a lot more power than a deputy AG normally has. And y'all know, I'm not a fan of Todd Blanche and the way that that he handles things. But, you know, by the way, deep, we said this before, the fact that one month ago or whatever it was, the New York Times released a story and then reports came out that have not as far as I know, haven't been refuted. Maybe at some point they refuted them, but I haven't seen that. It hasn't been loud. It came out that the way the New York Times was able to get these situation room Epstein meeting information was because they had tapes from the fucking situation room, which means they were leaked. Most important room that in the Oval Office are the two most important rooms I would argue in the presidency that we know about. And like that's not a scandal. It's so far down the list that any other political time period in this country, that would be fucking Watergate who leaked the most precious tapes there are. No one's talking about it. And you'll hear JD Vance like kind of, he doesn't admit that that happened, but he's like, you know, he doesn't refute that story. He actually confirms the point that was made in there, but let's keep going. We got it. We got roasted for it publicly by a lot of people including me, like, you know, you don't have to talk about this a lot. I'm like one of the OG Epstein conspiracy theorists. I've probably gone down every single rabbit hole. We go down most of them today with the original sin of the Epstein investigation. And obviously I'm biased here, but it was not what Donald Trump and the administration did in 2025. It was you have to go back to 2007, 2008, the original Alex Acosta investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. Okay, wasn't there. Didn't why did Trump hire him as labor secretary? Let's keep going. Basically dropped the federal charges. I think I've seen it ended up getting prosecuted on some sort of local thing, but the original warrant, who the original warrant back in 2008, what was he looking for? What was he allowed to look for? What were they collecting? It was not looking at a broader conspiracy. So that happens. Okay, Epstein gets pinched. I think he goes to prison or maybe this is when he goes on house arrest. But like anything that existed from the 80s and 90s up to 2006, 2007, anything that existed that we didn't get back then was disappeared. Right? So like when people say has what you've seen on the inside make you think that the Epstein never blackmail people or that Epstein never engage in broader sex trafficking? No, absolutely not. What I have seen and I've looked at most of the files is that there just wasn't dispositive evidence. And if that is a dispositive evidence ever existed, it was probably destroyed after 2006, 2007. Now again, in our defense. I pause every quick. If it ever exists in the first place, that's another thing we have to remember. It's not like they keep files on all these fucking things and whatever, because there's all kinds of dirty shit that happens in espionage. And I've accepted that since the beginning of looking at this case, unfortunately, that may be the way it is for some things. The fact that we've seen what we've seen that literally is so blatantly written down on emails should make everyone throw up though. And the fact that there's still 3 million files that they haven't released that even in his testimony, I believe this week trying to get confirmed Todd Blanche is saying, well, you know, and we actually legally can't release it. Despite the fact they've been compelled to do that, it's not helping the public trust on it. And again, you got to read the room more on that. We got a little more here. And then we're going to be done. Yes. Was there some, you know, bitching and moaning? Was there some back and forth? Yes. But we eventually collected 6 million documents as part of the effort. The president, people say the president was forced into releasing the documents. Like again, the idea that Donald Trump could not have killed that legislation, especially with the United States Senate is a joke. He absolutely could have killed it. What do you do? He actually said, no, we're going to release these files. He thought, you know, he's employed by the story. He was annoyed by the bullshit. He delayed it for months and months and months until the public pressure was so strong that he ended up signing the bill. They released the first tranche on Friday, December 19th. And they even like waited till later in the day. It was supposed to be released. I want to say maybe 11 a.m. or something like that. They waited till the afternoon to news dump it. It was Christmas week right after that. And then, you know, you get the Nick Shirley video a week later, you get the Venezuelan invasion, fucking a week after that. And no one's talking about it until January 30th, when the second tranche dropped also on Friday, but it dropped. And then everyone was talking about that. And they had huge problems with that. So he, you know, he's going to refer to the hoax claim here in a second, but like Trump was saying the hoax thing months and months and months before those bills were signed before this stuff was coming out. And we have the situation room reports where they're literally gathering the most important people outside of Donald Trump in the situation room to discuss the Epstein story. Like that's fucking insane. This is where you discuss military strikes. So obviously there, there was an issue with it. Let's keep going. Democrats accusing him of doing things bad. By