Ep. 2483 - JAIL FAUCI: New Fauci Texts Show His CONTEMPT For Americans

So, Anthony Fauci's tax are now seeing the light of day and their hideous. They're hideous because when you're in a position of public power, you owe it to the public to give them the full information. Your priors are less important than the data. And if you don't know something, you ought to say so because people are making life decisions based on what you say. Inform consent is not just about good government, it's about good medicine as well. While Anthony Fauci didn't do that, instead he shaded the truth. He hit his own questions. He pushed the American public toward the things he wanted. Vaccination of pregnant women and the young, lockdowns, universal masking and double masking, social distancing, data that cut against these answers got hidden or tossed out. That was a sin. It wasn't just a sin because it ended with bad public policy, although it did. It was a sin because it totally undermined scientific institution themselves and opened the door to total pseudoscience and then to healing crystals and woo, woo wild speculation and total nonsense. So if we're going to ask the question of who killed science, it's Anthony Fauci in the conservatory with the vaccine needle. We'll get to that. Plus we'll debunk a bunch of bad data floating around about the internet, about vaccines and miscarriage. And we'll talk about autism and vaccination too. And we'll get to the most privileged elites in our society, Taco Carlson and Hunter Biden, becoming besties with testies. This is the Ventureiro show. You should be enraged at Anthony Fauci, but not quite for the same reason that some people online are saying. So I'm going to say something different about Anthony Fauci than what you're going to hear on some other shows today. It's going to be based on the data. See, here's the thing Anthony Fauci was a terrible public official. He was all about his ego. The other night my wife was watching some trash TV on Netflix and she saw some episode about Usher's House and there's a giant portrait of Usher on the wall fulfilling my normal statement about humans. If you have a giant portrait of you on the wall of your house or a douche bag, Anthony Fauci fits that bill. And that meant he did not follow the data, consider alternatives or level totally with the public. And that killed the American perception of science. Anthony Fauci's basic framework was this, vaccination for everyone, including pregnant women and children, shutdowns rather than gradual opening, universal masking, social distancing, all until the R went down to zero. The reproduction rate in the virus died. Once he said that masks, taxes and social distancing were good, pretty much universally, he never backed down. He still hasn't backed down on a lot of this to this day. He lied, he obfuscated, he covered for any serious questions when it inhibited his program. And this led to a massive amount of government overreach and then to a massive backlash when the data ended up cutting against him. Fauci and friends closed the ocean, the close the parks, the closed the hiking trails, the closed the schools. And then they said that you wanted to murder grandma if you disagreed worse even when he didn't have the data or when the data changed, he would not say that he didn't know or that the data had changed and that to me is actually in many ways the biggest sin. See, the scientific process is great. I'm a fan. I'm a fan of science. It is the best single way to effectuate health and wealth over time. It's awesome. You posit a hypothesis and then you construct a study to test that hypothesis and then you examine the results and then you determine whether your hypothesis is right. It's great. Data is better than not data. Well, if science stops following the data, if science stops even acknowledging its own questions for publicity reasons, that is no longer science is now propaganda. And that's what Anthony Fauci did. By the way, if you want to full look back on the stuff that Anthony Fauci actually did, you should check out our series Fauci unmasked from a couple of years ago with Michael Moles available right now at Daily Wire. It's a great series. Okay. So this brings us to the text released by Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. What Anthony Fauci was sending to his friends? So January of 2021, he was texting a friend, quote, I asked around a bit more and another issue came up that you need to be aware of since many people have significant cytokine storms and fever after the second dose. This theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the first trimester. Okay. So this was an open concern. He was concerned with the possibility that again, one of the things that happened when you got the Vax. I know because I was Vax. My wife was Vax. When that happened, many people got pretty sick from the vaccination. That's a reality. Didn't do much to me, but it knocked my wife flat on her. And that was very, very common. And well, Dr. Vivek Murthy wrote back to Fauci. This is really helpful things. I've been hearing the concern about the mRNA causing mutations in the developing fetus as well. That's a really good point regarding the cytokine storm post second dose. Okay. So clearly they had some concerns that were percolating about what was going on with the vaccine and pregnancy. Okay. The next day, he said, I would say that in any vaccine in which data are lacking in pregnant women, must one must weigh the potential risks against the benefits. COVID-19 can be a serious disease, especially in pregnancy. In the vaccine trials, pregnant women were not allowed, but following the EUA, a large number more than 10,000 pregnant women have been vaccinated. No issues have arisen. The FDA and ACIP and the ACOG are all permissive for pregnant women to have a choice. Animal talk studies did not raise any red flags. So that same day, Dr. Murthy wrote back to Dr. Fauci Tony Richell. Did you see this announcement today from the WHO saying they advise against pregnant women taking the mid-dirt of vaccine because of lack of data? It has led to a flurry of questions. What does your take? I'll get asked about this. And then he sent over the link on all of this. And then Murthy wrote back, that's what my sense was, his well-tony, which is why I was surprised to see WHO put out a strong like statement saying they do not recommend to an pregnant woman. That's a strong statement to make him potentially quite damaging to public confidence among pregnant women. Is there a whole lot of conversations about whether or not to recommend the vaccine, whether this was a concern at all? And they did not express any of this concern publicly, any of these open questions. What should they have done? They should have said, listen, there are a bunch of varying recommendations. For the following reasons, we are suggesting that pregnant women get the vaccine, but saying that basically there's nothing bad happening. He doesn't mention the risk of fever after a second dose or potential for miscarriage, any of the stuff that he was talking about. And here is what he actually had to say just a couple of weeks after these texts. The FDA, as part of the typical follow-up you have following the initial issuing of any UA have found thus far, and we got to be careful, but thus far no red flags about that, about pregnant women. Interestingly, many of the pregnant women, well, healthcare providers who were exposed to COVID, to SARS-CoV-2, and said it, I would rather take my chances with a vaccine than getting infected while I'm pregnant because of the adverse effect and adverse outcome on pregnancy. Now again, what he should have said is we don't have enough data at this point to determine what's going on with the miscarriage, possibility, or cytokine storms or any of that sort of stuff. And of course, he then later sort of repeated this line in August, suggesting that pregnant women should get the vaccine. Well the data are really very, very strong, glad. If you look at the tens and tens of thousands of pregnant women who have gotten vaccinated, there's no safety signal of concern at all. Balance that against the fact that we absolutely know that when pregnant women who are unvaccinated, when those individuals get infected with SARS-CoV-2 and get COVID-19, it is very detrimental not only to the woman herself, but to the fetus. So that's the reason why the recommendation has gone from could get vaccinated to should get vaccinated. Okay, so if you're going to steal man the case for Fauci here, if you're just going to go out your way to steal man the case, what you would say is that he had personal doubts, he didn't want to express those doubts publicly to undercut the vaccine, but this is the point. He did not want to express personal doubts because for him to actually even pose the question publicly would be to undermine his presupposition, which is that everybody needed to get the vaccine. Jay Badacharia made this point again. Jay Badacharia is a person that Fauci personally targeted Dr. Badacharia. Again, when we covered COVID for legitimately like a year and a half, when we were covering COVID, Jay Badacharia was a repeat guest on the program. Dr. Martin McCarrion from Johns Hopkins University, these are both members of the Trump