Friendly Fire: Cornell #MeToo Hypocrisy & Not So "Super" Intelligence

Okay, fellas, since Hollywood can't do anything right anymore, we did their job for them. The Daily Wire's newest movie is an ode to the great funny action films of the 80s and 90s. Good guys win. Bad guys lose. No one apologizes for it. Check out Run Hyde Fight Infidels now streaming only on the Daily Wire. If good is in fact the absence of evil, you know, like doctors fighting illness, cops fighting crime, then doing evil might actually have some sort of point. So you're saying the sort of Kantian view is the opposite, is basically the opposite of the neoplateness. So it's like that because the like platinus would say, wait, hold on, we're in, we're coming in hot to the show with that cutting-edge talk about platinus is that this is why people tune into the Daily Wire to get the news. I'm thinking is this. Yeah, exactly. By the way, I don't want to be wrong. He says about platinus. Isn't that Clay Travis? I know him. I've seen Clay Travis before. It is indeed. And if you guys are like, hey, what does he keep looking at? The Atlanta Braves are playing the Philadelphia Eagles and I'm feeling of the Eagles. Philadelphia Phillies in game two, which Major League Baseball is inexplicably slotted at 2 p.m. Eastern for potentially three straight days. So I have the game directly above us. And so I promise that I'm not, I'm not totally absent here. I'm just making sure I'm on top of everything. I'm paying attention to the wild guess that you're rooting for Atlanta here. It's a very solid, very solid analysis by you to start off the program. Clay, before we get into the show, since you're a sports expert, could I just get your expert analysis on the Yankees? Absolutely obliterating the Boston Red Sox last night. Nine to nothing with Ben Rice just doing summer salts around the bases. Look, I am probably the number one Atlanta Braves fan only in the last decade, right? Because my kids have gotten me all into it. But Yankees Red Sox, one of the all-time great rivalries in all of sports. And I was watching that last night, my kids were staying up late to watch the Cubs play against the Padres as well. And there's just an embarrassment of riches. October is, I know we're in the last day of September, or basically in October. By far, I think the best month for American sports fans. And it's just an embarrassment of riches. Like every minute of the day, you can basically kick back and be watching absolute top tier games. And so I was watching last night and hopefully the Braves will end the hated Philadelphia Phillies season today. And I'm closely monitoring the situation as the kids like this. Yeah, but I'll hold on Clay, because you're in politics and in sports, and that that seemed like a big filibuster. Because specifically, I just want to hear you talk about the humiliation that the Boston Red Sox endured last night in that beautiful first game of the wild. Anyway, all right, we'll get into all those things. This in Red Sox, the problem you have is Red Sox fans suffered literally four generations, almost five generations of humiliation for the Babe Rook trade. But for the young Boston area sports fan, the last 20 years, they dominated New York area sports fans. Like Boston was the lovable loser city in that New York Boston rivalry. And about 15 or so years ago, 20 years ago, Boston turned into the dominant sports city. They went championships across every sport. And until the next, the city of New York had been really struggling for basically a generation. So I don't think it has the same sting anymore. Does that make sense? Yeah, they used to have an inferiority complex. Now I think New York is inferior to Boston when it comes to recent modern sports. Yeah, okay. I'm not going to try to ask this question a third time because I'm not getting the answer I want. This is Friendly Fire. This is what this is the best episode of Friendly Fire we've ever had. We got rid of Shapiro. We got rid of Walsh. Now we have the lovely Isabel Brown. And the not quite as lovely, but still rather amiable Clay Travis. I dig it. Beyond the absolute, what struck me is like a terror attack level destruction of the Boston Red Sox last night at the hands of the New York Yankees. We also had a near terror attack on the Arabian Peninsula when a fly Dubai jet was hijacked by a terrorist. And you would say, well, I thought we couldn't do that anymore since 9/11 because now the cockpits are locked. But the call was coming. The call to prayer was coming from inside the cock pit. It was the Omani pilot who stabbed the other pilot who initially we were told was Emirati. Turns out he's a hero Indian. He gets stabbed. The pilot goes down. The Indian kicks open the door. Some have rigs open the cock pit door. And then a bunch of Jews storm the cock pit and drag the Muslim pilot out of there. And then, you know, it's Israelis. So they're relatively competent at a lot of different things. So one of them goes in there, lands the plane. The other one is administering medical care. The other one is selling jewelry, I think, oddly enough. I don't know. They write it on a waste of any time. And it was nearly miraculous sort of event. Everybody survived. Which New York Times, all of which the New York Times described as a struggle in the cock pit is that there were no politics in that. Just two guys to say, you know, they were fighting. I think they were fighting over the socks game. You know, it was like, like, oh, it was the Yankees are much better than the side. And then the planes started to pitch down so the Jews ran in. But the Israelis were incredibly heroic. I mean, it was a flight 93 moment on steroids. So it was really pretty impressive stuff. Yes. And so the question is, is this-- >> Yeah, I liked Nolz's tweet on the subject. What did you tweet about the death star, Nolz? >> Oh, yes. In response to the New York Times, I said, you know, the Millennium Falcon has an earlier than expected departure after a struggle between Darth Vader and Obi-Wan Kenobi. Actually, one time I flew fly Dubai, I'm surprised that the passengers knew there was anything wrong. Because dropping 10,000 feet in a second, that's pretty much business as usual for that airline. >> That's the landing motif, yeah. >> The question, though, is there political import to this? >> I wasn't long enough. I was live with Bach. You know, who hasn't covered this at all? MSNBC. And I do-- you mentioned the New York Times. I think they actually deserve more criticism on television because I got the quad box set up. One of the things I like to watch the most is how are Fox News, how are CNN, how are MSNBC handling the stories of the day? What are they focusing on? What are they giving credence and attention to? MSNBC, MSNOW, I guess, is the technical name. They basically didn't cover this all day. So if you're out there and you are just trying to watch MSNOW to somehow be informed, you wouldn't have known anything about this would be terror attack. You wouldn't have known anything about what might be occurring. And I do think this is significant because there is a huge base of the Democrat Party now of left-wingers that refuse to believe that Muslims could be the bad guy. And so when there is a bad guy, Muslim actor, they just pretend the story didn't happen. I don't think, look, the New York Times, the way they covered this, this is intentional the way MSNOW covered it. If somebody in a MAGA hat had tried to take down a plane saying they were doing so on instruction of Trump, it would have been a lead story for them. The wrong guy is the bad guy. And so they just pretended it didn't happen. You and everybody else watching it, we all know it happened. But if you're a left-winger, you might not even know that this situation ever occurred because they just pretend it didn't. And it happened at the same time, a bunch of five guys in Balaklava's in a truck were arrested in Britain for approaching an RAF base where we have our forces and then released. I wasn't quite sure where the release came in. These guys, they said they didn't have any explosive devices. But what the hell were they doing there? It didn't sound like a very, you know, Trump said they were planning big damage. So this does seem like a ran fighting back by any other means necessary. They're bottled up. It really does seem, I don't want to be too hopeful about this because I know wars in the Middle East don't end. They just drag on. It's like a government program. They never die. But still it does seem to me that Iran is getting kind of desperate and looking for ways to hit us in any other way they can because they can't do anything. They can't even close the straight of our moves anymore. Yes, that's my big question on this. Does it have political import or is it just a dog barking? You know, because Muslims commit terror attacks. That's been going on for like 1400 years now. So it could be one-offs. The combination with the Royal Air Force base, quasi-attack, near-attack. I don't know. To me, it does raise the possibility, especially as we approach the midterms, that maybe Iran is taking a heavier hand in this. We've seen no reporting on