the way, like, do I think there is any, I've never seen a single piece of credible cred evidence that the president of the United States engaged in wrongdoing with matters ever. So like when the president says the hoax, what he's talking about is this democratic idea that he somehow was a, was a pedophile he's absurd. There's no evidence for it. Now the Epstein doc, the Epstein, you know, log it signed. We find six million documents. We find out three million of them are actually responsive, has something to do with the Epstein estate. We release all of them with the exception of a few things that are like, you know, the courts have said that we have to redact certain things. We can't release certain files. But like we did release, take longer than it should have taken. Yes. But we did release these files. And again, the problem here is not like anything that's in the files or not in the files. The problem is, if you go back to the original investigation, it was designed in a way that was way too narrow. If there was a broader conspiracy, and you know, my view is that there probably was the evidence that exists in 2007. That was the opportunity. So when you say there probably was a broader conspiracy, what exactly are you saying? I think there are a few different options. I mean, look, man, I, like, you know, you're not going to literally do two episodes about this. I've gone on every rabbit hole. There's this funny New York Times story that's somewhat true, somewhat false, but we're, Susie Wiles. How much that says will we know JD's conspiracy theorists on this? Like, I am actually I've gone down every, every rabbit hole here. Look, there's confirm. It was American intel. They're foreign intel that Epstein was sort of using Epstein was using sort of the sex ring to black male, rich and powerful people. There's that piece of it. You know, I'm, I think there's a separate conspiracy that hasn't gotten covered as much, which is that Epstein actually, okay. All right, let's pause it there because he's going to go into like the, the, the tax thing and all that, which obviously is, is a fair question. But that, that's kind of enough on, on the bone there to you got for you guys to see where it is. Again, it's clear. He's, it was clear from the New York Times story when you listen to what he's saying in the situation from JD Vance knows he's been put in a tough spot here at a bad spot. I do want to say, and I've talked about this on previous episodes because we've looked at the evidence with Trump and there's a lot of stuff there that, you know, circumstantially, that's like, oh, that doesn't look the best. Then there's other things where it's like he was an early whistleblower on a guy like Epstein after they had a falling out that's like, oh, that looks better for him and whatever. He is the sitting president of the United States. And if he's guilty of doing anything wrong with kids, he should be removed immediately. It's a high burden that we have to get to for proof in that scenario to see that there's something that legitimately says that a lot of the claims in JD's defense that he's referring to about, you know, pedophilia related to Donald Trump are claims that were made after 2019 after Epstein, not all of them to be clear, but a lot of, a lot of the very awful ones were after 2019 after Epstein was already killed and it was a major story and the FBI is obviously is required to listen to every possible lead they get and report on it in a report and that's what we saw in redactions. I have talked in the past about how I think people ignore like the testimony of Maria Farmer when it comes to Donald Trump. She talked about how she would, she worked the front desk at Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan office for a year or two in the 90s and Donald Trump would be in there all the time. That's interesting. And people didn't like when who support Trump didn't like when she would say things like that, like these things had to be talked about. Even I have talked about the fact that it does seem like if we, you know, gone to our head if we had our best guesses to like why Donald Trump is so against, you know, releasing all the stuff here and calls it a hoax and all that. I'll come back to the full point on the hoax in a second. But it might be because there's some sort of introduction that occurred that's related to Epstein with his wife, which would be regardless of the truth or dare I say if there were anything innocent there, not that Jeffrey Epstein did a lot innocent around women. But sometimes he'd be out in a public club with women who were of age that he didn't traffic there. That did occur too as well. Maybe there's nothing there, but it wouldn't matter. Everyone would assume there was and maybe there would be something wrong and it would be a major, major scandal. And it would certainly explain some of the very what I've talked about in the past on podcasts is like guilty, acting behavior that Donald Trump has. I think JD Vance's breakdown of like why Trump is calling it a hoax is very, very near sighted. I don't think that's it. He's been calling this a hoax for a long time and going beyond that saying just move on from this creep. There's nothing to see. It's like nothing to see. It all worry about it. And like that he literally promised the opposite to his base to get into office. And optically again, the guy died, air quotes, under Trump's administration in 2019. That's, that's not a good look like whether he likes it or not between the fact that he knew the