administration and in Trump too, on the show that we were trying to follow the data at granular level all the time on the show. Here was Jay Badacharia. That puts pregnant women in a really bad position. You're withholding information from them, giving them a recommendation that could potentially harm their baby. I don't know the process when you're the director of something like the NIH, but if you have reservations, shouldn't the public know those reservations? I mean, especially for something like the COVID shots, which were brand new back then, I mean, Antonio Fauci was a major figure in trying to get those COVID shots off past the finish line. He owed the American public some transparency regarding his honest thoughts. Generally, it's the FDA that regulates products and checks for side effects and so on the NIH develops the science that produces the new vaccines. There's usually like a one lane and another lane. Antonio Fauci in some sense was out of his lane, push and then use that power to tell the American one thing when he really thought another. Again, so the biggest thing here is that he was not transparent with the American people. And that was again, the message of Anthony Fauci, I will judge for you to give a sort of paternalistic view of how medicine ought to operate. Who's going to tell you what you needed to know? And if he decided you didn't need to know it, you just didn't need to know it. That was the way that he pushed all this stuff. And again, this had some wide ranging ramifications, for example, maintaining for legitimately months that the vaccines were likely going to stop the spread of COVID-19. Right? The CDC website was saying in March of 2021 that early data showed the vaccines may help keep people from spreading COVID-19. It turns out that that wasn't true at all. But again, by July of 2021, Fauci was noting that the vaccinated could continue to transmit the virus to the unvaccinated. But that was much more important. months later. That was months later. How did we know for some time now how transmissible the Delta variant is? Like, why did it take the outbreak in Provincetown for the CDC to take action and change its masking guidance? What we did know was how transmissible the virus was among unvaccinated people. So it was very clear that when you compared the Delta variant with, for example, the Alpha variant, it was clearly considerably more transmissible. The new data show that it is so transmissible that even a vaccinated person who has a breakthrough infection can now transmit it. That is the new data. There's a difference between knowing that it's transmissible in general versus it's also transmissible when you have a breakthrough infection of a vaccinated person. Okay, but here is the thing. They were again conveying the idea that vaccination was going to cut down on transmissibility since late 2020. One of the reasons why I sort of infamously suggested that people get the vaccine is because they were promoting that data. Then the data changed. And earlier, then he was willing to say it was pretty obvious that the vaccines were not preventing transmission. So again, for Fauci, it was always the era in the direction of vaccinate everyone masking social distancing, shutdowns of schools, and all of the rest. Now, you should be pissed about all of that. I'm pissed about all of that. I think the Anthony Fauci, he lied, he lied by omission and all of that, which is why he should go to jail. I do need to spend a moment here on what the Fauci texts and the scientific data do not show because there's some bad data that's being passed around the internet. All right, coming up, we'll get to the actual data on the vaccine and pregnancy and all the rest first. There's a difference between owning something and having a claim on something. That is a distinction that people don't think about until the markets get really volatile. So for example, digital assets, right? You own it, but is it like actually in your hands, like could it just be taken away? This is sort of the problem with non-tangible assets. Like they exist and they're useful, obviously, but they are also just a little bit riskier. And that's not true with physical gold. If you're considering adding physical gold or silver to your portfolio, golden crest metals is worth a look. They're found to lead transparents about pricing, built to be the opposite of the high pressure dealers. Everyone has heard a horror stories about they also have an A minus rating with the better business bureau and five star views across BBB Trust Pilot and Google. They'll send you a free investor can explaining how to add gold or silver to an IRA or 401k, a free portfolio review up to 25 grand free silver on qualifying purchases. Text Ben to metals at 638257 visit goldencressmetals.com/ben or give them a call at 888-429-3999 again. That is goldencressmetals.com/ben or text Ben to metals. That's 638257 to get started with golden crest metals today. So there's some data suggesting that there was mass miscarriage thanks to the vaccine. Again, I like the data. That is not what the data show. I know I know a lot of people on the internet and in public life, they don't care about the data. They trust their gut. That's their right. It's free country. Make your own calls. But when it comes to the best solutions to problems writ large, I will always trust well formulated data over our gut. That doesn't mean that I will always be right because the data may change. The data may be badly formulated. People may be fiving about the data. That happened a lot during the pandemic. And so when the data changed, my opinion is about the data will also change. But I will maintain that any rational society will favor data over gut. Will favor actual really well formulated data over your gut. If your gut is right, say 60% of the time. And the data is right like 90% of the time. I understand we're pissed. The data is wrong 10% of the time. But as a general rule, that does not mean that we should trust our gut, which is wrong 40% of the time. And again, this is the reason why what Anthony Fauci did was so bad. Perhaps the greatest problem, but the last several decades of American life is that a bunch of institutions said they were rooting themselves in data and were not. And so they blew out the credibility of the institutions. And people learned not to trust data at all. And so the alternative, as it turns out, was not a better informed set of leaders restoring those institutions. It was follow your gut. So the problem is not that Fauci said the vaccine didn't cause miscarriage. And then it actually caused massive amounts of miscarriage because the vaccine by the day did not cause mass miscarriage. And again, I'm going to get into the detailed data in a second. The problem is that Fauci had no long-term studies on pregnant women getting the facts. And then he told women it was basically completely safe. He should have aired on the side of caution. He didn't. He should have been fully transparent about his doubts. And he didn't. Okay, now for that data because again, data is data. So there was an April 21 2021 study in the New England Journal of Medicine. This thing never should have been published. It is a mess. It is a dog's breakfast this study. And anybody who had actually read the study immediately would have sensed that this data was just a total mess. The abstract itself says preliminary findings did not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons. Again, this just shows how it works. You don't blow out the credibility of your scientific institutions, call women pregnant persons. Preliminary findings, not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons who received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. However, more longitudinal follow-up, including large follow-up of numbers of women vaccinated earlier in pregnancy, is necessary to inform maternal pregnancy and infant outcomes. Okay, so here's how this study worked. You have to imagine that basically this is a snapshot of a foot race. And the snapshot happens halfway through the race. So a bunch of people start to foot race at a different time. And some people start at minute one, some people start at minute four, some people start at minute seven. And then about 50 yards down the track, they take a snapshot. So some people are going to be in the picture, some people are going to be out of the picture. And then you study the people who are adjusting that picture. That's how this study was conducted. And then you're supposed to assess the speed of the people in that picture. Impossible, right? Well, that's what the study tried to do. It's a very, very badly formulated study. This is why I say well formulated data is useful. Bad data is bad. This is why there's a phrase when it comes to data analysis called garbage and garbage out. Meaning if you have a poorly substantiated, poorly predicated database, what you will get on the other end is also going to be crap. And that's what happened in this study. So there are almost 4,000 participants. And for a 10 week period, sometimes during the pregnancies of these women, they measured 827 participants who had finished their pregnancy in that 10 week period. So immediately you are just not following 3200 participants who originally signed up of the 827 participants. 