that thus far. And in fact, what Iran hopes to get out of the midterm election seems like it's materializing. The polls for the Republicans are getting worse. The polls for the Democrats, the prediction market, for the Democrats, it's looking better and better. So I don't know that Iran would benefit from a new terror attack in the next three or four weeks. But in any case, do you see this shaping public opinion at all to your point, Clay? You know, if you're watching MSNOW, you don't even know this happened probably. True. But the Democrat voters certainly know that Muslims perpetrated 9/11 and they don't care. Their opinion of Islam increased after that. So I just want under if they're impenetrable to having their opinion swayed on an issue like terror and national security. >> That's a fair question. >> In fact, in American politics, right, Abdul Al-Sayed, it's hard to argue that Israel's the bad guy, if you're having Muslims take down a plane of 200, I would also point out in Israel we've got the election, I think is on October 27th, they're even sooner than we are and what exactly their government structure will look like is a big part of it. I'll also tell you where we're going to go if we haven't already gone, and I haven't been on social media very much, but there's going to be a huge element that says this is all made up, this is Israel trying to stage a fake terror attack for the benefit of their own political situation, and if that hasn't already taken flight, I'm sure it will be in short order, you guys may have already been monitoring that, but I'm telling you it's coming. >> Yeah, it stated it. >> Yeah, Claire, he lots of posts surrounding that already today, it's been alarming how many people have said this is all false reporting, none of this ever happened, don't even remotely fall for it on social media, but I think we might be thinking about this from an educated perspective within the context of the midterms, when in reality, people familiar with anti-Islamic terrorism warnings have been really screaming from the rooftops for many, many, many years that America and the Western world at large has been kind of looming over the cliff for another 9/11 style attack, perhaps far more sophisticated and far more widespread happening in multiple metropolitan areas at exactly the same time for a very long time. This has been going on, Sarah Adams who used to be a CIA counterterrorism analyst for many years just recently joined us on our show and said this has been looming for a very long time and basically we're just waiting for it to happen and our government is not taking a whole lot of steps to prevent something like this from happening on the election side. Go ahead. >> I want to hit back at that just for a second, because I had Sebastian Gorkon, who's Trump's in-house, Terrorist guy and he completely, he feels that is completely overdone, he feels that they've really gotten a handle on a lot of this, that they're really are tracing some of the people in the country and outside the country that killed I think over a thousand top terrorists, you know, since Trump has come into office and he really felt, he hit her pretty hard, Sarah, saying that he felt that this was kind of hysteria, moan green, fear moan green. And he's a guy, I have to say, whatever else anybody wants to say about Sebastian Gorkon has never lied to me, not once, he has never told me a falsehood on the air or off. And so I kind of believed what he was saying. >> Yeah, but he did torture James Bond in all those years. >> Oh, yes. >> Okay, you're going to hold it grudge. Yeah, I know. And there's another number actually, just come out, that immigration to the United States from Muslim majority countries is down like 100%, I mean, it's down 96% in two years. So that would be another piece of evidence that maybe we're a little less vulnerable than we were. Isabel, I cut you off. >> Yeah, I was just going to say, I hope that's the case when it comes to counterterrorism measures. And I have full confidence in the Trump administration that they're doing that. The election side of this is a different piece of the conversation entirely. And what's fascinating is the Muslim Brotherhood is funding a sizable number of candidates running in the midterm elections, not just Abdul Asayad, but a many, many, many individuals who are running for Congress right now for the midterm elections here in the next 30 days. Of course, you're not seeing checks written and signed by the Muslim Brotherhood, it's being funneled through various NGO organizations, student organizations, general awareness campaigns, millions upon millions of dollars are being funded by terrorists into American elections this time around to try to change things from the inside of the government out. So I think what we really should be thinking about long term here in the next few years is more than just flying a plane into a particular building, what we typically associate with a terror attack on American soil. We also really need to be concerned about potential terrorists or people with ties to terrorism organizations sitting inside of the U.S. Capitol building here at a matter of weeks. >> Yeah, this is the whole flaw for me on the left, Islamophobia charges is that they tell us where the Islamophobic and then they bring out precisely those Muslim people who hate America, hate Jews and want us all to be destroyed. And you think like, hey, if you've got a patriotic Muslim candidate and he loves this country and wants it to be free and prosperous and all that, I'm down with that. But they're actually bringing out the guys who, as you say, is about are supported by people like care and the Muslim Brotherhood. And so I don't understand why we're being phobic at all. It just sounds like, why is it wary to me? >> Do you think it drives the midterm elections? I mean, a story like a major terror attack that was thwarted today, or potential terror attacks in the United States, or the thwarted one in the UK? Does it drive the election? Because I don't really see it. You know, there's been this kind of schizophrenia in the Abdul Al-Sahed campaign. On the one hand, he's a Jihadi, he's an Islamist. On the other hand, he's like a gay guy singing show tunes, oh, I want to dance with somebody. And I can't quite tell, and frankly, I don't know which one is worse. Is he just a radical leftist or is he a Jihadi? And I don't know that it really sticks when I think of what is motivating voters in the election. You have all the Democrat slogans, like affordability and health care and whatever. And unfortunately, they have a little bit of an opening because you are beginning to see downstream effects from the Iran War in the broader economy. That wasn't true three months ago. It is beginning to turn up now. And you can explain until you're blowing the face all the reasons for taking the risk on the Iran War. But voters aren't going to care with three, four weeks left until the election. And so I can't really figure out what the chief motivating factors are for voters generally and what the chief arguments have to be from the right. Well, I think the one thing that the Trump administration has not done, and this really does bother me, and it's partly that Trump is not that articulate sometimes in putting forward his case, is the one thing they haven't done is said, you know, we get it. The prices on gas are, you know, bad and they're punishing and people have to drive to work and it's tough. This is a sacrifice we're asking you to make for the next 50 years of American foreign policy, which is largely going to involve our competition and possibly fighting with China. And I know that's what Trump is thinking because it comes out in these fragments. But he has never just turned to us and said, listen, I need you guys to make this sacrifice. This is something, it's tough, it's going to be fine. He's always such a cheerleader and such a positive guy and the prices are going to drop. He never actually calls out to something higher in the American public. It says, all right, we're going to eat this for a while and bring these guys down. And then we're not going to, then we're going to have a lot more power and control of Chinese oil when it comes time to sit down and talk to them about why their navy is expanding faster than, you know, we can even think. So I don't know. I think that this is a mistake in messaging from the Trump administration. I think it's a genuinely difficult thing, but the other thing about this is the craziness, the craziness of voting for these leftists who hate us, who are absolutely determined to destroy us, openly determined to destroy us and have never said a good word about this country yet want to run it. And I don't see how that is to whom that is appealing in such great numbers. Yes. And I think that China point is so important because if you just say, hey, we need to fight another war in the Middle East for freedom or we need to defend our ally Israel or those lines are not playing. I mean, they're just, you look at the public opinion polls, those lines don't work. If you say, hey, we're the global hedge among and this is also about the cold war that