All-In with Chamath, Jason, Sacks & Friedberg

Industry veterans, degenerate gamblers & besties Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, David Sacks & David Friedberg cover all things economic, tech, political, social & poker.

E127: Presidential Candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in conversation with the Besties

E127: Presidential Candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in conversation with the Besties

Fri, 05 May 2023 21:44

(0:00) Bestie intros!

(0:49) Jason and Sacks intro Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

(3:46) Foreign policy: Ukraine / Russia

(17:17) Foreign policy: Taiwan / China

(18:57) Government spending: Fiscal responsibility, where to cut budget, debt ceiling

(33:22) US Govt Intelligence Agencies: "Deep State," increasing accountability, "agency capture"

(46:04) COVID: mishandling, more "agency capture," vaccine policy

(55:10) Broader thoughts on vaccines in general

(1:05:54) Energy policy: thoughts on nuclear

(1:15:29) Culture wars: trans issues, CRT in schools, public vs charter schools

(1:23:09) Media: declining trust, misaligned incentives, conflict of interest with large advertisers

(1:30:07) Mainstream media coverage, ABC News debacle, evolving with new information, money in politics

(1:40:37) The Besties do a post-interview debrief

(1:57:30) Announcing All-In Summit 2023!

Follow the besties:

Follow Robert F. Kennedy Jr:

Follow the pod:

Intro Music Credit:

Intro Video Credit:

Listen to Episode

Copyright © <> - all rights reserved

Read Episode Transcript

Sacks you're ready. You got your quick time going. Oh, let me do that real quick. And just a quick note, Sacks Mr. Kennedy doesn't have earpieces and so he we just have to be careful of the crosstalk we're talking over each other I'll direct questions to each person and then follow up so you can obviously just use your judgment of when to insert yourself but be gentle on the insertion there because we don't want that came out wrong. Just be gentle when you interrupt There's your cold open at least if you did it incorrectly it'll be quick. Okay here we go in three two All right everybody welcome to the all in podcast As many of you know this podcast has gotten quite popular the last two years typically in the top 10 or 20 each week And we talk about politics. We've got a big following in DC and Why are you calling these self-absorbed chapat? I mean listen to how your co-host opens a show calm down everybody. Okay. Yeah Yeah, okay, and as part of that our ongoing discussions about politics and presidential candidates has resonated in particular Communities and today we are lucky enough to have one of the top presidential hopefuls in the 2024 election joining us Robert Kennedy Jr And we will it be inviting all presidential candidates to come on to the all in podcast and have candid discussions that are unfeltered By the way the audience would expect them. We're going to play with different formats, but we decided for this first one We've got a series of topics we'd like to cover and We're going to treat it like any other all in podcast without us have David Sacks Who has is the most conservative of our panel who has been also the most enthusiastic? I think of everybody here and one of the most enthusiastic supporters of Robert Kennedy Jr's pursuit of the presidency of the United States So with that David would you like to introduce our guest? Yeah, let me give Bobby a proper introduction here So Robert Francis Kennedy Jr is entering the political arena as a candidate for the first time at the age of 69 But it's perhaps no exaggeration to say that he was destined for the mission. He is now pursuing He is the nephew of president John F. Kennedy and the son of attorney general and senator Robert F. Kennedy When Bobby was 14 his dad was running for president on a platform of civil rights civil liberties lifting Americans out of poverty and opposing the Vietnam War He had just won the California primary when he was tragically assassinated RFK junior graduate from Harvard and the University of Virginia law school and became an environmental lawyer Who aggressively litigated against corporate polluters and government agencies that were failing to regulate them He has always put the health and safety of the American people at the forefront of his activism And this has made him controversial at times as he has questioned the safety of some pharmaceutical products And also criticized covid restrictions during the pandemic for this the mainstream media has tried to paint him as a quote Conspiracy theorist but given that so many conspiracy theories about covid have been vindicated Tablet magazine wrote quote at this point the fact that Robert F. Kennedy is the country's leading conspiracy theorist alone qualifies him to be president But the biggest reason why I think his candidacy is so interesting and relevant is that it harkens back to a democratic party that believed in peace instead of war free speech and civil liberties to have censorship building up the middle class instead of the donor class And opposing corporate greed especially in the military industrial complex Which is a message you just don't hear much anymore coming from the democratic side of the aisle So with that Bobby Kennedy welcome to the program Thank you so much for having So maybe we could start with foreign policy something we've discussed here specifically the Ukraine and Russia's invasion of Ukraine And our support of that war sacks would you like to tee up a question for mr. Kennedy? I think Bobby's tweets on the subject show that he has a really deep understanding of it He's been saying a lot of things that I've been saying since the beginning of the war which it not just the fact that We're risking war three over You know getting involved in a in a country that isn't A treaty ally the United States is never been a vital interest in the United States But I think your critique goes deeper Because you actually understand the causes of how this war started So maybe you know Bobby you could speak to that how how did we end up In this proxy war with with Russia from from your standpoint Well You know for first of all I would let me start by saying this I supported the humanitarian aid to the the Ukraine which is why we were told initially was the in was the mission although I had I was suspicious of it and you know my son as as I've mentioned Actually went over earth left law school did not tell us where he was going and went over and joined the foreign Legion Um and fought in the car keep um Offensive with a special forces group he was served as a machine gunner. He was an engagement with the Russians and But he feels the same way essentially that I did this is no longer a humanitarian mission at all the decisions The United States have made as made since since the start has been about have been about prolong the war About maximizing the the violence of the war Um and being absolutely in transigence against the many opportunities to actually settle the war If you and and that my understanding of the war is that not that Zelensky is pushing this war as hard as he can But that the neocons and the White House Want this war they want it regime change with the Russians they want to exhaust the Russian armies This went not this fence secretary Lloyd Austin said in 2022 our objective Is to exhaust into the great Russian forces so they cannot fight anywhere else in the world Um and President Biden acknowledged that one of his objectives in the war is regime change in Russia removing the Adam Air Putin Well, if those are the objectives that is the opposite of a humanitarian mission That is a mission to maximize casualties to prolong the war it's essentially a war of attrition and that's what we're seeing And the brunt of this is being paid by the flower of Ukrainian youth There have been over 300,000. This is something that the US government and the Ukrainian government have worked hard to hide Number of casualties, which has been catastrophic This is the most violent conflict since World