712 got a regular birth. 104 of them, about 12.6 percent, had miscarriage. There was one stillbirth and there were 10 that were either induced abortion or or ectopic pregnancy. So what does that mean? Again, 12 percent according to this study, 12.6 percent of people ended up with miscarriage. And again, the vast majority of these women, these women were all vaccinated. So all these women, so the study specifically tracked 1224 pregnant women who got the vaccine early on in their pregnancy. Okay, so because of the studies flaws, it was later withdrawn. Now again, the benchmark for miscarriage in pregnancy is somewhere between 10 and 20 percent. There's not really a great solid statistic because many women will have an early miscarriage and it won't be identified as a miscarriage. Some women just don't report it in when they get a miscarriage because they pass the fetal tissue and all the rest. Okay, but this is not like wildly out of bounds of typical miscarriage data. Even that study. Some people are misreading the study to suggest that something like 80 percent of people who ended who who had the vaccine ended up with miscarriage. So Senator Ron Johnson published a letter from an OBGYN named James Thorpe who argued the actual number of miscarriages out of the 827 participants was 82 percent because there were 700 women in the study who received their vaccine the third trimester and therefore they should be totally excluded from the miscarriage rate that they calculated. So he is dividing the 104 total miscarriages into the 127 women who are vaccinated in the first or second trimester and who also happen to finish their pregnancies in some way by the 10 week checkup. So that's not looking number one at the full 4,000 women vaccinated at all points of the pregnancies. It is also not looking specifically at the date of the trimester in which people took the vaccine. The study is a mass and it was withdrawn. It ended up being withdrawn in October of 2021 specifically because, quote, no denominator was available to calculate a risk estimate for spontaneous abortions because of the time of this report. Follow up through 20 weeks was not yet available for 905 of the 1224 participants vaccinated within 30 days before the first day of the last menstrual period or in the first trimester. So in other words, there were at least 900 people in that original study group who took the vaccine. The vast majority of them ended up giving healthy birth but they weren't included in the sample because they didn't give birth during that 10 week period. That snapshot at the 50-yard okay so the reason I'm bringing this up is because again if we are going to recommend following the data then we should debunk bad interpretation of data and there's some good news. There were subsequent studies that actually examined huge numbers of pregnancies. There's one study in September 2021 that looked at 100,000 pregnancies and found that COVID vaccines were not associated with an increased risk for miscarriage. There's another 20-23 studies that covered 150,000 pregnancies and found no elevated miscarriage risk either. Okay so in the end where does all this land us? Yes, Fauci should go to jail. He committed perjury probably on a bunch of on a bunch of matters ranging from the Wuhan lab leak and gain of function research to what he was saying to the public at the time. And he probably committed other crimes to involving governmental abuse cracking down on the great Barrington's declaration going after people who disagreed with him. But his biggest crime in generic terms was destroying the very scientific institutions he supposedly wanted to uphold. Data is a useful heuristic and those who claim to speak for it have to follow it. Heuristic is like a mental shortcut. It's what you listen to because you don't have time to actually do the studies yourself. The alternative to data is no data and no data is a horrible heuristic and this brings us to another organization called the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, WPath. And so WPath was used again. This is the absolute gutting of scientific institutions and the wearing a round of their faces as masks, allahannable lector is insane. During the same period where Fauci was walking around saying that he was the science while systematically undermining the science. This is done in far worse and more damaging ways by WPath. The WPath was the organization that was promoting the idea that you should formally and surgically mutilate little boys and girls because boys could in fact become girls and they lied and obscure data to promote that idea despite literally all evidence to the contrary. There is no evidence to back a single proposition they were promoting and they didn't just wind up with tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of kids surgically and hormonally mutilated. They ended up destroying all faith and science because all the dumb scientific institutions followed and echoed their evil crap like the American Academy of Pediatrics. Like I mean that's a place where people used to look for actual information and turns out when your pediatrician is telling you boys can become girls, you'd rather listen to the roadside psychic than that pediatrician and you get it. Again, I'm pissed at Fauci because it was his malpractice that led Americans to trust conspiratorial randos about medicine over actual doctors and I'm pissed at those doctors who listen to Fauci. I'm pissed at all of the doctors and professional associations that pretended that transgender health scare quotes was even a thing because their arrogance led to a trail of dead and mutilated bodies and to the complete erosion of any level of respect for scientific institutions more broadly. And why am I talking about WPath because it is now emerged and a legal filing from the end of July. WPath, which again was this fake scientific organization that was just an interest group for hormonally transitioning the kids, moved to dismiss a lawsuit by the FTC for defrauding patients into trans health procedures by pushing false information about the outcomes of the procedures, namely that boys could become girls through hormones and surgery. So what exactly was their defense? What did WPath say? Well, first they wrote this, WPath engages in this significant medical debate by publishing academic and clinical guidelines for health care providers for the provision of transgender health care. Plaintiff has acknowledged that there are parties on both sides of this medical debate. WPath is on one side of that debate and provides guidance on how to best provide transgender health care. Others such as Dr. Hillary Kass fall on the other side of that debate and disagree with how to or if one should provide transgender health care to adolescents. And their argument, their key argument is not that their science is good. Not that they are engaged in free speech. That transgender health care, they say, is an area of intense medical debate does not entitle plaintiffs to prevent individuals and organizations like WPath from speech aimed at contributing to that debate. Participation in such a debate is exactly the type of speech the first amendment is intended to protect. So here is the thing. It is not a first amendment protected activity to self snake oil. If I go out there and I label a bottle at this snake oil right here will cure your propitia and it's is not that is an actionable cause in a court of law. If you go out and lie and say boys can become girls, you can't just claim as a medical organization recommending standards of care that you are engaging in free speech. This is not a matter of public debate. Boys cannot become girls. There is zero evidence that boys can become girls. There are zero evidence to back any of the positions that WPath has taken. WPath concedes that its standards of care are not rooted in fact, they are quote unquote merely an opinion. WPath actually leans on the scrimetti ruling from the Supreme Court. That allowed states to ban transgender interventions for minors and the pro conversion therapy. Childs versus salazar ruling from the Supreme Court. To say that it's basically the same as when you say that I should be able to take my kid to a therapist to deal with gender dysphoria. Now to me, that is not just a free speech issue and it shouldn't have even been to skyd it to decide on first and it should be decide on actual scientific grounds. There is no data to suggest that what WPath has been pushing is remotely standard of care. But the bottom line is that WPath wore around the scientific institutions as a face mask in order to promote a bunch of propaganda in the same way that Fauci did that and if you keep doing this over and over and over if you do it over and over if you take all the scientific institutions and you turn them to left wing social propaganda. If you the scientific community spend all of 2020 telling us that COVID is so deadly I can't take my kids to the beach but also if my kids are being taken to a BLM protest they can spit all over everyone and it's totally fine. At a certain point people stop trusting the science altogether. And this is a tragedy because again I am a data guy. I like data. I don't like woo woo crystals. I don't like empty speculation. Again that doesn't