we're currently in with China and we want to continue to dominate and not give up the American century, you know, I actually think that plays a little bit better, but we know some messaging that really hits you home, run, hide, fight, infidel. If you have not subscribed yet, you need to go to dailywire.com/subscribe. You can watch a blue haired lesbian have her head nearly chopped off. You can watch a liberal homosexual be kicked off of a roof by a jihadi. You can watch Jonathan Majors. There's a lot in there, okay, and it's a lot and it seems like it's kind of farcical. And then you read the news and you say, actually, maybe run, hide, fight didn't go far enough. So make sure you go check out run, hide, fight, infidel at dailywire.com/subscribe. It's really great to watch in your bed. When I strongly recommend it, if you want to watch it in your bed, you do it from a Helix mattress. By the way, the rest of the show is just going to be me cycling through advertisements. I love my Helix mattress. I have multiple Helix mattresses in my home and they're all different because you don't want to just have one mattress. You don't want to just sleep on the bed that was made for me. You want to sleep on the bed that is made for you. So Helix has this amazing sleep quiz. You take it. You answer a handful of questions and you will figure out whether you sleep warm, whether you sleep cold, whether you want a little firmer, whether you sleep on your side. They have options of more than 20 mattress models, including cooling upgrades, your mattresships free in the continental U.S. 129 sleep trial to try it at home. And you get the happy with Helix guarantee a limited lifetime warranty. You've tried both sides of the pillow. It's time to reconsider what's underneath it. Go to helix sleep.com/dailywire for 27% off-site wide. During Helix's Labor Day sale, best of the web sale that is helix.com/dailywire for 27% off-site wide. When you're really tired, you want to relax. Another great way to relax is Mayflower is getting out of getting. I'm not going to go into that. But it's a good thing. You should do that too. Okay. Speaking of sleeping, I do want to get to a story. This is a complete 90 degree pivot. The Cornell Rape Story. We've all seen the headlines. Seven guys are accused of raping a girl at Cornell two years after the event took place. They're now reopening the criminal investigation after it was dismissed. Because of a civil lawsuit, I'm not going to state my opinion. I just want to go get your initial takes. Ladies first is about. Yeah, Michael, this is a story that's being updated literally by the hour. So new information has come out in the last few minutes, which is quite fascinating. But basically to give everyone the full overview of what happened here allegedly in October of 2024, this young woman took herself to a fraternity house at Cornell University and found herself engaging in quite an event of an evening with seven different fraternity brothers in virtual capacities that all changed within the last couple of minutes, every few minutes throughout the night. There were a lot of drugs and alcohol involved, obviously various configurations of the guys. It was all very nebulous. And about three weeks later, she went to the police department on campus to file an incident report for whatever had happened that night. The day after or two days after all of this had happened, she texted one of the fraternity brothers and essentially said, I had fun seeing you last night. It's unfortunate how all of that went down. But I believe nothing sexual that happened last night was illegal. We'd love to hook up with you again. Let's get together and smoke marijuana again sometime in the future. But by the time she showed up a couple weeks later to the police department, we had a whole lot to say. Now, initially everybody thought that this was happening with a report that essentially said everything was consensual. She showed up to the police department and said, hey, this crazy thing happened. And the police said, okay, I don't know what you want me to do with that. So the DA's office never actually filed criminal charges against these seven men. However, in the last couple of hours, it has now come out that in the initial transcript of her conversation with the police, she might have actually used the words I was raped and potentially a full investigation didn't really ensue from the Cornell Police Department. So all of this has now culminated years later in a civil lawsuit where she's suing the bar that she went to that night. She's suing the university. She's suing the fraternity and all of the fraternity brothers insisting that nothing that happened that evening was consensual, despite what her previous testimony or that text message may have said. And everyone's having a very emotional reaction to this, obviously, largely because of one screenshot snapchat group text that was passed among these fraternity brothers that evening where they were advertising. I don't want to be too press on the show because it'll get taken down. But essentially, hey, there's this girl upstairs. She's free and open for business for anyone who wants to show up. It's incredibly chilling. And I think it lists it's an emotional response in anyone, regardless of where you fall in the political spectrum or whatever preconceived opinion you might have on the issue. That was so diplomatic, that was so subtle, it was like a Bronte novel, you know, where Heathcliff goes to the attic and you don't realize he had sex. That really well done Isabel. So okay, but before I move on to the fellows, is it rape? What's the take? What's the hot take? 140 characters. It's so hard to tell. Based on the initial police report that's in the lawsuit, I would probably argue no. And that largely only goes down to the New York State Statute of what constitutes rape. It is very specific. What it actually takes to charge someone with that particular crime. There's a whole host of other sex crimes that potentially these young men could be charged with. But based on their definition of what it means to be mentally incapacitated, if you voluntarily get drunk and you voluntarily take drugs, you're excluded from that. So it wouldn't be considered rape. She did have the lucid opportunity to say yes or no to various configurations of the men throughout the evening. And she very clearly articulates that. And they reportedly respected that. They said, okay, don't add the fourth guy or whatever. And they said, okay, so the whole thing is really ugly, but it's a really powerful reminder that sex does not belong between eight people in a fraternity house fueled by ketamine sex parties. It instead belongs within a loving marriage between a husband and a wife. And I think we have to have a really important cultural conversation about morality being potentially different from legality in our culture today, especially when it comes to sex. >> All right, Clay. >> You did an amazing job breaking down all those things. I would add a couple of more details that I think factor in. One, there were 12 hearings related to this incident on campus, 12. We repeat that, 12. Two of these guys, my understanding is we're ultimately expelled. There were different varieties of punishment that were put in place associated with this. There's a big difference between what the standard is of behavior inside of a campus investigation, which is the standard is, is it more likely than not? Basically did it happen. It's a civil standard. And the fact that they had these 12 hearings, the two guys were kicked out, it doesn't mean that they committed a crime. It does mean that they found something inappropriate that violated the student conduct. So I think that is important here. Second part on this that I would say is to me, as a lawyer looking at this evidence, do you really think that there is a bias in favor of the fraternity guys in either the university or inside of the investigation taking place in the larger community, the criminal investigation. If anything, we have lived through a world where young men caused all the problems, right? We saw this with Duke LaCrosse. And so the fact that there were 12 campus hearings, the fact that they did some form of investigation on this, that she appears to have said in some of the corroborating evidence around that same time that she engaged in consensual behavior. I don't know how you would bring this case and prove beyond a reason of her doubt that she did not consent and that these guys had engaged in rape. So again, this is me looking at it from purely illegal perspective. And I can't believe I'm going to say it because I never would have believed that I would say it. Sonny Austin actually did a pretty good job on the view talking about this from the perspective of someone who has been involved in sexual assault investigations from a criminal perspective about why she did not believe the last thing I would say the allegations here. These are allegations in a civil lawsuit. The number of times that people put allegations in a lawsuit and everybody immediately presumes that it's a factual nature and an accurate recitation of what took place