War II that's take place probably anywhere in the world And the casualties are enormous all over 300,000 Ukrainian debt The Russians are killing Ukrainian depending on who you believe at a ratio of five to one Two eight to one Which is the seven to one in the in the recently recently leaked whistleblower leaked Pentagon documents And the Russians cannot lose this war we're being told they're losing they cannot afford to lose this war This is existential for them and they have been building up their forces They have a 10 to one artillery advantage on us and this is an artillery war So it's simply and we do not have the artillery to replace what we've lost up there This is a war that is proceeding in a very cataclysmic trajectory And the answer to your question about how we got in this war Uh, goes back, you know a long way, but I would say that the real story starts in 2014 When the US government and particularly the Neocons in the White House in elsewhere uh participated and supported the overthrow violent overthrow a coup d'etat Against the democratically elected government of the Ukraine and put in a very very anti-Russian government This prompted the Russian so that and believe that the US With navy was now going to be invited into the Black Sea to have a ported Crimea It prompted the Russians to preemptedly invade Crimea At the same time The the government that went came into the Ukraine began enacting a series of laws that Turned the Russian populations of the Dombas region into second-class citizens. They they They illegalized essentially their culture their language And they began ultimately killing them. They killed 14,000 of them And it was as it prompted a civil war in the country and the Russian Response which it was illegal. I have no sympathy or um towards Vladimir Putin. Vladimir Putin is a gangster and he's a thug But his uh his response in the Dombas was not irrational So I guess the question becomes if you were elected president Would you stop sending armaments to the Ukraine? I would immediately uh Have a ceasefire and I would settle the war and I think it can be a saddle. I don't even know I mean it wasn't the best settlement for this war which is outlined in the Minsk Accords in 2014 In the Minsk Accords which all the European Uh countries agreed upon Was when the when the Russians said and the Russian people in Dombas voted to leave Russia and Russia did not want them Russia said no Let's develop an accord An agreement which would make Dombas a autonomous region within the Ukraine which would agree to not put missile systems in Ukraine NATO missile systems Which would agree that you Ukraine would not join NATO if Zelensky says no I want to keep fighting would you stop sending US weapons? I would settle this. I would settle this war The Ukraine cannot fight without US war So then at some point you would tell us Zelensky if I'm reading into what you're saying correctly Hey settle it you're out. Yeah, I would settle the war Yeah Do you think that We somehow allowed Zelensky to believe that we would allow him in to NATO meaning do you think that US foreign policy somehow Almost induced this thing to happen. I just want to try to understand the boundaries. We have been doing integrative Military exercises with the Ukrainian military. So we were actively integrating them into NATO forces. There was no question That you know the one thing that Putin said from the outset. This is a red line You know when I uncle was president One of the things that he said he said a couple of things. He said number one The principal job of a president United States is to keep the nation out of war and he succeeded doing that during his term in office He said 16,000 military advisors to be a nom who were not Conn were not authorized to participate in combat That didn't mean that some of them didn't They were not authorized and but in fact That was fewer federal troops than he sent to get James Maritus into the University of Mississippi So he sent fewer of in nom and two weeks before he died He signed a national security order ordering all of those troops home by 1965 with the first Thousand to come home that month by November and he died two weeks later So and then of course Johnson came in and he handed the war and sent 250,000 troops over there Which is what all my uncle's military advisors wanted him to do Yeah, and he stood up to them one of the other things my uncle said and you know the anniversary of his speech in American University Which is an extraordinary speech probably one of the best in American history At Jeff's acts is called the most important speech in American history Um, it was a speech to the American people and it was it's an extraordinary speech because he read it is asking them to put their There are themselves Into the shoes of the Russians and understand that the Russians bore the brunt of world war two they lost I'm one out of every 13 Russians died in that war Third of their country was occupied and leveled to the ground. It's like he said Is as if the entire east coast of the United States to Chicago was put into rubble And he described this in detail for the American people To say you know, we're all people we're all on an arc and we need to we need to understand each other's motives And not just vilify each other and what we're seeing now Is this formulae vilification is narrative that we saw as Saddam Hussein was you know Putin with every little war that we want to get into For those guys are pure evil. We're pure good and we're gonna go rescue, you know the damsel in distress Just on that could you contrast and compare just maybe the last three or four presidents on this very narrow dimension Of that of JFK's promise of what of president should be doing Bush Obama Trump and now Biden how do you see The things that these guys have gotten right and or very wrong here on that dimension just on that dimension You know, I've been friends with Joe Biden for many many years But Joe Biden is you know, he's a go-to-war guy. He was one of the strongest supporters of the Iraq war He's been supportive of every war that's come along and that you know, I think that's one of the reasons that you know some of those That portion of the Democratic Party, which is a very very powerful kind of king pickers Was very happy with him getting an office is that he never says no to a war I think Trump, you know, I liked a lot of what Trump's had about foreign policy about disentangling us from this knee jerk reaction of you know of constant wars and that the cause that that imposes on our country what it's doing