guy, he knew a lot of people around the guy. They ran in some similar circles. Donald Trump became president. The guy ended up getting arrested. He died in US custody, you know, under his command. And then when Donald Trump needed to win back office, he promised to release the files and is not doing it all the way. Whether Donald Trump likes it or not, there is nothing in there that's good about optics like good for the optics. There's nothing there that is. So I think again, like JD Vance just saying, well, it's because they're, it's just because the Democrats are, you know, now trying to call them a peto or something like that. That's why he's calling it a hoax. I don't, I don't think that's, that's the full story at all. But again, you know, people are going to judge this. How they want to judge it. Like I said, I, I think we're at a point where you're just in a tough spot when any of these politicians come into the studio, you know, a show like, like Crystal and Saga, obviously, which is, I believe they record down in DC and they're like a pure news and politics show. Like they bring on people from both sides all the time, congressmen, senators, like stuff like that, you, you'd expect. I think in the work I see there, like a lot of great work that goes on, Joe's in a different kind of seat where he's like the trailblazer of the space and, you know, the guy who shoots the shit with you for a few hours. And, you know, that is going to be branded, how it gets branded and unfortunately he doesn't control that. But yeah, I, I obviously in that New York Times report, it was from the summer of 2025 when Rogan allegedly said, I think it's fair to say he did that based on the fact they just had JD Vance on that, you know, he would have on JD, but he wouldn't have on, he refused Todd Blanche according to that New York Times report. Like, you know, he had had him, he had out on JD before. And again, there's clearly no pre-approved questions here. So that is how you want to do it. I do feel like he challenged him pretty well. Are there points in there? You heard me interject where there could have been other questions. Sure. But speaking as someone who sits in the chair, where you're talking with people for a long time and talking about some difficult issues, sometimes there's a time to step in and a time to also step back and let the person's talking duty opinions for everyone else out there to decide. I felt like Joe did a pretty good job of that. And again, I've said this before, Joe Rogan is a man, you know, like I may really respect the guy and thank him for creating the space, but like no one at any point is above criticism. And, you know, where he fucks up things, like I've said that in the past and I will say that in the future, I think on this one, he's getting a little bit of the short end of the stick from the public response there. So, Dave, there was also, you know, with our friend Todd Blanche, like I alluded to, he is in the middle of like testimony as far as I know, trying to be confirmed as a G. And again, Todd Blanche was the personal attorney for Donald Trump before being a G in in criminal trials and stuff, which and I've said this, like the last 25 years, there's really the the AG role has strayed at least the last 25 years, probably beyond that as well. It has strayed very far from what it's supposed to be, which is like its own kind of Chinese wall, separate area where the AG has autonomy to do any cases that are, you know, upholding law and in the interest of the American people, rather than just talking to the president on how they most want things to do. And we've just seen every attorney general kind of break that rule. So in that respect, Todd Blanche is no different, but he's just been particularly arrogant and hardheaded about the Epstein case. And that's why I've been on him. But Crystal and Saga had on Thomas Massey and Rokana together, who are the Republican and Democrat members of the House, who have been vociferously pursuing the Epstein Transparency acts that have been going through Congress over the past year and a half. And Massey said something interesting about some sort of like trap he set for Todd Blanche in the bill, which by the way, before we play this. Thomas Massey, obviously, he lost that primary because $32 million from people like Mary Madeleine was spent against him. And Donald Trump was campaigning hard against him in a closed primary where basically only old people were going to vote. So they're watching the news and watching TV ads where you can lie about a guy over and over again, which is what they did. And that's why he lost, but like Thomas Massey's national approval is quite high. His approval prior to that campaign against him was quite high in Kentucky. And I'm sure at some point that'll boom around back with the old people. But you know, you now took out this dude so openly and so blatantly that he has completely gone gloves off because you know, he's he's leaving office in January. You can do whatever the fuck he wants. And good luck with that because what do we got five more months of this? I mean, this is just the first thing he's doing. But let's hear what he had to say here. Very successful. We got three. The first bill has been very successful. We got three million documents released. But there have been some dragging of feet by the attorney general and the acting attorney general. And so, you know, this is to spur the next level. Specifically, the main thing that this new bill does that we've introduced is forces the US attorney