mean I'm always right. It means that my opinion will change with the data but it also means that when people just come up with stuff out of pure thin air I'm going to call it out. All right coming up as you know I'm a person who likes data. I like to plan and when my schedule is organized my calendar is organized I generally prefer knowing exactly what's going to happen and when but unfortunately that doesn't care about any of that which is why we just sort of plots. I wonder you're standing there and the next you are you are not well this is why you actually do need to plan you might not be able to control the plot thing and everything but you can make sure the people who depend on you are financially protected if the unexpected does occur this is where life insurance comes in and let's you stop worrying about every possible what if and enjoy the life happening in front of you policy genius makes finding the right policy simple and straightforward as an online insurance marketplace where you can compare quotes from some of America's top insurers side by side for free. Their license team helps you compare coverage amounts prices in terms answers your questions handles the paperwork and advocates for you throughout the process. There's no guesswork and no unnecessary hassle just clarity and an affordable policy that fits your family's needs policy genius also has thousands of five star views on Google and trust pilot from customers who found the right coverage for them prioritize peace of mind lock in your life insurance today with policy genius you can find 20 year life insurance policy starting at just 276 bucks a year for a million dollars in coverage had an over to policy genius dot com slash Shapiro to compare life insurance quotes from top companies see how much you could save it's policy genius dot com slash Shapiro. And so this brings us to a press conference that was held at the White House with regard to vaccine. So the president yesterday signed an executive order that backed fewer routine vaccines for kids. That's that's fine. I'm actually rather in difference of this. The reason I'm in difference of this is because different countries have different standards for the number and the schedule for childhood vaccines. So Denmark for example has fewer childhood vaccines. I believe it's like seven and they spaced them out differently. The United States has it had I think 14 or 15. They're wouldling it down to 11. Now that's all fine. That doesn't bother me because some of these vaccines again these are recommendations that are mandates number one number two when you are talking about you know the vaccinations that are most likely to prevent health problems some of them they're not all equivalent right the HPV vaccine HPV is a sexually transmitted disease typically speaking that leads to cancer. And so it seems like a matter of parental choice whether you are deeply worried your kid is going to get HPV. I like that that that's an activity based thing. It is not quite the same as a MMR which is just infectious. So not all vaccines are for the same diseases not all vaccines are equally effective. Okay fine. You want to make a scientific argument that we should space these things out over time. And by the way it typically is not because you know quote unquote you're shooting your child full of chemicals. The reason why the Europeans do it differently very often has to do with their sort of nationalized health care systems how often you are expected to visit the doctor. You levels of prevalence of particular diseases in particular countries and all the rest. So it's a little more complicated than the way that people want to make it out. I will tell you what is not particularly complicated. There is no data none a zero that links vaccines to autism. This is not a scientifically backed concept. It just is not and this is what the president was out there promoting yesterday. And this I object to because again data science. And this of course has been a big push by RFK Jr. The secretary of health and human services for years. And the president went out there and he suggested that the vaccine schedule being broken up will decrease autism. There is the data just do not exist for this proposition. They don't. Decades ago children received only a small fraction of the vaccines required today and those times people were much healthy and of course the high rates of autism now observed did not exist. So there's a reason for such epidemic rates of autism. And we're going to bring it back to much closer to where it was. Well we did not know exactly what the cause is with respect to autism. It is essential to our research efforts that we have the very best vaccine recommendations in the entire world. So we're reducing them. We're changing it to visits over a period of a year a year and a half. So they get 20% of what they would have gotten in one big shot. Yeah. Now again when he says one big shot he says that it's like a water bottle filled with vaccine that's not that's not right. Okay. Just had a baby. The baby got some vaccines and get other vaccines. We have open conversations in our household about when to get which that's all fine. I don't have a problem with changing the vaccine schedule. Suggesting that this is going to reduce autism diagnosis in the United States. There's no evidence to back this. And now again the person who's most been associated with promoting this nonsense. is a guy named Andrew Wakefield. Andrew Wakefield published a paper in 1998, suggesting that there was a link between vaccination and autism. So in the original paper, which was retracted by Lancet, it was published by Lancet and then it was retracted in 2010. According to Lancet, in the original paper, Wakefield and 12 co-authors claimed to have investigated a consecutive series of 12 children referred to the Royal Free Hospital in School of Medicine with chronic enterocolitis and regressive developmental disorder. The authors reported that the parents of eight of the 12 children associated their loss of acquired skills, including language with the MMR vaccine. Now again, that is self reported. Number one, number two, that is an extraordinarily small sample size. And number three, it turns out that Wakefield had been selecting these people and that his research had been funded by lawyers acting for the parents who were trying to sue the vaccine manufacturers. And it turns out that the British General Medical Council found that Wakefield had acted unethically and had shown Calisdist regard for the children in his study upon whom the invasive tests were performed. And all of this was fueled by Wakefield pushing single vaccines rather than, for example, to combine MMR, the new schedule that Trump is suggesting separates off M and M and R, measles and mumps and rubella as opposed to one shot. Now the reason why all this was combined was to minimize inconvenience and ensure that actually kids were getting that full battery of vaccines. Separating them off, the idea goes means three separate visits. How many parents want to go to the doctor three separate times as opposed to just doing it once and being done with it? And again, for the third time, I'm not arguing that we can't make changes to the vaccine schedule based in the best possible science or good decision making. But the attempt to link this with autism diagnosis is ascientific. RFK Junior was doing this routine yesterday. 1970, the biggest epidemiological study at that time in history was performed. And the University of scientists from across this country looked at all the eight-year-olds at Wisconsin, about 900,000 children. And they were looking for autism and they knew what autism looked like. And they came back with an incident rate of 0.8 per 10,000. So less than 1,000, a rate according to CDC today in this country is one in every 31 children. In California, it's one in every 19 children and every 12.5 boys. There has been a dramatic increase. Okay, so then RFK said that it's not just that we're noticing it more, right? It's not just overdiagnosis, it's real. One of the things that the industry likes to say, one of the talking boys, which the press loves to parrot is how we're just noticing it more. But this is an absurdity and this is an assertion that has been debunked again and again and again by peer reviewed literature. It's also debunked by common sense. Because if we were just noticing it more, we would notice it in older groups. Or not. Or only noticing it in kids who were born around 1989 or after. The older generations you're not seeing those increases. So something happened in the mid-90s that changed our children and it has to be an environment like exposure because genes don't cause epidemics. You can provide a vulnerability, but you need an environmental toxin. Okay, so again, he's trying to argue that the environment is what's causing the autism epidemic and all the rest of it. So I want to start with this chart. Okay, this is a chart that shows you autism prevalence in California. We use California because that is a case where really, really large levels of diagnosis. He says, one every 19 children. Okay, fine. So this is a chart from the California Department of Developmental Services showing autism, disordered cases by birth year going all the way back to 1947. So what