It's hollowing out our middle class But then trump did a lot of things including walking away from they you know from I'm the intermedia nuclear missile treaty which is it was another provocation for Russia because that treaty You know, we're putting these intermediate missile systems all along the Russian border and Romania and Poland and you know and in in Ukraine and And that those missiles can he a cuba. I mean can he hit Moscow And in a few minutes so there was a very destabilizing system We all signed it and he walked away from it and now I don't think that was a I think that was another provocation We should be de-escalating these provocations though, you know the why it didn't NATO This is what George can and said After after you know the sub-unit collapse Why do we even have NATO anymore? Why do we have it? Why do we have it unless we're going to involve the Russians in it? Why don't we do a martial plan for Russia? We won the war they are the losers They admit they're the losers But they want to join the European community Let's make that easy for them. Let's not continue to treat them as if they're the enemy because that is a self-fulfilling prophecy And that unfortunately is what we did Let's pivot then you want to contain and you would force everybody to the table to a resolution If I'm understanding correctly You weren't explicit in terms of would you remove support? But I think we can infer from it you would have a point at which you would stop sending armaments to Ukraine We have tremendous moral pressure and economic pressure and everything else on Ukraine How about this Jason? I mean would you be willing to take NATO expansion off the table if it helps resolve this conflict? Yeah, everybody's Biden won't. Well Biden won't right? No, no, it's absolutely Why are we trying to expand we gave our word? We would not expand NATO one inch to the east and now we've gone into 13 countries You know, it's a it is a provocation Let's talk about Taiwan so We got to stay out of wars if Xi Jinping decides Taiwan is strategic and he invades Taiwan what would your response be if you were elected President well my response would be to de-escalate that conflict There's essentially a war party in Washington um that is Is encouraging that conflict that is drumming of that conflict what I would do is I would I would De-escalate it. I would stop looking at it as a threat I now and and and I and allow The Chinese and the Taiwanese to come to their own solution about what kind of relationship they have And I think that that if we stop Our provocations towards the Chinese that that would naturally de-escalate and if China decided it's strategic and we're going in anyway Would you if you were president to fend Taiwan? That's a question that I would not answer I'm curious why not why don't presidential candidates just answer That question because you're committing the country To a war in the future that would be probably the bloodiest war ever fought And it's not something that strategically is not good strategy to protect project your your intentions You want to leave room for negotiation you want to leave room for all kinds of movements And you want to have a debate with the American people and with congress But Biden's been clear that he would defend it right so that's an it's an interesting insight right there freeberg Do you want to talk maybe a little bit about the economy and the spending that we're seeing? Yeah, so Robert, I think my biggest question I've Reference this on the show a number of times is this extraordinary concern. I have About the fiscal deficit and the debt level of the US Running deficits north of a trillion dollars a year 33 trillion in total debt Some people use the debt to GDP metric which you know at this point is approaching or has exceeded 130 percent and 52 nations that have reached that level of debt to GDP only one of them has not had to restructure Their currency or restructure their debt payments Obviously with the debt ceiling approaching and some Fiscal conservatives using this moment as a point to try and generate leverage. I guess my biggest question for the country Now and going forward is you know Do we actually have the ability to pursue all of these interests on a social a geopolitical a security agenda and and do so without having either a balanced budget or a plan That says here are the boundaries and here are the boundary conditions because in the last couple of years and particularly In the last five years we've seen almost like a bipartisan Unmitigated spending spree That you know is largely driven to You know to do what the electorate wants which is to give people stuff and giving people stuff costs money and that money has to be paid back At some point I guess how do you think about the importance of this and how do you think about the boundary conditions that you would You know look to articulate and impose As you you know think about this role With respect to the the deficits spending and the debt levels for this country in terms of a boundary I I you know I would love to hear arguments about that but I um You know I we've as you say, but I think the debt is now 32 trillion GDP are GDP to run 25 Trillion so that is that's just a really alarming ratio I if you look at why you know that the primary cause are our military And it's it we're spending eight this year. I think uh eight Eight point four trillion dollars on the military budget this year But if you throw in the homeland security and all that surveillance and security expenditures at home It's one point one trillion a year That's one point one trillion a year that is attributable to To essentially to our our you know warmonger And I don't think we can afford to be police know the world anymore We have 800 bases around the world. We need to start rebuilding our middle class at home. We need to be responsible with our debt And we need my grandfather always said That we should make America a too expensive to conquer. We should make fortress America We should arm America to the teeth at home so that note so we're too expensive to conquer and then we should concentrate on building up our economic power and a robust middle class That's what's going to make America strong and instead of projecting military strength abroad We ought to be projecting our economic strength and a marketplace of ideas and economic power I you know why right now we're borrowing six six billion dollars a day Mainly from the Chinese and Japanese just to serve the interest on that debt That's not a healthy thing for America to be and we got to figure