general to cooperate with state attorneys general that want to prosecute Epstein co-conspirators under state law. And it turns out in New Mexico. That's where the Zoro Ranch was. You hear a lot about Epstein Island. You hear almost nothing about Zoro Ranch. But it was expansive. It was massive. The people were going there all the time. Crimes were committed there. And some of those aren't barred by statute of limitations. And so the the attorney general in New Mexico would like to prosecute those crimes. And so we're making it easier with this bill. That's one of the things it does. The first bill. So basically, it requires, it would require blanche to cooperate with state attorneys to help prosecute Jeffrey Epstein's top clients under state law, which would I guess the way the congressman is explaining it there would take some control. The Todd planch currently has on certain investigations as the highest attorney in the country out of his hands and put it in the state hands because we have seen stonewalling since 2019. But over and over again, particularly out in New Mexico, where the state starts looking into things intermittently over the years, and they're told to stand out. We've reported on that on this show from different publications that have sourced that and talked about what happened. It started with James Comey's daughter, I believe, if I remember correctly, Deaf. Back in 2019, 2020, he's saying, "No, no, no, don't look at that." And we all know about Don Huffinez, or how are the fuck you say his name? We've covered that before, where he's Steve Bannon's buddies like running for some office in fucking Texas, Rich Guy bought the ranch and he's converting it into like a Christian retreat, you know. Don't worry about digging up all the bodies, but now there are, you know, it's very confusing like it's because it's been so start stop, but like there are some investigations that seem to be underway that maybe you're being fought where they're trying to dig up potential bodies that are buried there, which every Epstein was trying to do, you know, create his eugenics, I don't know, fucking supernova, whatever the fuck his sick ideas were. But there's a clip I have right there, Todd Blanche, in front of the Senate, where he's in front of Senator Kennedy, talking about why he didn't release the other three million files. This was interesting. Let's play this. How many more pages are there that are responsive? We're not aware of any. How about the responsive? In the department's opinion are not responsive. Well, from what we collected, about $3 million that were just nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein or the case at all. Okay. Why don't you just release everything? Just why not rip? Well, that'll be against the law, because the only reason we could release the $3 million we did is because of the Epstein Transparency Act. There are federal laws that prohibit the release of case files. And the Epstein Transparency Act was very explicit and specific about what could be and should be released. Other than to himself. Well, first. Okay, let's kind of right there. All right, so now it's going to get above my pay grade to some legalities here. But the way he's explaining that is, if there's the Epstein Transparency Act itself, said if there's case files unrelated to Epstein, you are not allowed to release them. Then why are some of the people who were a part of writing the Transparency Act and advocating for it, saying that that is not the case, because these three million files that he's claiming are not related to the case, guys like Massey and Connor are saying are. And I believe, Dave, some of it gets a little fuzzy in my memory, which is which, because they illegally redacted a bunch of stuff in the first three million that they put out that we've been talking about, that they've then had to like, unredacted and stuff over time. So they were already breaking the rules. But I think like some of the, some of some congressmen and senators have seen some of the other three million files. If I remember correctly, please correct me in the comments if I'm wrong. And they have discussed a fact that it shows dark things that would appear to be at least in a parallel way, some way related to Jeffrey Epstein, which begs to point, like Jeffrey Epstein was his tentacles go everywhere. I've described it like, think of Epstein, like you've probably seen videos like this on social media where you see a trickling bit of water on the side of like soil. And there's a long rod in there or a long weed, whatever it may be. And someone pulls on it really hard. I've seen these videos. They're like the satisfying videos on your feed that when you're fucking doom scrolling. But like, they'll pull on it really hard. And a little more water will come out. And a little more water. And they keep pulling, they keep pulling them boom. It goes everywhere. That's Jeffrey Epstein. Jeffrey Epstein is like, to me, that root, that damn, that fucking rod, whatever it is, the tip of the iceberg to where when you really pull him out and see the shine some light on the darkness below that, you're gonna see a million other things right there, suddenly explode. And those are the kinds of things where it involves the people who really pay for the world. We use words like run the world, which is what it is. But like, let's call it what it is. Pay for the world and pay for their world to exist the way they want to see it. Against the interests of people who are supposed to be democratically voting and free governments