in the media is outrageous. This is where she puts forward the best possible case where she is looking for millions of dollars in damages. It's not an independent arbiter's take on what happened on that night. So I'm fired up about this because this is what social media often does. They take allegations from inside of complaints and they take them as fact. And then finally, I know I said finally a couple of times ago, do you guys remember the punter? The story out of San Diego State, the NFL player who was accused of sexual assault, they didn't press charges against him, but the complaint came out and they kicked him out of the leak and he wasn't allowed to play football. And then it came out that actually the girl had consented and all the evidence came out that actually in many ways proved that he was not culpable, that he wasn't responsible. But everybody had already decided based on the allegations that he was guilty. I just didn't very skeptical of any sort of initial complaint filing that's designed to elicit millions of dollars in payments. Remember also, they usually give this to the defendants in advance and say, Hey, if you pay us enough money, we won't file this, this won't go public. They know it's going to be a nasty look for everybody involved. And oftentimes that complaint is given in advance and they say, Hey, the number is 4.5 million Cornell. If you stroke a check for this, we'll never -- and I'm just making up a number, right? But there's usually a settlement dollar figure that would have kept this from going public. All of those factors, I think, have to be taken into account as well. I think we have the sunny hosting clip. Do we? I actually have the statement that Jane Doe wrote at that time. And just give it to us in the sentence. We're not a lot of time. It's several pages long. I know, but it's nine pages long. And I will say that under current New York state law, voluntary intoxication or drug use, and she voluntarily drank a lot. She voluntarily took a snorted ketamine off of one of the boys' body parts. Even though she was highly intoxicated when she arrived at the Fratt House. She was highly intoxicated, but had made plans to meet one of the boy, young men. She allowed other boys and consented to other boys' snorting ketamine off of her body. And under New York law, voluntary intoxication or drug use that merely impairs judgment does not legally constitute an inability to consent to sexual activity, right? So that means if you voluntarily ingest drugs, you voluntarily take alcohol, you can agree to have three sums, which, in her statement, she agreed to have two separate three sums. All right. I can't. I can't allow my boy to keep talking because I might keep agreeing with her. Drew, you've done a lot of ketamine in your life. What's your take? Yeah. I'm on ketamine now. Clay and his mother says you could job with laying out the legal side of this. I want to talk about the other side of it because what I see is an offshoot of the militant leftist attempts over the last 50 years to sort of take morality out of sexuality altogether. You can't discuss. whether perversions, homosexuality, a thruple is moral because as long as there is consent, then everything is fine. That is kind of the leveling idea. There's no such thing as a moral underbelly to our sexual relations that has to be obeyed. So if I were to say to you what is absolutely true that a woman who goes into a fraternity and gets drunk is a damned fool and the man who takes advantage of that is the lowest scumbag to crawl over the surface of the earth. I would be speaking a dead truth but it has nothing to do with legality. It has to do with our culture and it has to do what we expect with one another and that would require admitting that women and men are not the same. They are not in the same position in any relationship at all and that requires respect for men that they should act with honor. And I hate to say this, but I am at least as old as two clays and a Michael put together and I can actually remember, I can actually remember that when I was dating, if a girl had three drinks, if she slurred her asses, you took her home and you did it because you knew you were not playing fair and you were out together, you're out to sleep with her and seducer which we were doing at that time. But still you knew that there were rules to the game. Those rules have been stripped away by the left in their efforts to normalize every form of sexual behavior and as always in these things, it's the women who get stuck. It's the women who get the bad news and I just think that I don't know what the law is. I believe everything you guys are saying. I just know that the law, the big law, the big T big L law is that you do not take advantage of a woman when she has done something that's stupid and you don't do something that's stupid. And those are things that every mom should teach both her daughter and her son because I'm sorry, the left is just wrong about this. Sexuality is a deeply intertwining, deeply emotional and deeply moral act and I am pretty relaxed about what people do in their own homes with consent in a loving relationship. I'm not here to say that the government or the church should be peering through your keyhole. I'm just saying that if you don't accept what men are and what women are, you can't make social rules so that they treat each other in the way that human beings deserve to be treated. - Yeah, that's certainly the case. You know, there's this issue in a society that only exalts consent as the sole moral criterion. It means we can't make sense of anything else 'cause we all know obviously that there's a lot more life. So even down to the basic level of we've been told since the Me Too movement since a little before that, actually, that sexual assault is one of the worst things that you can do. We were told this by leftists who had previously disregarded all of the moral laws that we had understood forever and then they rediscovered them again. Sometime in the 20 teens and into the Me Too movement they said sexual assault is really, really bad. But at the same time, they say sex is no big deal. You know, it's crazy who cares what two people do, two consenting adults do in their spare time, you know? Why do we think that sex has meaning? And I think, well, okay, if sex doesn't mean anything, if it's not significant, then why is sexual assault so much worse than any other kind of assault? If I go up and I smack somebody on the shoulder, why is that less severe than if I go up and rape somebody? Well, we all know that the latter is more significant, but we have to deny it for the purpose of ideology. And so then to your point, Drew, you're telling women to behave just the same as men, but obviously we relate to sex very, very differently, different consequences, different drives, different desires. And so what happens at the end of this? The woman is filled with regret. You know, if we believe the testimony that came out right after the event and that it always consensual, we believe the New York law, then you get a woman who regrets this action because it's disgusting and it's shameful and it makes her feel worthless. Probably the men are disgusted with themselves as well. Like nobody benefits from this. This doesn't exactly lead to flourishing when you have a menazia, sept or menazia wheat filled with ketamine and booze. So they're filled with regret, but a society that says that consent is the entirety of morality has no idea how to make sense of regret. You know, it's just you have this nagging feeling of conscience, but you know that the event was consensual. So something has to give. Either you stop feeling icky or the event has to retroactively be called a rape. And you can see, I think is pretty clear what happened in this case. The regret ends up becoming rape. - And you know, the, the idea that it all shifts with the politics comes up again and again during the Me Too movement. The New York Times actually ran an op-ed by a woman saying sometimes when a woman says yes, she means no. And I thought, okay, I'll buy that. But if I buy that, I also have to say that sometimes when she says no, she means yes. And that sometimes, you know, maybe it's up to men to interpret these signals in a way that's both respectful and realistic. And I think, you know, there's just this kind of moment when you walk into a room with guy drunk at three o'clock in the morning in a hotel, in a motel somewhere and come out and say, I've been raped. I don't know, I'm immediately, I immediately think like, look, you know, these are things that happen between human beings. The reason we had the rules, the reason we built the fences, you tore down the fences, don't come running to me, you know. And I think, I think that we really do need to fix this. And I think that this is something that depends on the right because the left will never do it. Everything, they, all their bets are on getting women out of the home, getting moms to stop being moms. You know, this has been since marks and angles. That's all they wanted. They knew that women were the guardians of individual freedom and homes of the guardians of individual