out you know a way to do Impulse fiscal discipline But I can't tell you exactly what my boundaries would be That's something I need to think about but how do you how do you think about that? Like I think non-of discretionary spending You know defense is is about 800 billion non-defense is about 900 billion And then obviously their social security benefits Medicare Medicaid In order to get the budget balanced You think cutting defense would be kind of the first priority and you could kind of get there through You know that approach, but I there still seems to be a big gap to me on you know given how much we're spending On how do we actually get there? Are we ultimately going to have to kind of change retirement benefits restructure Medicare Medicaid Or are we going to raise taxes or are we going to do all three To get to this point otherwise we have this obviously kind of never ending debt spiral that that's that's going to cause a massive crisis Whether it's not this year maybe it's in five years or ten years Right now it's projected social security will go bankrupt in 2035 2034 around that range. So this is coming up fast Where are we going to be cutting besides defense and or are we going to be raising taxes to 70% do you think? To kind of bridge this whole I can't answer that question any better than I already have I think with their there is there are targets for opportunity and the uh In the homeland security. I think once we stop fighting these wars all over the world There's a lot less need for us to have a surveillance stated home So the real cost in the military is one point one trillion a year I'm not just the 800 trillion that shows up on the book and I think those are targets for opportunity and I can't you know I have to know I need to study more the issue about how to how to get back into a balanced budget I you know one of the things I'd say disturbs me Is that I don't think we should be playing chicken In congress about raising the debt ceiling um because I think I don't think we should mess around with the full faith and credit of the united states Particularly at this point time One of the things that's happened in the world Bobby said There's been a couple of countries france is probably the best example That had to raise the retirement age and irrespective of The view that one has on whether that was right or wrong The practical reality of doing it is just that when these initial social safety nets were passed The average life expectancy of folks was 10 15 years less than what they are today and presumably as we keep inventing technologies Folks are going to live to 80 90 a hundred years on average which may seem implausible, but is likely if you look at the trend I'm just curious how you think about the state of Our social safety net And what has to change what would you keep the same And what has to be totally reimagined for what the world will look like in 30 or 40 years? I would say it's a red line for me to touch social security um Or medicare america medicare i think we need to take care of people particularly people who have spent their whole life paying into a system And with a promise at the end and and have worked hard and And saved and done what they're supposed to do. I don't think they you know, it's right to pull they rug out from under them But again, I this is an issue that I need to spend more time looking at Uh and studying maybe the next time I come back here on better answer for you guys. I think this is my concern is uh Sorry, but Robert the the comment you just made is the same comment I hear from both sides of the aisle That we can't touch social security medicare medicade because it would be so unpopular We wouldn't get elected and that's ultimately kind of what a democracy like ours may lead to Is that folks vote and elect representatives that are going to create these systems that benefit them But in aggregate we may not be able to support those benefits over time and at scale And we may be facing that moment sooner than any of us want to And I think it's one of the more pressing Issues and concerns not just for the United States, but for the global economy That if the US doesn't resolve this massive whole Talking about social security for example going bankrupt in the next 12 years as one acute example of that problem set You know, we may not be able to turn it around And I mean, do you think that politics is set up to solve The structural economic problems that the US is now facing because so much of politics ends up leading towards what additional benefits can I provide to my Uh the folks that get me elected here's the thing Is we spend eight trillion dollars in the war in Iraq Eight trillion dollars and we got nothing for it. Yeah, that's pretty nuts. That's nuts And for heck we got worse than nothing we killed more Iraqis than Sonnet, but saying we killed a million Iraqis probably Uh, we created ISIS we turned Iraq into a proxy for Iran, which is exactly what we've been not trying to do for 40 years Um, and we drove two million refugees with the Iraq war and it's after mass Syria and Yemen and you know Pakistan and Afghanistan two million refugees and we grew up These stabilized democracy in Europe and we go and so eight trillion dollars there We spent 16 trillion dollars on the pandemic on the lockdown and again got nothing in return Um, so that's 24 trillion dollars and now we're doing bank bailouts every you know couple of months uh So look on valley bank Fed said that it was Printing 300 billion dollars for that made up for all of the you know deflationary um Uh Staps that the Biden administration had previously taken Oh you go to uh, you know you go to a American who's been working their whole life And has been promised at the end of the life that they're going to get a few bucks every month And you know, I have a friend who I brought to my speech with me who was Who um during the same month that we committed and another 750 million during March seven weeks and 750 million dollars extra to the Ukraine We uh, we cut 15 million Americans from Medicare My friend got a call from I from the from the government On his cell phone a recorded call saying that your food stamps have just been cut by 90 percent he went from Two hundred and eighty three dollars a month to twenty five dollars a month So you try to feed yourself on twenty five dollars a month There are 30 million Americans who are starving right now and that to me is unacceptable And it's hard to go to people like that people who have been honest who have played by the rules Who have done everything that they