do you see? You see a slight increase in diagnoses all the way up to about 1975. And then you see a more market increase, but still really, really, really low all the way up to about 1990 and then you see a skyrocketing increase in autism diagnoses. And that is what you see. You see an exponential chart here, but it really starts to take off around 1990, right around 1990. Okay, so now I need to discuss why that is happening. The reason that you are seeing that is because the American with disabilities act was passed in 1975. It funded schools to a greater tune because of disability claims in 1990, the federal government reset the standards for disability claims in schools and they included autism. And now it turns out that if you are a school and you wish for additional federal or state monies, a great way to do that is additional autism claims. Same thing with ADHD, by the way. Okay, how do I know that this is a case of incentives creating outcomes because there was a study that was done by Furnier, Gang, Non, and Dorkin this year. Okay, and it compared autism prevalence by functional severity. Okay, so anybody who has ever met kids with actual severe autism, moderate to profound autism, this is a real thing. Okay, this is not Elon is just a weird guy. And we now have this thing. It's happening in middle schools, by the way, where kids will say, do you have the Tism? Meaning autism because it becomes so common for people to claim autism. And basically if you're weird or if you have a particular skill set or if you're kind of smart, people will say that you're autistic now, which is stupid. Autism is a real thing. And severe autism is disabling. I mean, severe kids with severe autism very often cannot talk. They cannot interact in society. Having moderate autism means that you largely cannot fully interact. You need very often full-time care. That is not the same thing as you're a weirdo with 158 IQ. That is not the same thing. I mean, even if you go back to Rainman, the whole point of Rainman is that Dustin Hoffman, who has autism, is supposed to have a particular set of skills, but is not capable of being cared for by his brother. He requires full-time care. Autism is not just your buddies a little bit weird around people. That's not autism. And guess what? It turns out that prevalence by functional severity, meaning diagnoses of moderate profound autism, are they up since 2000? They are down since 2000. Diagnosis for eight-year-olds of moderate to profound autism. It was 1.5 per 1000 children in 2000. It is 1.2 per 1000 children in 2016. At the same time, the chart is going like this. That's so weird. So moderate and profound, meaning like real hardcore autism, is actually slightly down. Between 2000 and 2016, while the rest of the chart is going like that, is skyrocketing. How about mild autism? Mild autism, the diagnosis rate for eight-year-olds, has more than doubled. In 2000, it was 3.1 per 1000 children now. It is 7.3 per 1000 children. Borderline has absolutely skyrocketed. Absolutely skyrocketed. You're talking a difference between 1.4 and 6.9. Okay, so it is multiplied there by a factor of 5 or so. Now, does anyone think, why would that be? Why wouldn't this chart be the same? If autism diagnoses are increasing across the board, wouldn't you expect more moderate to profound cases? But why is moderate to profound declining while mild and borderline are wildly increasing? And no significant challenges from point 6 to 3.4, which again, not to do some bad math here. That is like almost a 6x increase between 2000 and 2016. So basically, if your mild borderline or no significant challenge is massive increase in diagnosis, if your moderate's profound decrease in diagnosis, hmm, what could explain this? Could it be the possibility that just as the number of COVID-attributed deaths, skyrocketed when the federal government started paying hospitals based on COVID deaths and so people started mislabeling heart attacks COVID? Could it be you're getting a mass over diagnosis? Because I can show you similar charts. It turns out that public policy has this impact on a wide variety of maladies. Here, for example, is a chart demonstrating social security disability spending in billions of 2013 dollars dating back from 1964 through 2013. And what do you see here? Well, you see a pretty massive increase in disability all the way up to about 1978, 1979. Why? Because the federal government started making social security disability more widely available than it turned out. A lot of people were engaging in fraud. This would be the so-called welfare queen period where people were claiming disability didn't actually have disability. And so a bunch of restrictions were put on reception of disability and also the number of benefits amount of benefits received. And so you see a complete flatlining of disability spending between 1978 and essentially 1990. And then there's a recession and people start claiming disability to get the money and the government loosens it up and boom, exponential growth. It's almost as though people respond to incentive structures. And so why am I pointing this out? Because again, data matters and this to me remains the greatest sin of people like Anthony Fauci. They destroyed any faith in data. They destroyed any faith in science because they had a preset system of things that you were supposed to care about. And then they just obviated the data. They just decided to excise the data or untraned stuff. They decided to just excise the data. And I don't like it from any side. Because again, the data isn't only going to be perfect. We're going to get better data. over time, we need better systems to check the data, by the way. It turns out a huge number of studies are not replicable. We actually, I would suggest, need a massive 501c3 whose entire job is to just replicate the studies of others to demonstrate what is true and what is false. But what we have seen in science is the same thing we have seen in a wide variety of other institutions in America. And that is that we have destroyed trust in the key institutions that make America function, which means that next comes the revolution because if you get rid of all the institutions and the devil turns round on you, where will you hide, Roper, the forest being flat? That's what's happening now. When you destroy the institutions, the black pilling leads to revolution. That's what the DSA is. You wonder why the DSA is rising because there are no institutions that stand between you and the revolution. They've been leveled. And that's why I find it kind of hilarious when you see people who very often have stumped for the leveling of those institutions now turning around and being very, very upset about the institutions being leveled. Now, I will say, they're good-hearted, old school kind of liberals who are shocked by the DSA. But they are few in far between, as we'll see. So Joe Scarborough was shocked by the DSA national coach, our person named Megan Romer, saying that October 7th was inevitable. But this is, of course, what the DSA believes. Remember, the DSA believes that capitalism and free markets, the West. And its values cause everything bad on Earth. So if a terrorist group decides to murder civilians on mass, then it must be the fault of the West. The coach air of the DSA supported going to a pro-Homass rally the day after Hamas gleefully slaughtered more Jews on October 7th than any day that Jews were slaughtered since the Holocaust. Women raped, young children shot in front of their parents, parents shot in front of young children, the DSA co-chair, which means the DSA, supports that. I really don't want to hear from the DSA anymore that they're about economic justice or health care. Okay, but Joe Scarborough is few in far between because it turns out the vast majority of the left is perfectly willing to follow travel with all of this stuff because they think they can channel the revolution, which is why again, Hassan Pecker is only important because they made him important. They made him important. He's the one who's campaigning with people, right? The right is on a decentish kind of job of trying to excise the psychos from its mates. The left is just hugging them as tight as possible. Here was Hassan Pecker yesterday talking about CEO Weaver, who's a DSA leader saying that she wants to empower the white middle class. One of the things about Zoran is that the people surrounding him oftentimes are so much cooler than he is, but that's also part of the reason why I really respect what he's doing. She's awesome. Again, this is the whole thing, is that Mamdani is the friendly, smiling, smarmy face of this thing, but CEO Weaver is Mamdani's executive director for Housing Justice for All and she just says this stuff out loud. Here she was back in March 2021 saying the white families particularly need to transition away from property rights. I think the reality is that for centuries we've really treated property as an individualized good and not a collective good and we are going to transition into treating it as a collective good and towards a model of shared equity, we'll require that we think about it differently and it will mean that families, especially white families, but some POC families who are homeowners as well, are going to have a different