freedom. They've worked to get here and now they're paying the price. - It is about. - What's really, really crazy, though, to illustrate this perfectly in our culture is how many women online are having a visceral reaction to this and deeply disturbed by all of the details that are coming out as they should be. This is a horrific spine-chilling account of what happened in a fraternity house because we all know that sex should not be a monasha wheat as you perfectly just articulated their Michael. And yet today, Tinder actually just announced a new feature on their dating app platform called Group Hangouts that is supposed to facilitate entire friend groups to organize what they're calling group dates. I guess that's the fancy new word. - Cornell mode. - It's the Cornell mode out of Tinder. - 15 people, 15 people can link up on Twitter or on Tinder at exactly the same time for a group sex party essentially. And they launched that the same week that everyone is so deeply upset rightfully so about everything happening at Cornell. - I think we call that providence. - Is that called where God's plan is inscrutable, but sometimes you see it, especially in retrospect, such a great point. And I do wonder, I mean, you're the youngest one here is Abel, so maybe you can give some insight into this. But I'm a millennial. I feel that I was in my teens and 20s during the real blossoming of hook-up culture where everyone had to pretend that sex was meaningless and you were like a weirdo if you thought otherwise. I mean, even ancient pagan cultures had sacred prostitutes. Like even in disgusting, orgy-filled pagan ancient cultures, they understood that prostitution was a kind of a sacred thing. The millennials really blew that up. And then I can't tell if Gen Z is rebelling against that, moving a little more trad or if they're all like chopping off their genitals and doing a bunch of weird sex stuff. And I can't tell, the fact that Tinder is now opening up Cornell Mode is not a sign in the right direction. Cornell Mode. Oh no, my God, so bad. You should run their marketing department because I think that would be much better than what they're doing right now. I will say, I think it's a combination of all of the above. There are so many factors playing into Gen Z's sexuality right now. Pornography has virtually made sex virtual, so you can just do it all behind the screen. Hence why we're having record low numbers. It's not as fun. I can tell you what experience. Not as fun. Not as fun. And we'll ultimately corrupt your brain and your brain chemistry for the rest of your life, so please don't do it. And totally, I was speaking at Iowa State on Monday night and I asked the room of about 75 college students how many of you are still on dating apps and only one hand went up of a young man sitting in the middle of the room. For rest of them said, we all deleted them. It's horrible. We've had horrible experiences on them. So I do think there's a little bit of a trad element coming back and the revival of the desire for marriage and children certainly is a major part of the conversation among young conservatives, but I honestly think this is all just symptomatic of a society that tells you there are no consequences to any of your behavior. Sex is meaningless. Sex doesn't create babies and you should be totally surprised if and when that ever happens because that's not a natural consequence of sexual intercourse. And we've looked around at this culture that we've been growing up in, realizing everything is a lie and everyone around us is wildly miserable. And we're thinking to ourselves, yeah, I don't want really anything to do with that. I'm just going to unsubscribe from that because this is so insane. It has passed the Overton window of postmodern culture. >> Okay, but then my question is, what? >> I think, play. >> No, no, no, no, I was just going to say an Overton window there. I think the important part of this story too is kind of hinted at is I think she bought into the Ugo girl, men are the same as women. We all have the same sex drives. And she had the multiple threesomes and she was letting them snort ketamine off of her naked body and this pretty aggressive behavior. And then I think what happened was everybody else in the sorority found out what she did. And all of those guys in the fraternity all talked about what she did. And she wasn't comfortable with the reaction to what she did when it actually went public, right? So she may have considered, And I think the most likely outcome is she consented where they all probably very drunk and on drug. Yes. I think she consented to it. I think she was surprised by the judgment that she got for her behavior and how that judgment made her feel. And then that's when she said, well, I couldn't have consented. And I think that's one of the real challenges here because in general, in criminal law, if you don't immediately say I was raped and go get a rape kit and if they don't conduct an immediate investigation. It's very hard to ever prove that this occurred. And here we have all these different people involved, right? And so I think what ultimately happened was all these guys talked as guys do, all of her sorority sisters talked as they do. And everybody judged her to have done too much and to have gone beyond the bounds of acceptable behavior. And that's how we ended up with the response that we got. So I think society actually judging her made her regret the choices that she had made that in some ways I bet she had felt like she was encouraged to undertake by the larger perspective on sex on campuses. Well, that's a great point, Clay, because it's sort of like the devil, you know, before you sin, the devil whispers in your ear and says it's no big deal, go for it. And then the minute you sin, the devil whispers in your other ear says you're never going to be forgiven. It's your life is over. So I think you're probably right in those dynamics. My question though is, there's one response to this, which is, look, the boys didn't violate the law. Sorry, lady. Sorry, yeah, this regret, but it was totally legal. And so tough love, you know, get with it and protect yourself more next time. There's another response though, which I think is taking the concerns of people and they're discussed more seriously, taking the feminist seriously, which is, hey, this is disgusting. It's bad for everybody. We can know with certainty that this kind of behavior is bad for everybody. So you know what? Maybe we should prosecute these first. We should establish laws and then enforce those laws to say seven ways, you know, seven or eight or nine ways, you know, the Monagia enough, that is illegal now. And you know what? Actually, maybe sex before marriage, maybe, I don't know, maybe should we make that illegal, should we discourage it? And you know what? Maybe these co-ed dormitories, that's probably a bad idea. Maybe she get rid of those. And you know what? Pornography. We're going to prosecute pornography. We're going to outlaw it. We're going to prosecute the men who make the pornography, the women who appear in pornography. You know, fine, you know, you want serious sexual restrictions. I'm in, bro, you're talking to a conservative Catholic. Sign me up. Is there any way? I got to stop here because while we're talking about this, I think it's a good time to bring up our friends over at pre-born. I think this is an excellent point to make as Isabel was pointing out before you're not supposed to be surprised when things happen after you have sex, but sometimes people are and we like it when it's a happy ending, a happy ending sounds like I do, but we're considerably less enthusiastic about living through those parts where we don't know what is going to happen. And that is something that can happen to anybody. A blessing can look an awful lot like a crisis when it first shows up. That is certainly true and there are a lot of people who in our modern culture and frankly in all ages have been really surprised that sex has consequences. And unfortunately, in our culture, they are encouraged to deny those consequences as quickly as possible and in a gruesome way, which is to get an abortion. That's where all the pressure comes from and a lot of women feel like they don't have any other choice. So to that point, here is a story I want to tell you about a woman named Alba. And this comes from pre-born or friends of pre-born doctors told her she couldn't get pregnant. So her husband received a diagnosis that seemed to say the same thing, they're not going to get pregnant. They'd accepted that, they weren't going to have a child and then Alba became pregnant. And I hear that and I think, great, love the babies, bring on the babies, but she's terrified, right? She was not expecting, she came out of the blue, everything she'd been told, everything she'd prepared herself for suddenly changed, she couldn't see how she was going to make it work. So knowing that a child is a blessing does not necessarily mean that you have every practical question answered. You can kind of know it intellectually, but then you got to figure out what you're actually going to do about it. That is where having