around the country, which in their mind those people don't exist. You know, you just, there's no world where you should be okay with that. But Todd Blanche has gotten so boring and, you know, robotic with his answers that even Jesse fucking waters the propaganda mouthpiece himself was given to him with a little rim shot right here. - I wasn't, I don't know. I wasn't part of the original prosecution team. Neither was Attorney General Bondi. And I can tell you this, there's only one president that's held Mr. Epstein accountable. And that's Donald J. Trump during his first administration. That was the administration that prosecuted him. And during this administration, it's the administration that's been totally transparent and released all the files. And no matter how much criticism people want to make about the Epstein files, that is indisputable. It's undisputable. That nobody talked about the Epstein files for four years during Biden, four years. - He's right about that. - And so when President Trump said, let's release the Epstein files and the law was passed that allowed us to legally do it, we did it. Okay, I'm not sure you totally get what people feel about that, but I want to move on. - But I want to move on. Anyway, just get that one in there, that's good. That's like saying you're a dwarf among midgets, all right? Like, you know, why yes, I can reach the second shelf. That was a great family guy cut away back in the day. You know, it's not when you start bright about, well, we did a little more. So therefore, we're great. Like that's not the winner. No one's arguing with the Biden administration being anti-transparency. There was a lot of problems with the Biden administration. It was a complete disaster for four years. No one who can look at that objectively would argue that point. No one would argue that every administration, all the way back to Clinton at the very least, has in some way covered up something like Jeffery Epstein or allowed it to operate. No one's arguing that, but we're here now, and you guys are in charge, and you ran on being transparent and releasing the files, and you are fighting doing it. Read the room. All right, so we'll see if he ends up getting confirmed, and what that whole thing is, but interesting week in the news cycle for sure. I had talked about Caroline Levitt last week where we played a video of her not really getting it with, I don't know where some people are in Gen Z, and why they may be turning to certain political opinions and stuff like that, and instead, I think people were tweeting on Twitter, we might have read one of these. She's literally married to a boomer, and then doing boomer talking points as well. She's 28 years old, you know, that's just like a double slap in the face, but she said something else again. I want to play this all the way through, so we have all the context so that the points can be hashed out correctly, but she was referring to what has been called the Epstein hoax that you heard JD Vance refer to. So let's get the full context and we'll judge it with what it is. - But if you look at how this Epstein story sort of evolved over the past week, it's classic Washington Post, you have Democrats on the Oversight Committee leaking redacted information to their favorite reporter at CNN who then pops the story with that redacted information and does not reveal that the unredacted version is available, and the unredacted version proves that the so-called victim in this email is a woman who is unfortunately deceased, but prior to her death said it on numerous occasions that President Trump never did anything wrong, and was always incredibly friendly in her interactions with him. - Okay, close that real quick. - So that may be a fair point right there. Like if there are political tricks being played to where a document's being shown like a secretive, and then it's not, I'm not familiar with that document, but that is where you could say, like all right, that's a political football game, that's fair. I do wanna point out, Tief, do you notice what show she's on right now? - Yeah. - She's on that fucking Pod Force One show that I've never talked to someone in my life who actually listens to that, but that is the same New York Post show with the same just kinda empty smile lady, don't know who she is, sorry, she just called a stray, but this is the same fucking lady that Howard Lutnik famously lied as assault to a year ago in the interview that was one of the things that started this whole fucking weekend show we do right here. And the press secretary of the United States who's already viewed stereotypically no matter who they are as the mouthpiece of the fucking organization is running to that same show to get out the word about the Epstein case itself. Read the, again, how many times have we said optics today? Read the fucking room. Like I'm not saying like if she has to go on Joe Rogan, for example, he would have said yes, but like go anywhere else. Go somewhere where there's a rolling camera on a microphone even if only five people are watching it when it first comes out anywhere. But like just be smarter, go ahead. - A purposeful leak to try to manufacture this new cycle to drag the president. And we've seen this play out so many times and there's a classic playbook of the Democrats using their friends and the fake news to spin up a narrative about the president. And so we just don't tolerate it. we don't give in. we just call it out for what it is and we move on and we focus on the issues that we know the president