relationship to property than the one that we currently have. We need to end the relationship again, these are the people who work for us or Mamdani, they work for it. And Hassan Piker is the same dude who allegedly suggested it apparently that, you know, I'm just going to let him say it himself, I can't even repeat it. We're going to keep bringing an immigrant to this country on purpose just so they can f**k your sister and then maybe even your daughter, we're going to destroy the white race bitch. That's what we're here to do. Now his response that was he is white. Okay, well that's pretty convenient, but dude, in any case, I think the important thing here is to understand the op, okay, because it is in fact an op. Okay, so in 2020, Zoran Mamdani, when he had a Ugandan accent, right, again, Mamdani code switches all the time because he is just another theater kid who's been elevated to a position of power. He explained full on how this goes. He said that basically what you need in the Democratic Party for the DSA is you need a bunch of third world minorities to come here and validate the opinions of college educated white people. He's just saying the quiet, I mean, again, this is, I've said this. Now he's saying it. Harry was back in 2020 saying it, but with it, if an accent because he's a complete fake. The interesting thing about our communities here is I think that minority communities, because we have never had representation, we are tied much more to identity. White communities, they've had representation forever. And so for them, their tie is a little less identity and a little more ideology. And so what I mean by that is we have a lot of voters here who think of themselves first as progressive voters. And so we reach out to them speaking about our platform, our progressive platform. And you're very right that you need someone in the middle to be a validator, someone to tell them to trust us, believe in us. We've had that with Tiffany, Kaban and Cynthia Nixon. They need validators guys. They need people in the middle who are just going to help, you know, the white lips follow the third worlders. That's what you need. And they just say it right out there. And that's what you got. That's what this coalition is. The Neuropost has a fascinating piece today about an anti-rent radical who is squatting in Brooklyn and turns out that the rent striking rising star radical orchestrating Mamdani administration socialist housing agenda is the daughter of a famed music studio owner who recorded rock legends like David Bowie, the Ramones, Blondie, Lou Reed, Sonic Youth, the food fighters in Coldplay. While framing herself as a champion of the proletariat, Tracy Rosenthal grew up in a trendy $1.7 million no mad had North Manhattan, I said with a lead access to the music industry attending the Grammys at least twice with her dad four time winners Stephen Rosenthal. And then she talks about how tough she has it. In North Carolina, DSA meeting where she spoke last August, Rosenthal sang the blues about what she claimed with horrendous conditions she had to endure in 2021. As soon as I moved in, I realized that we had roaches and I lost my mind. I was very angry. It was really gross. And then she talks about how hard it was. A nomad is at North of Madison Square. Here is Tracy Rosenthal explaining that abolished rent is vengeance. It's vengeance. I mean, they're just obviously they want the revolution. Obviously. The revolution now. In a certain way, the answer is vengeance. I grew up in New York City where the real estate capital, like real estate capital moved and then bankrupted my family from having like a business and like in the music business. Hmm. These people. These spoiled brat rich kids destroying the country. It's amazing. It's truly amazing. And of course, they're helped along by the legacy media who continue to portray them as sort of semi moderates. So MSNOW, Pablo Torrey, who started off as a sports commentator. I'm not sure why he's doing politics now, but I guess that's where we are. He claims that actually Hassan Piker is not a radical. He actually is more like Charlie Corp. Kirk the Nick Flentez, which is weird because he is definitely more like Nick Flentez. And in the meantime, you try to point out, look, Hassan Piker, I've talked to Hassan Piker before. I don't think he's Nick Flentez. I think he's more like Charlie Kirk. And the idea there is there are people who exist to provoke on the other side. And the question is, as a party, as as Dems, do you then hold yourself to a standard that is beyond what again, the other side equivalent of the aisle is doing. Again, insane, insane. But this is the idea. If you can normalize Hassan Piker and I'll do all side, then you can normalize everybody, which of course is the goal. So the goal here is to open space for AOC. I'm old enough to remember when Nancy Pelosi was the left most member of the Democratic Caucus. And then it turns out she was outflanked and suddenly she became moderate. They're doing the same thing with AOC right now. So Jessica Tarlov with Scott Galloway on Raging Moderates. They were talking about the magic of AOC as the moderate Democrat. Yeah, I just wondered in general election of AOC is more of a liability than a plus. I don't think there's a good thing. I mean, she can't be as she is now compared to the like real core DSA wing, like the far far left stuff, like the Daria Lisa AOC is like a moderate on a comparative basis. And that's a fair point. Okay, so again, the idea that she is somehow the moderate, and if this is where we're going, that basically the moderate Democrats are completely ruled out, right? You're on the federal men's done. The only question is whether AOC is radical enough? I mean, this is where things are going. I mean, while AOC is out there, freeze in her eggs and we're all going to have to join her in her journey. Oh my goodness. Why is this even our business? I say it again. Why is it our business? Only two reasons. And two, because she wants to normalize the idea that somehow female biological processes are anomalies and impositions by cosmic forces established against women or some such nonsense. All right. Come with me to my last workout of this whole egg freezing cycle. So this is something that I discovered on this process is that after about four or five days in, you can't work out anymore. So today I'm on day three. I'm heading back to New York. I have my first ultrasound checkup appointment tomorrow. And after that, no more working out. And the reason for that is because your ovaries really grow a lot in this process to facilitate making a lot of eggs, which is what the drugs are for. I'll get into that later. And what that also means is that you can't have much, you don't want to risk something known as torsion. You don't want to twist your ovaries. So you can't do almost any exercise at all. Why is this a thing that we even know? Again, I'm not sure which is worse. The sort of man, manosphere on the internet or the, or the girly influencers on the left of the, of the internet. It's, it's just, it's great. And then she put up a bunch of posts about all of her, all of her workout routines. This is what we need in America. Okay, but here is one of the things. So the DSA, right, they actually run a city. Okay, so Zor Mumsani's in charge of New York and it keeps proposing crazy things. And every so often it turns out that those crazy things get stopped. So for example, he proposed all of these massive tax increases and has been able to do any of them. So he went to the state and made Kathy Hogan do a lot of those things to sort of bail out the city. Now a judge is temporarily blocking mom Donnie's pieta tarot tax, right? That is the tax on people who supposedly own apartments worth more than $5 million where they don't live the majority of the year, which again is nonsensical and stupid and simply drives homeowners out of the city. Wayne Ozzy, a state judge in Staten Island entered a TRO, a temporary training order man dating at the Department of Finance removed the tax roll of 960,000 properties to publish last month as part of that pieta tarot tax roll out. The court also banned the city from taking any additional enforcement action on the tax warning notices that have already been mailed to 17,000 homeowners. So again, the lawsuit is not challenging the pieta tarot tax as a whole. They're arguing that the rollout has been botched. The inefficacy is the beautiful thing about being a revolutionary. If you get charge of a government and you suck at it, you're really bad at it. You are just accelerating the fall of the system. The DSA hates the system as a whole. The more the system fails, the more they argue that they ought to be in charge of more of the system. It is beautiful. This is the way that it works. Again, woke to is going to be worse than woke one. Woke one was the proposition that racism undergirds capitalism and the West and imperialism and colonialism. It's all motivated by evil white supremacy. And most people are like, eh, woke to is the idea that capitalism undergirds all of the evils of society, all of it. And now woke one isn't totally dead. The left is still relying on some aspect of woke one, which takes us back to the WNBA. So Dijonet Carrington, who graduated from Stanford with an agree in