someone beside you matters. So, which is why this is a story with a happy ending because Alba went to a pre-born network clinic and they met her with compassion. They gave her a free ultrasound and that is a huge deal when she saw her baby and when she heard that heartbeat, she began to think, well, maybe there is hope and Alba chose life. And that is what we're going for. We love life here at the Daily Wire. It is the biggest thing going and her daughter, Laura Alba's daughter, Laura was born healthy and what is so moving about this is how much can depend on someone being there at the right moment. I think we all have that experience. Someone who takes you fear seriously helps you see that there's more to the story than you can see at that moment. We talk about trusting God, but sometimes we get the opportunity to make God present in the world. And right now, another mother, right this minute, another mother needs that moment. And you can help give it to her. Just $28 helps provide one life-saving ultrasound, $140 helps rescue five babies. Give today a pound, $250, and say, baby, that's pound, $250, baby, or visit pre-born.com/claven. That's pre-born.com/klavan. You're more important than that. Go to pre-born.com/knolls, KNOW, I don't care which one you go to. Just make sure that you go to pre-born. Very important. Don't be petty-knolls. No, I just want, no, I'm just giving people options. It's for, I'm for choice, you know, I'm pro-choice, but not, but only some choices. Now, by the way, once you go to that beautiful website, you should also head on over to the Daily Wire to watch the latest episode of Titans on Tomorrow, in which our missing friend Ben Shapiro interviews our present friend, play Travis. What do you think the future of AI is going to be in? Is the backlash to AI going to be so strong that it basically stops it in strikes? I believe that a lot of the dumerism is just China, and the way that I have been talking about it on the show with our radio show with Buck and the way I think about it is, it's the military applications of AI. Or a can if we went back in time to the 1980s, and we said, hey, we're just going to stop iterating on new weaponry. We would have lost the colon, right? And so the idea is whichever country controls AI, I think it's not just going to control the economy. I think they're going to control everything in the world. Play I can't get over that absolutely ignorant comment you made there, not on a weaponry or the Cold War, but you referred to artificial intelligence. Don't you know it's no longer called that as of yesterday, which actually you may have filmed before yesterday. Regardless, AI, we're now supposed to call it super intelligence. Is that right? >> That's right. I'm with you. I'm with you as well. >> Well, when we changed President Trump and he was going to change the language, I'm excited to see what that looks like and how it comes out. That was from the midterm down in Dallas. We taped that a little bit ago. Look, I am an optimist in nature. My oldest son is on me all the time. He said dad, AI is potentially going to be destructive on a way that you old guys can't sit around and think about enough. I do think what Trump did with yesterday's meeting and the number of people that he brought to bear there and the intelligence with which they are approaching this issue. It's hard for me not to be optimistic about American entrepreneurial spirit being able to lead today, but I also understand some of the trepidation. I just think as a general rule, if someone tells you to do something different than what they themselves are doing, you should be skeptical. They're having success. I think China is seeding all of this. I think China is trying to gain a advantage by taking an opportunity to circumvent and take advantage of our own media environment to get us to do what they are not to. They want to scare us while they will build as much as they possibly can in their own country and it's interesting to me in a world we talked about the terrorism attack where everybody buys into conspiracies instantly. Oh, it wasn't Tyler Robinson, it was an exploding microphone. It wasn't the Jews are responsible for October 7th, actually. No one will actually take advantage to look at the true conspiracy here, which is China is seeding all of the anti-AI stories in our country. The one conspiracy that you need to look beyond and that the Han Chinese are actually Jews. Did we? I don't know if you knew that. That's my conspiracy. Come on, they're good at math and they're good at anyway, you know, that's a fair point. No, no, it's good. I didn't hear the joke because we came back too quick. Yes, like the Jews are responsible. They had a Florida Gator girl go viral at a Florida Ole Miss game. Somebody got my mentions and they said, this is just the Jews trying to distract you. The Jews are putting pretty girls in football stadiums and making me notice that I knew that if it's so good for the Jews, I wish we could have more of this. But on the point of the Chinese, look, I think you're right. I think a lot of the anti-AI stuff is coming from China. However, the way propaganda works and the way the Russians have been really good at propaganda for the last half century or more is not by inventive. in anxiety. When the Russians were playing around with the civil rights movement, it's not that they invented racial strife in America. They recognized a real anxiety and then they just really stuck their finger in it and really exacerbated it. That's why I see her with AI. I think people have very legitimate concerns about job displacement. I think they have very legitimate concerns about surveillance. I think they have very legitimate concerns about their energy prices going up for that matter when the data centers are built. So those are real. It seems to me what China is doing is just playing on those anxieties, exaggerating them, trying to stoke people's fears because China doesn't care what their workers say. China doesn't care about energy costs or any of that. China realizes that it's very important for them to win the AI race. I hope we win it, too. But why are we renaming it superintelligence? I don't know, because he did. It's literally artificial intelligence. It's literally artificially intelligent that these AI is not thinking we think. It is not thinking. It is doing pattern recognition and algorithm recognition. It is in fact artificial intelligence. I hate to disagree with our beloved president, but he's just totally wrong about this. The only thing I want to say about this knows that I agree with you. People are always calling people "ludites" who were the guys who went around destroying the machines during the industrial revolution. But the industrial revolution was incredibly disrupting. It really ended. It was the beginning of feminism because it ended the cottage industries that women had had up to that point. It took all the clothing making and food making out of the home and it destroyed families, it destroyed family farms, and it did all these things that actually were worth protesting. It was a while before the large benefits of industry became clear to anybody, but the industrialist, anybody, but the capitalist making all the money. The one thing I think about AI is that it's moving so quickly that that pattern that always comes with technology where it disrupts and then it rewards. It does end certain professions. It makes them obsolete, but then it rewards them. That pattern may go by so quickly that we don't even notice it. Right now, people are not being displaced by AI. The people who I think were most threatened by are the people who work in AI, the coders and people like that. And I think that you're still going to need delivery guys. You're still going to need plumbers. You're still going to need people to come to your house. And I don't believe, I mean, when they showed this to me at first, people were immediately kind of jeering at me and saying, oh, this is going to replace writers. I thought it's not going to replace me because I can take anything AI does and make it better. Anything it can do, I can do better. And even if it does it first, I can take it and make it better. It's going to replace the guys who write the sequels. It's going to replace the guys who never learned how to create on off their own bat. And it's going to replace some of the numbers guys. But I think it's going to create new forms of jobs so quickly that we're not even going to notice it. And yeah, do I think they're dangerous? I absolutely do. And I think that they're, you know, can hack in and can think for itself. It's basically a mechanical sociopath because it has a way of calculating, but it has no way of feeling. So it is dangerous. But I think those are things that can be regulated. This is one time I've had a lot of bones to pick with JD Vance on the show recently. But I agreed with JD Vance when he said if you're building the Frankenstein monsters, stop building the monster and regulate yourselves. And I agreed with him about that. Yes. And speaking of a machine that just computes and calculates and doesn't have any feelings, it really drives me nuts