were supposed to do with the promise that they would be taken care of that their health care would be Taking care of an old age You go to those people and say okay now we're gonna cut your food stamps And try to feed yourself on twenty five dollars a month try to feed yourself for twenty five dollars a week We're telling them that And then uh And then spending eight hundred billion to make a plane how you gonna cut the federal budget when you're sending over a hundred billion to Ukraine There's you can't you have no more authority to do it. I want to finish that by saying You know You're like tinkering in the engine room when the ship is sinking You know because You know the order to order switching tech teachers on the Titanic Let's deal with the real problem. Let's figure out how to make this nation a nation that is really focused on taking care of our people Inside rather than saying okay well in order to pay for the Ukraine war We got to screw every American on social security and Medicare We've had by the way The inflation that we've created from you know from from just printing money Is making my friend keys food twice expensive so the the causes of stables in this country is raised by 76% in two years And now they're cutting these food stamps And bailing out the same month three hundred million dollars the silicone valley bank We got it. I mean that it doesn't make any sense and having this kind of conversation How do we screw the poor to make sure that we can you know we can milk them while we're doing all of this great It's this country is acting like the alcoholic Who is behind on his mortgage and who takes the milk money and goes into the bar and buys rounds for strangers You know that's what you're dealing with That's a pretty good analogy shots everybody So let me let me ask a follow-up question on this debt ceiling fight which is which is a game of chicken and the The country's economy might go off a cliff in the next month because Republicans Democrats can agree So Biden's position is I want a clean debt ceiling increase no terms on it house Republicans have passed a debt ceiling increase but It contains things like a 1% cap on spending growth It clause back unspent COVID-19 relief funds and it would halt Biden's student debt forgiveness plan So Robert I guess a question to you would be Would you negotiate like what would your posture to house Republicans be would you be willing to negotiate Because Biden is basically saying I will not negotiate at all So negotiate or not negotiate I guess that's my question to you. Yeah, you have to negotiate I'm not sure if he's posturing you know or what They have to negotiate they have to you know, they have to work out something that's good for our country And that you know and they're gonna blow sides are gonna have to give up something We have to you know, we have to put our country first and it's it's insane to play this game of chicken with a You know with this doing the stakes or so I there's been a lot of talk Robert about the deep state the FBI DOJ CAA your family obviously having dealt with two tragic assassinations your father and your uncle Has dealt with this firsthand in terms of just having the CIA Information about these assassinations released. I'm curious your position on some of the most radical Proposals people have this election cycle of dismantling the FBI CIA DOJ K.A. The deep state do you believe there's a deep state and how would you as president deal with this Intelligence operation we have and then also personally What are your personal feelings on it? well On the you know, I have You know, I've I have a pretty clear idea about how I would handle The intelligence agencies and in fact my father was thinking very deeply about that at the time my father who believed Is is you know first reaction when his brother was killed was that the CIA had killed him in fact the first three calls he made On that day, and you know, I was home At the time And John McComb the CIA was right across the street from my house And so John McComb was the CIA director you would come to our house and swim every day after work during the spring and summertime And my father called the CIA desk and talked to it to ask officer and said did your people do this? That was his first call any called a Harry Louise Who is a Cuban? Who was one of the Cubans who had remained friendly with my family? I you know, well we were surrounded by Cubans growing up because But who were bay of big refugees my father had got them freed after a year and you know in the cashier was prisons and And my father and mother's been a lot of time finding houses for them schools integrating them to the US military finding jobs And so we were all raised very very closely with the Cuban community, but gradually They turned away from my family, but this One Cuban who had been been an engineer had fought with Castro and then turned against him when he can't become communist was very close friends with my father The second call that he made was to a Harry Louise and he said did I did our people meaning the CIA people do this and That was And so my father was thinking very very very Carefully about how to handle this CIA he had been you know, he had been essentially managing the CIA since he came into office And he recognized that the problem and you know as I talked about my speech and I think David on this show mentioned this that during the bay of big invasion I uncle realized that he had been lied to by by Charles Bell and Alan dollars and Richard Bitts, so the heads of the CIA as well as its joint chiefs And he came out In the middle of the invasion when it turned against them and he realized these these men were being killed on the beach And he said I want to take the CIA and shattered into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the wind so he recognized That the function of the intelligence agencies had devolved and that they were they had become captive of the military industrial complex and The military contractors and their Their function was essentially to provide our nation With a constant pipeline of new wars The feed the military industrial complex and the growth of the surveillance state And my father when he ran for president Pete Hamill was one of his favorite news men Hasdom on the bus during two weeks before he died Asked him what he was going to do about the CIA and he said what we need to do Is do we we need to remove the espionage division And as being us branch from the plans division the plans division the CIA is essentially the dirty tricks Provision that's the division