psychology in African American studies. So dual uselessness degrees. Dijonet Carrington, hammered Sophie Cunningham, who is sort of the quasi-moderate slash maybe a little conservative forward for the Indiana fever. And then because she hammered her, she was ejected. And then she claimed white privilege. So then she came out yesterday and she said, I've never once claimed that the assessment of the foul was white privilege. That was your assumption. Oh man, those assumptions making an ass of you and me. Okay, you can't assume that when someone says white privilege after being ejected that they are saying that it was white privilege that they were ejected. We have to make another assumption. I don't know what it was supposed to be. Try exercising your critical thinking skills. I know you studied psych. Furthermore, I'm the last thing from ignorant or asked and I'm going to come to speaking on white privilege. Do you research on that one? I actually went to school. One of the top universities might I add to educate myself on this exact subject. I would never use that term as rhetorical weapon knowing the historical and social way to hold without having the proper evidence to substantiate it. So what the hell were you saying then? I'm confused. What is it that you were claiming? Why did you treat white privilege then? You did it. It's just it. This league is an absurdity. It's an absurdity. And they are militantly focused on alienating every girl dad in America. You know, the people who will likely bring kids to the game. Look 1.0 is not dead. There's a piece in the Atlantic by a person named Tyler Austin Harper called why I quit the tenure track. And it's fascinating along these lines. So Tyler Austin Harper. Right. I believed in American higher education with the dewey fervor of the young missionary. I came from a long line of people possessed by the unshakable fate that college was a ticket to a better life. My grandmother, Hollerborn and Mounds of West Virginia, didn't finish high school. My mom made it through an associate's degree before I came along and she had to abandon her education. And then he ended up teaching at Bates College. And it turns out that everybody at this college thought that American society is really, really horrible. He got to know Ava, a college administrator of color, who was passionate about DEI issues. He says, I was surprised to discover she viewed Central Maine as a Stephen King-esque hell. A place where ancient prejudices and violence lay just beneath the friendly college town facade. Ava confessed to me that when she drove through town and spied the local crackers sitting on their porches, she sometimes thought to herself, these townies would probably like to kill her. She said, and he says, the charged atmosphere at Bates didn't feel out of step with that of the country as a whole at least initially. Sure, the college sponsored over earnest discussions of books like White Fragility and How to Be an Anti-Rasis. Yes, the president of the college bragged 67% of new faculty hires that fall were by-pock identified. Yes, college leadership was constantly adding new letters to the sexuality acronym. But again, he thought, no, no big problem. None of this is a big problem. And then it turns out that it was in fact a big problem. So it turns out that the complete destruction of Bates was rooted in an embrace of the anti-Americanism. And it turns out hilariously, this entire system he finds was deeply and cordially racist because there's a bunch of white people saying anti-racist things. He says, the story of elite higher education's hiring and labor practices and the story that's decades long creeped for progressive extremism are not separate or even contradictory. They're the same story. In 1969, a survey of 60,000 professors found 27% identified as moderate, 28% is conservative, 46% liberal left. Now at some of the country's top universities, only single digit percentages of faculty identify as conservative. That of course is true. Now, I got ripped up for this, by the way. Yeah, he got ripped up for this face. But of course, what he's saying is true. I mean, the university system has destroyed entire probably two full generations of Americans, particularly white liberal Americans. He tweeted out that he was hearing people don't like his lived experience, which is a he said, I'm hearing the people over at the other website don't like my lived experience. Yeah. We can see why because he is saying a true thing. Okay. Now speaking of people who wish to rip it down, who wish to do the revolution and cosplay the revolution again, if it's white lips, white upper class lips or pushing the revolution on the left, it is white upper class pseudo conservative. So we're doing the same on the other side. So Tucker Carlson is like the best example of this. A member of the actual kind of class who is hanging out with actual Jeffrey Epstein. I mean, again, Tucker Carlson has no problem with sex trafficking so long since the tape boy is doing it. Anyway, Tucker did an episode the other day that is just insane. Hunter Biden is now doing a tour of the woke right of the horseshoe right. And he joined Tucker. Again, this is not a giant surprise because it turns out that Tucker and Hunter are in the same world. Remember, Tucker is the man of the people. He's flannel, clad, main boy. He's just sitting over there and he's scabbing doing some hunting and fishing. Except for the fact that Tucker Carlson is a silver spoon jacket who vacations in yachts on the Mediterranean and has known Hunter Biden for decades and his friends with him. We're supposed to pretend none of that happened. Well, in this episode, Tucker acknowledges that he is, in fact, from the same world as Hunter, but it turns out that both Tucker and Hunter want to lead the revolution against the system that has made them some of the most privileged people in the history of all human beings. Here he was talking about his convergence of worlds with Hunter Biden. I grew up with your high school girlfriend, I think. So, I mean, I'm very familiar with the world that you're from, because I'm sort of from it too. And I noticed the change during Obama. And I'm not blaming Obama. I'm not blaming any, but the society changed. It was like all of a sudden, if you didn't like Obama, you were a racist. And I felt like in our neighborhood, that was the advantage. You couldn't say anything about Obama that wasn't positive. Do you remember that? He's saying, got more device to learn. He's not blaming Obama for the device of this. He just kind of got that way, just kind of got that way. And it turns out, of course, that again, he has been friends with Hunter Biden for a very long time. Jason Zangrelly wrote an entire book about Tucker in which he openly reports that, you know, what was actually on Hunter's laptop. from the details from the details. Tucker Carlson. Well, Carlson's son Buckley was a senior at St. George's in applying to college. George University, George Washington University was his first choice. So Tucker and his wife reached out to one of their Washington friends who's a well-connected George Channel um, Hunter Biden. In an email, Tucker filled in Hunter on Buckley's grades. A year later, the London tabloid, the Daily Mail was working on a story about how Hunter Biden's name was discovered in the leaked user list for Ashley Madison, a website for people seeking to have extra marital affairs. Biden sought the help of Carlson, whose friends with the Daily Mail's Washington editor. And Carlson wrote, "Actually lost my bleep on the editor over there." He claims London office forced him to do it. He's a pig either way and I told him so. And Biden apologized to Carlson for troubling him and Carlson responded, "Are you kidding? I'm glad you called." What they did was repulsive and immoral. And I hope I'd wrecked their day. I certainly tried to. F them. Let me know if there's any way we can help. He is one of the people. He's not a member of that, that Epstein class engaged in sexual perversion, like going on Ashley Madison or, you know, addicting your dead brother's wife to hardcore drugs or anything like that. He's a man of the people, you see. A man of the people. Now Hunter Biden did say that Tucker has not transformed, which I find absolutely believable. I mean, again, I've been calling out Tucker's various anti-conservative parrises since what, 2018, 2017. Anyway, here is Hunter talking about his good old relationship with Tucker. But the thing for me is that with you, I, the transformation, not transformation because it's not a transformation. Anybody that knows you realizes it's not a transformation is out on your own now and not understandably, like anybody that has a job, being beholden to corporate structure. Yeah. Fox News. Is that I, I feel as if that combined with the incredible ultimate betrayal, and what I mean by betrayal of the promise, the singular promise that was important to you as it related to Trump. That we would not get into the potential of ending up in a war, a, a, a, war or three. I mean, he's there with a drug, adult derelict talking about their long time friendship, but don't worry guys. They're not a member of an elitist uniparty, not at all. In fact, Tucker is so not elitist that you know where he was when Mar-a-Lago got rated. He's