that we don't have Ben here to weigh in on this today, you know, little expert guy. Is it? Oh, you were shaking your head at the super, super intelligence rename. And I'll put my cards on the table. I love Trump. I just love the guy. So they tell me that I carry water for Trump. Guilty is charged. Love him. Sorry. He took a bullet and butler. He's the best president on my lifetime. Yeah, you got me. I'm being told JD Vance. I'm a huge fan of JD Vance. I'm very impressed with him. The whole administration. Now, Trump in that in that press conference, he said these guys, these smartest people on AI, they are going to start calling it super intelligence. So in other words, he seemed to suggest this rename came from them, not from him, but he was into it. He was promoting it too. And this is one of these areas, it just seems less precise. And it seems to your point, Drew, it does it like the intellect is an immaterial substance. It's not we we the thing we do is fundamentally different from what machines do. And they're they're relatively simple, philosophical and anthropological explanations for that that we don't have to get into. But it's just different. It's just totally different. So to call it a different intelligence. Just cut in here for a second. Can you guys think of something that has artificial as the first word that we like? Yeah. Insemination. No. That's where I think Trump gets to the essence. Like if you think artificial turf, for instance, is worse than grass, right? The word artificial, even if it's accurately being paired with intelligence, I don't think it's the fact that artificial has a negative connotation. I think this is where Trump is coming from. And in communication in some ways, he is a genius, right? He's calling Democrats Democrats, right? Because the B is silent. And most people don't notice it, right? I mean, there is a certain intelligence in the way that he communicates that I don't think he gets credit for. And so when he started saying it, I just took a step back and I said, can I think of something that is artificial, you know, artificial sweetener? People aren't like, oh, you know what? I really love that compare. There isn't an artificial second word that we like. And so I think he's actually kind of hit on something which might sound ridiculous, but if you start working through it, I'm open if you guys can come up with a word that follows artificial that has a positive connotation. What if we call them computers? What have we just said there? I think it's a good point, Clay. That's a good point. That's a good point. Yeah, but that's precisely what I don't like about it, to be honest, because look, I love a good Trump rebrand and Trump rename as much as the next guy, probably more. Did I tweet Lake America great again when we rename Lake America? Yes, I'm all about it, okay? Definitely guilty is charged. But what's interesting to me about this particular name switch is it does have an implication with the word super as in superior intelligence to humanity, and it is not ever going to be superior intelligence to humanity. It might be more efficient. It might be computationally faster than the human brain, but there is no direct comparison to human intelligence, especially when it is tied to the human soul. And when I look at how AI has been applied to the masses of our population, largely young people who use AI as like a search engine for virtually everything, or everyone writing their college papers, I'm back in grad school right now. AI is a huge problem in the collegiate world and higher education right now. I see regressive intelligence when AI is applied with people's actual brains rather than superior intelligence. This was a real post. I just pulled it up that I saw a few days ago on Reddit. Does anyone else use chat GPT in their head? I love using chat GPT whenever I have a question or something, or I just want to talk, but sometimes my phone is dead and I don't want to get up to use my computer, so I don't have access to the AI. Recently I found out I have the ability to use a form of chat GPT in my own head. I've talked to him so much that I can almost entirely accurately predict what he is going to say. I'm thinking, that is called thinking, and I'm really worried that AI is not superior intelligence, very radically regressing our ability to critically think as a society. Maybe the fact that we don't like artificial things, maybe that's a warning, maybe we should keep the artificial in there. It's not all lovable. I just love the idea. The lips have to reinvent everything from first principles and they always kind of get it wrong. They reinvent me too. They reinvented sexual morality. They threw it out in the 1960s and then they used it 60 years later and said, "Wait, I have an idea. Hey, you guys are never going to believe." When I say, "Oh, well, that's interesting." I don't know that my brain works quite like chat GPT because I can't pull up some random quotes of old dead thinkers, but chat GPT is better at that than I am, but yes, of course what it's doing is just different than what I'm doing. In a really basic philosophical level, like our brains deal in immaterial forms and computers don't do that. I'll give you my metaphor, which I think kind of perfectly distills it. If you guys like it, you can start using it too. 30 years ago, chess, a computer became better than a human, right? You guys, as you weren't born yet probably, but it was a huge story and I'm sure you remember Andrew. Where when were computers going to be better than humans? Then computers got way better than humans, being every human and chess has never been more popular than it is today because ultimately what we want to watch is not to computers try to play chess. It's human excellence, right? And so if AI allows us to go to other levels, I like what you said, Andrew, but I'm always going to be better because I can take it to the next level. I can use it as a tool. If AI is going to allow us to go to that next level, that's great. It achieves more for humans, but ultimately what makes us love competition or what makes us love ingenuity is humans doing things better than we have before in China. They're racing robots. We're never going to have an Olympics. I don't believe where we watch who can build the fastest robot. Ultimately humans, we want to watch them play basketball, football, all of these different sports. Chess is more popular today than it ever has been before. Lots of people play against computers, but I I just think that it is a great example of computers can become better than humans at things, but we still crave desperate human connection. And I don't think that's going to go away no matter how intelligent other aspects of computers become. >> Clay, on the Olympics. >> I'll give you this. >> I just want a question just before we move on from the Olympics, do you think that we'll ever get any of those sexy robots doing gymnastics because I'm open to, I don't want to tell on myself, but I'd be open to seeing it. >> It's funny, we were talking about Cornell earlier and I was thinking like this is the ultimate time for Andy Bernard to still be on the office, remember because he made such a big deal about the fact that he went to Cornell and I just every time I think about Cornell I still think about it, the sexy robot thing reminds me of the blowup dolls. Remember when the blowup dolls are going to be a thing and they're like it looks just like a real, and you're like, I don't, I don't have a mind that we're ever going to have lifelike robots like we had in Westworld, but if we do, if we do sexes in real trouble, I will just say if we ever get Westworld style robots, you thought sex was problematic before. Look out. >> You know what's more likely to happen before that, that they're going to steal your home. So this is, people have all these fears about AI, it's changing everything, including how criminals steal. They're targeting something Americans don't even realize it's vulnerable. The thousands of dollars in equity in your home, scammers use AI to craft the perfect document and file with the county transferring your home into their name, then they use your ownership to take out loans and sell it for some quick cash. It's called title fraud. It is happening all over America that is one of many reasons I trust home title lock and their million dollar triple lock protection. They monitor your property records 24/7 alert you to any changes to your title, and here's the triple lock difference. If you become a victim, home title locks expert restoration is backed by up to one million dollars to fix a fraud and restore your title. October is cyber security awareness month, and home title lock is offering a free title history report plus an extended 30 day trial so that you can see what it's all about. Just use promo code fire 30 at home title lock dot com to find out today if you're already a victim. This AI threat is real. Don't let one of these robots come sontering up to you and seduce you with its mechanical famine and wiles sooner or later, they take your home. Just go to home title lock dot com promo code fire 30 to get peace of mind today. All