was elected on and I would just I wasn't elected on releasing the file. The Department of Justice has turned over tens of thousands of pages to the House Oversight Committee and to the American people. I mean they released everything that's legally releaseable online or to the House Oversight Committee. They also tried to move grand juries to unseal documents in various states and unfortunately those judges declined and they've been fully cooperating with the House Oversight Committee. So this idea that there's files that the DOJ is hiding or that this administration is not being transparent is just totally false. It's a fallacy and I understand people have questions and when you're on the outside you're skeptical of government and people should be but there is literally nothing to hide and President Trump has maintained that this entire time and so again this is a classic playbook being run by the Democrats. Okay you can't pick and choose though so she used this story out front that we just talked about that that might be true but what about all the ones where it's not what about the fact that the fucking sitting commerce secretary of the United States who has still not fired nor has had the decency to resign who still puts himself right behind Donald Trump on camera all the time literally on this show itself by the way was caught lying about his relationship in every facet with Jeffrey Epstein his long time fucking neighbor in New York. Is that a Democratic hoax? I don't think so. Is it a Democratic hoax that that same guy paid five million dollars to the GOP Super PAC before he had to testify in front of them a few months ago to say yeah sorry I lied anyway I'm gonna get back to my job now no that's not a hoax either that's that's not a Democratic hoax so you cannot pick and choose and you can't just keep trying to say she's used this phrase all the time on Twitter about this case time to move on time to turn the page things like that people don't want to even when fucking Tony Fabrizio the internal mega fucking poster that Donald Trump has pulled the mega base like the ultimate center of like the we love Donald Trump base back in March I think the Epstein files was like number six on their list of most important things which is quite high up in those people where do you think it is for everyone else I cease and look I know there's also bot campaigns online they exist on every side of every issue I know that I see videos every day with millions of likes with people across generations races and walks of life saying are we gonna sit here and just know that the government and the people running our world are fucking covering up for satanic pedophiles and be okay with that like are we gonna keep watching movies every day and going out and saying oh the sky's blue now look you've heard me I like to be an optimist about life I control what I can control but the point is taken at what point are we gonna be like yeah this whole we're listening to people like Caroline Levitt say turn the page and just letting it happen again at what point do people check out of the system it's not impossible it's not impossible we were talking about it on John 90s podcast that I referenced earlier but like people have this idea in their why I think it's just subconscious where I don't know like a lot of people I talk to it you know maybe some of you out there don't think this way but a lot of people I talk to think that like we wouldn't be capable of having a French revolution here or something which to be very clear I do not want to see that happen that is horrible and that is I want to do everything I can to prevent anything like that to ever have a chance to happen but like if you think that people because we have a little more technology and a little more you know basic daily comforts if you will they feed us every day would not be capable of being pushed to a point to where you could have an out of control angry mass lead to that then you have not studied history and you don't understand human nature again I'd like to do everything in my power to help prevent anything like that from happening but you know I I think some people are complacent about that you know what even even with something like like the inflation we say this example many times on the show but Matt Keminash said back in episode 43 is like when inflation is 10 to 15 percent people who may not even know what it is they can feel it in their wallet and they're upset when it's 40 percent they're in the fucking streets and this is beyond that I mean we see what inflation is doing we see what the economics are doing for the average person we see what the average American savings accounts look like we see all these things obviously this is all bad news but you know when you add on top a complete collapse of trust in the institutions you know that's that that's that's a powder cake that people that are in government and she did just tell you shit you shouldn't just trust the government except them of course you know they they should they should be fearful of that and I mean that in a healthy way and hopefully just a free speech way but like we got to get back to the point where the government fears the people rather than the government telling the people they need to fear them that's total bullshit that's completely backwards from what the what the founders intended of course we've covered that but I don't know we we've gotten to that point and you know maybe I've just been huffing so much smoke over the last couple days from the wildfires that I