just like you, Tucker. He was, you know, in the woods in his cabin where there's no running water or a toilet. He was joking. He was on a yacht in the Mediterranean. When Mar-a-Lago got rated. This is like such an impossible rich guy thing to say, but it's just a fact I was in Europe with my kids on the med, the August of 2023, I think. And Mar-a-Lago got rated. And that was like, that was ridiculous. On a documents charge, really? And I'm from the city. So like, I know a lot about the document stuff. And it was like transparently absurd. Literally sending armed FBI agents into his bathroom like no. And so to me what that said was, Trump is actually being persecuted by the uniparty. Therefore he is its sincere opponent. And my overriding feeling since I wrote a whole book on this 10 years ago is that the problem in Washington is that on the big questions of the economy and foreign policy, both parties agree. It's the agreement that is the threat, not the disagreement. Okay, now I'm just going to point out here that if you're going to talk to a uniparty, it might be a little uniparty to, for example, now posit that Hunter Biden never dropped off his laptop while being a drug-addled piece of crap at a repair shop. And actually all this was planted by Wade Frey. You're not going to believe who Tucker Carlson says. Plant it, the Hunter Biden laptop story. You're not going to believe it. You won't believe it. You're totally going to believe it. It's the Jews. You're not. I know. It's the Jews. What can't they do? I can't. I can't. It's just such a slopp. It's such a slopp. Okay. Here's an idiot saying idiot things. And one of the things that enraged me about the statement from those sleazy intel guys is that they blame the Russians for it. Now maybe the Russians had a hand in it, but it was the Israelis who were pushing that. Fact. Fact. I mean, literally to me. Okay. I would love for him to name the names. Who? Which Israelis were pushing it to Tucker. And by the way, Tucker made hay out of the Hunter Biden laptop. It's hilarious. You want to talk about a unit party? How about you go on your show at Fox and you start talking, add nausea about the Hunter Biden laptop. And a few years later, sitting with Hunter blaming the Israelis for the laptop that Hunter Biden dropped off at a repair shop. It's just pathetic. It's just pathetic. And again, it's all part of the same dumb op. It really is stupid. It's truly stupid. And if you follow this, you know, free country, you can do what you want for this out a thousand time, but my goodness, my goodness. And Tucker says that the problem is not out there in the world. The problem is here in America with you, guested the unit party. It tells you that you're putting your faith in the wrong thing, which is in a political system whereas there's got to be a real solution that begins with changing people's hearts. That's what I think. Exactly. Exactly. Because it comes from us. We're trying to find the problem out there. Exactly. And it's here. Get where the problem is. Yes. Right. No, I can't buy. I've discovered about myself that it's the it's the Jinnah moves me. Oh. Okay. Also, by the way, they both love Candace Owens. Shocker. Shocker. No, it's that Sean Ryan set up the Candace interview with them. I'm sorry. The exponential stupidity with which this country is collapsing is it's beyond reckoning. I'm going to end up in the woods just to escape this stuff like my goodness. I love Candace. I do. I do too. I do too. I'm taking a lot of abuse for saying that, but I do. I know her and I and I do. I think she's a great person. As a person. Yeah. Forget the politics and anything. And largely why I'm sitting here, we've known each other for, you know, quite tangentially for 30 years. Yes. Is that she is a human being is a really, really good person and thoughtful and generous and has a deep faith and I just vehemently disagree with some of her positions. And it used to be that way. I remember. Meanwhile, Tucker Carlson said, well, you know, I totally agree. She's wonderful. In fact, I've texted Erica Kirk and Candace owns it then now. That says something about Tucker Carlson, doesn't it? Well, what a hero he is. He has texted Erica Kirk. The widow of Charlie Kirk and also the woman who says that she murdered Charlie and everyone around him murdered Charlie within an hour of each other. Wow. The heroism, my goodness. I can't be the absolute utter imbacility of this. If you are so stupid that you believe the people who stand for you are rich boy, richy rich, like grew up rich rich boy, Tucker Carlson at his Swiss boarding school, living in a fake cabin in Maine with the Gaston Chandelier talking to Hunter Biden, longtime drug addict in complete peace of sh-- about how America needs them and their human hearts, along with that of Candace Owens to fix what ails the country. Oh my God, man. Oh, good lord. Good lord. Here's Tucker. My favorite thing that Tucker does here is he always does this. He knows what he's saying is ridiculous. It's my right. Oh. No one said it's not your right. It just makes you a douchebag. It is not even on partisan lines. I mean, the divisions are so intense. I always thought of divisions as racial or religious. You know, you're Protestant marrying a Catholic or black person marrying a white person. I feel like the divisions now are ideological and political. And that's-- I mean, this morning I texted Erica Kirk and Candace Owens, both within like an hour of each other, not related to each other, but just because I really like them both. I'm not embarrassed of that. And I've-- and that's my right, by the way, I get to like people, whether or not I'm fully aligned with their program, right? That's my view. Yeah. I've taken so much abuse for that. It's like, how could you be friends with two people who disagree with each other? Well, I don't know. I am. Uh, well, I'm-- two people who disagree with each other. I mean, it kind of depends what they disagree about. I mean, if they disagree about whether they like the Odyssey, that's one thing. If they disagree on whether one of them murdered the others, murdered her on husband, that feels like a pretty big-- just-- but in the end, in the end, it's all about the Unipartee Hunter, says he likes Thomas Massey, he likes MTG, and this is where we are. Okay, this is where we are now. We are at an inflection point in this country, whether you-- it's because of the technology is related to AI, and as it relates to our debt, in the fact that Donald Trump is responsible for what? of the the entire debt of the entire nation over the course of the, you know, since its inception. Yeah, it's on course. Yeah, it bonkers. Yeah. And we are in desperate, desperate need of leadership. I agree. And so I, and I want, I want to reach cross to everybody and say, like, look, let's figure out with the things that we can agree on. Instead of like pointing, you know, the, and constantly, and one of the things that I think that we can agree on is that we are, we have the exact wrong leadership at the exact wrong time. Okay. Well, I'm glad that you guys have the same exact thoughts on these things. And probably in the back room, there's some Parmesan cheese that you can snort off the carpet. Maybe some, maybe some corrupt paintings could try to sell at this point. That's the way through. They also, by the way, talked about their favorite Bible verses, but frankly, I don't know what, what Hunter Biden thinks about the Bible. Nor do I care what Tucker Carlson says about a book that he first completed in 2023. So we're just going to not do that. But again, I just want to show you these are two extremely elite people, like the elite of the elite in the beltway, we're explaining to you that actually you have been betrayed by the system and only they know how to get through. And the answer presumably is some sort of horseshoe revolution. I mean, I can't think of a worse leadership class than Hunter Biden and Tucker Carlson together in a room. It is very difficult to think of a worse leadership class, especially considering the other people that they hang out with and the people who they're willing to cover for and their complete lack of honesty in principle. It is an astonishing thing and astonishing astonishing thing. All right, coming up, we do have a WNBA update for you. Plus, it turns out that, you know, there are real problems in the country that require real solutions, but nobody's actually going to do them. First, if you're a daily wire member, you get even more analysis, more news coverage access to the mailbag right now. If you're not a member, become a member, use Coach Shapiro. Check out for two months free on our annual plans. Click that link in the description and join us. I'm not a member of the organization. Are you paying attention? Honored look too. Hello, Mark. Listen carefully. The great Satan America will fall. Your infidels. The bodies of women are not pure and men's souls are unclean. What makes them so dangerous? Their goals are not in this light. But the next. How do you want? We got friends here. Kids just delisted the meat. In the lot. We cannot run or hide. From what is coming, we have to fight. I will be rewarded 10,000 times in the next life. When you die, you are nothing. Boy, one way to find out. That's the American way.