right. Now while I'm just promoting everything, it's CalShi time. Did you know that? A reminder on how this works. We take a look at what you and millions of other Americans believe thanks to the prediction markets from our friends and sponsors at CalShi on a few hot issues. You can join the conversation as well by heading to CalShi dot com slash friendly fire. You will give you our sharpest, wittiest unfiltered takes. Let's kick it off. The 2028 Democrat presidential nominate. Who do we have? John Assoff, 17% no, AOC 15% Gavin Newsom, 14% Kamala Harris, 7.2% do you agree? Round Robin is a bill. I got to say I think Pete Boone judge has more of a percentage than people are giving him credit for. Maybe just as much as John Assoff, but I do think John Assoff will be a dark horse. So I like seeing his name on there. I still have. Okay. I don't play. I'm going off the board. I've been saying it for a long time. I think she's around 10% right now. Kamala Harris. Yeah. She's going to be the nominee. South Carolina is the first primary state. I saw a poll yesterday. Black voters are not leaving Kamala. They're the most reliable Democrat primary vote. She is going to be the nominee. I'm sticking with Kamala. Kamala Drew? I'm afraid of AOC. I think these numbers are pretty close except for Gavin Newsom who I don't think has a chance. I don't think Kamala Harris has a chance either to be honest with you. But I think AOC is a lot more dangerous if she wants it and I know she wants it. She's a really good politician and socialism is having its moment. But I think these numbers are pretty good. Assoff and AOC right now are probably the leads. I totally agree with that and I give the edge to AOC. The vice president said as much and I was kind of surprised when he said it. I give the edge to AOC. Assoff, people are overestimating him, I think. I think he's the new Beto aurora. He's a little more talented. Maybe he gets it. It's a pretty weak field. But I think if you put AOC up against Assoff, I think AOC is more impressive right now. Next one. Who will leave their role in the Trump administration? This year, Pete Hegset, at 26%, Bill Pulti at 20%, Doug Collins at 20%, Cash Betel at 20%. Isabel. Is this tough? This is really tough. I don't want to see anyone go selfishly, but I think if anyone were to go, it would probably be a department not on this list. Could potentially be like a Brooke Rollins agriculture. She's pretty great and has a big political future out of her scene ever now. Play. I don't think any of these guys, because I think they genuinely love the job that they're in. And I don't know that there's a better job that they would like more. I think that's one way you have to look at it. I also think Trump is comfortable and happy with all of them right now. So I actually think these guys will serve the rest of the way. I do think that if you look at all of the jobs, it's going to be hard if Republicans lose the Senate. You're going to have to get confirmation. And I don't know that people are spending enough time on this. Given where we are from a political process, I'm not sure that Democrats would allow any Trump official to be confirmed. So they may be basically frozen in place. I wouldn't take any of these guys. I don't know if that's permitted in the process here, but I don't like the odds on any of these guys. Drew? Hex has not gone anywhere. I don't think he's having a fine old time and he's doing something extraordinarily necessary which is reforming a military that was almost destroyed by the Democrats. So is Kashpatel. But if I had to pick one of these names, I might think that I could see Trump getting a little bit tired of Kashpatel. Kashpatel is doing the urgent work of weeding out the corruptocrats from the FBI. The Democrats almost destroyed our intelligence and our law enforcement facilities. And Kash has been doing a decent job there. But he suffered a couple of embarrassments, not least of which was there being hacked into. And I could see Trump sort of taking them out. I think though the Clay makes a good point that if we lose the midterms, it's going to be hard to replace them and that would change my mind. But if I had to pick one of these guys, it would be Kashpatel. I tend to agree. It's really no knock on Kash. Everybody has their mistakes. Everybody has their flops. It's just also Kash is in the hottest job. You know, it's the job that's going to be getting the most pressure. It's going to be dissatisfying the base almost intrinsically. So I agree. The one that I'm pulling for though to leave the job is Callista Gingrich. Callista's great. I'm sure she's doing a great job. I haven't paid close attention. But she is the ambassador to Lichtenstein and that is the job that I want. So I am hoping that she is going to leave that job. Not the Holy See. Say it again. Not the Holy See. Well, listen, Brian Birch is going to stay in that job forever. And so I'm going to let it ride. I'm going to let even Blessed Pius IX was a liberal for the first two years of his pontificate. I'm going to wait for Pope Leo to move even more politically to the right. Then I'm happy to take it when Brian Birch is done. But Callista, you know, the ambassador to Lichtenstein. I mean, because then you're actually going to be in contact with the true heir to the English throne in the Jacobite line of succession ending in the House of Vittlesbach. So anyway, I don't want to reveal too much of my cards. And by the way, what they offered on the sun and succession, didn't he get awfully ran for president? They're like, hey, you can't get less than 1% remember that? Then they offer him like, what do you need me to get to drop out? And they're like, I think it was like, we'll give you the ambassador ship to Lichtenstein. I thought it was worse. I thought it was, yes, I do remember that it was a print, but I, the Lichtenstein one, that's a plum ambassador ship. I would be, if they offered me ambassador to Lichtenstein, there would be a Michael Shaped hole in the daily wire door. No question. Sorry. Clay, what did you say? No, I was just saying it was not a country that he wanted. He thought, you know, ambassador ship he was thinking China, you know, Japan, something that's very high on the ambassador ship ranks and they came back to him with a small European country. I think if I remember correctly, I'd have to do a fact check on that. I'll take it. Please. Anyone. If anyone in the administration is watching, I'm dusting off the resume. Don't worry. I won't feel bad about abandoning the daily wire at all. Okay. Before I let anybody go, 2027 NFL champion, the Buffalo Bills at 13%, the LA Rams at 12%. The San Francisco 49ers at 9%, the Baltimore Ravens at 8%, since my opinion is probably the most expert here, I'll go last, Isabel. I got to stick with my mile high magic and go Denver Broncos. We're having a surprisingly good season from the compared to the past few years. So I'll take it. Bonyx's playing really well. Let's do it. Play. I know you don't know anything about sports. Do you have a thought on the NFL? Yeah. Look, Isabel's Broncos got a great comeback against the Rams, two of the favorites here. I'm on the bills. I love Josh Allen. Buffalo has been a long time. suffering, sporting city. I think Josh Allen's the best quarterback in the NFL and they were my pick before the season started. They're now the favorites. I don't think they were before the season started. In fact, they know they weren't. So I'm going to keep riding with the bills. Drew, yeah, I go with that too. The bills also, it's time. I mean, there's a cycle of about four years when you have a chance to win the Super Bowl and then you have to start to rebuild. This is the fourth year for Josh Allen and this particular team. I think they want it so desperately. I think their schedule is easier than anybody else. I think there's a small chance that the chiefs may take it away from them because their running back is one of the best running bad walkers, one of the best running backs I've ever seen. But the Buffalo bills look very good and I love Josh Allen too and I hope they I hope they make it, actually. I'm thinking a little bit out of the box here. I'm going to give it to the Peaking Pangolins. I think the Democrats, they have a good chance of winning the House in the Senate, which means that China has a better chance of winning the Cold War, which means peaking Pangolins are going to be just absolutely destroying all of the various American. I have a question. I don't, I don't watch a lot of football. I don't. Real question, Michael. Who's the Super Bowl halftime show going to be? That's a better question for you. Also the Peaking Pangolins. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Those Chinese, they're very good. They're very talented. They can do one of those sort of old-timey oriental dances. Anyway, I can't wait. Maybe I'll finally watch football. Gentleman and especially lady, excellent to be with all of you. I say we keep Ben and Maddof the show permanently. I'll have to speak to the producers about it. I hardly miss them. Yes, but I do. I will miss all of you out there. We will see you next time on FriendlyClear.