can't think straight but it seems like a pretty honest point Joey DeFi yeah I'm smoking on that pack you're smoking on that day yeah yeah I heard it was like stepping outside it's like 10 cigarettes straight to the fucking dome I was like why and I feel that buzz though yeah what's I I have a link there they I didn't really look at it before we go but it's like the latest news from CNN which I'm sure is completely accurate and they've never been not accurate about something before obviously but you know hopefully hopefully there's no political ramifications of them needing to be inaccurate about this but can we pull it up where there's it the parasite it's it's under now it's under go down from that it's under at Canada fires right there oh yeah all right so yeah if you're in the New York area or New Jersey area you've seen the air looks fucking heavy and crazy it's not quite like it was in 2023 but oh yeah look at that it's even in St. Paul and Detroit because it's some of the fires spread to the Midwest but once again there's Canada fucking wildfires burning burning that are that are getting to the United States and it's heavy out there and like yeah it's not good go go down deep I just want to read some of this so choking plumes of smoke from wildfires and Canada are pouring in the major cities across Midwest Northeast and mid-Atlantic bringing dangerous air quality and more than 100 million people it's a third of the country basically the polluted air will last through at least Saturday in some areas so as you're listening to this hopefully it's clearing up as new waves of smoke move south go down deep I want to see where they talk about this keep going so it's the worst in Milwaukee in Chicago keep going keep going all right right there smoke has already been an issue this summer in parts of the west plains and Midwest as stateside fires have burned more than 3.6 million acres get Randall Carlson in here I want to know if there's something behind that mostly in the western half of the country but thicker smoke that moved in this week is from wildfires in the north in Canada 3,500 fires have burned more than 6 million acres this summer with a dozen blazes flaring up in Ontario in recent weeks filling the skies with smoke drifting south like it did in an extreme way in 2023 Canadian wildfire activity this year is nowhere near the hyperactivity of 2023 but the combination of wildfires in Ontario and a heat dome in the central U.S. spells smokey troll for the millions I will say 2023 was fucking apocalyptic yeah for like a couple days that was like you step outside you were dead it was literally orange out there I want to say Casey Neistat did a really good fucking video yeah he did of that at the time where he showed it and it's still on it's still on YouTube I would imagine so go check that out but it's not that bad that said this is shit like this keeps happening like Canada what the fuck like this is get it's get a fucking hold on this and then we got to figure out the Midwest of course but like what are we doing yeah I don't know it's like when you set the movie filter to Mexico or like you know that's right that's how I was in 2023 that's how I was in 2020 this one is I'm still trying to figure it out yeah it's like somewhere in between it's bisexual doesn't know which it wants to be yeah you know yeah but nice to see center and McConnell yeah that was good with us we wish him all the best good health wish full recovery I do hope he'll step aside from office because you know he's very old but they're gonna have to wheel me out of here that's probably the same I yeah in his head he's saying I don't think he can say it out loud but yeah we will get Joe Kent that podcast out look for that on Monday it's about four hours and 15 minutes so you're gonna get a full full spectrum of things we there was an hour in there where we're going through a lot of his story he's had a very long decorated career spent a couple of decades in the green berets and you know eventually ended up where he was and then famously step down and march over the Iran war and disagreeing with us getting into it and the potential for us boots on the ground so I I really enjoy talking with them so thank you to Joe for doing it and so we'll put out that episode we may have two more guest episodes this week this past week we did three this week might be three again we are rolling around here getting some great people in a lot of different types of content so there's something for everyone shout out to my buddy had called a rone who was in again we just put out the first of what's two episodes with him there's the second one coming in a couple weeks and put out Doug Rushcoff so I had referenced that clip where I guess one of the billionaires that he was advising on the doomsday bonkers you can see that it's shortly after the two hour mark in that episode but Certainly a wild conversation with Doug and then as I referenced out front We had the Monday podcast with Joseph Scott Morgan, which will be followed up sometime soon with the podcast from Baron Coleman And maybe a third one covering the Charlie Kirk case. So stay tuned for that and that said give it a thought get back to me Peace Peace What's up guys? Thanks so much for watching the video if you have not subscribed Please hit that subscribe button before you leave as well as leave a like on the video to YouTube You can join my patreon via the link in the description and you can also join my clipping community via the discord link down below See you for the next episode