the action-prefid division They do the assassinations they fix elections they do paramilitary operations black ops torture black sites all that stuff The espionage division and CIA was originally set up by Cuba by Truman as an espionage agency as being a judge means Information gathering and analysis It's not violence. It's about information acquisition and Unfortunately the the the the clandestine action division Was wagging the espionage dog So the function the espionage division was to provide new actions things to do for the clandestine division And then covering up their mistakes So there was never any accountability and what my father understood is that the espionage division should not be working for the for the clandestine services They should be overseeing him and particularly doing accountability Uh-oh, you know what if the CIA Looks the way that the CIA looks at the Warner Rack is it was a success because we accomplished a measure of opposing Saddam Hussein But and you know that CIA was George Kennett who lied to President push and said it's a slam dunk So they got us to go in there at weapons of mass So as president would you rethink it and then just as a final question as final follow to that do you believe they Murdered or were involved in the murder of your uncle. What would have you come to person? Yes, they were definitely involved in the murder and you know and the six-year cover up They're still not releasing the you know the papers that legally they have to release Um, but I don't think there's any doubt if you look at this You know mountain monumental mountain of evidence and confessions and you know so many people have confessed to their involvement and you know we understand the If you look, I mean there's for anybody who has doubts about that I would recommend a book I Jim Douglas called the unspeakable Because I think he's done a better job Uh, then anybody else had kind of assembling and distilling all of the millions and millions of documents that Uh, have been released over the past 50 years And these things these revelations are released incrementally and so nobody really takes notice of when you put them all together The story is very close. So you you would definitely rethink The CIA the FBI DOJ you know the whole intelligence at the minimization I think what you're saying as well as maybe you would also Release the documents that maybe would at least provide some more transparency I just wanted to build on that because you had a very provocative tweet Part of what you're talking about is accountability and we need data and transparency to have that There are people that have whistleblown there are people that have leaked and I think it's fair to say that they've all been treated by the security apparatus in largely the exact same way But you tweeted recently about your desire to see some of those folks forgiven and pardoned Do you want to just take a few minutes just to talk about some of those folks that you think Has allowed us to actually see the truth if we want to see it and why you think that and what you think should be done with folks like that I mean Julian Assange is an example Julian Assange is a newspaper publisher. He published leaked documents You know why are we I mean I if I was any newspaper publisher in this country I would be worried about that then now he can go to jail for life because he published leaked documents of great import to the American people of things that we should not have been secret that we should have known about um the revelations that affect our civil rights affect our foreign policy affect things that we ever write to know about and you know it's it's really It's strange that there's any support for his imprisonment among the press and I think the press is beginning to figure this out finally The most controversial of those figures is Edwin Snowden and Edwin Snowden released documents that showed us that we were all being spider-pump And that's important for Americans to know and in fact it was so important That Congress passed laws based upon his revelations to protect the American people So why are we punishing the whistleblower rather than punishing the people who were you know who were illegally spying on us That's what we should be doing. We shouldn't be Jailing dissenters in our country. We shouldn't be Jailing whistleblowers. We should be jailing the people who break the law To keep this bipartisan do you believe the deep state is acting to subvert the Trump presidency and that they are framing him on these three or four indictments that they Are working on some that have dropped some that haven't do you believe there's a deep state conspiracy against Trump because you might be facing him I don't use the word deep state. I mean I you know I've described how these bureaucracy's function and it's not That it's not so much a group of people the kind of deep state implies there's a group of people and it's kind of you know black coats and a smoky room pulling strings but The corruption is systemic the these you know they all of these agencies are captive agencies The CIA is ultimately working for Ape for industry like the oil industry the coal industry and the military contractors and that they've always had that ties since the very beginning you know Alan dollars Who would work for itself and Gromwell and ended up doing coup d'etat's I have his former clients like Texaco and United Fruit Texaco and BP and in Iran in 1953 Is former client United Fruit when one Jacob R. Benz and Guatemala tried to nationalize United Fruit you know The CIA under dollars went over through the government to protect the interest of his former clients So there's always been these ties to industry and the ties now and particularly the oil industry and the ties to To the military industrial contractors really drive CIA action and CIA intelligence and we have to you know you have to stop Yeah, and this is systemic and all these agencies. I mean USDA is run by Cargill Smithfield on Santo Bob pilgrim John Tyson EPA is run when we suit EPA Uh, we got discovery documents That showed that the head of the pesticide division just Rowland had been secretly working for Monsanto for a decade and you know It's sending them those back and forth with Monsanto directing them you need to kill this study you need to kill that study And this unfortunately is not the exception. It is the rule Most of the people who work for those agencies are good citizens. They're good Americans They're honest and their patriotists But the people who tend to rise in those agencies and occupy these very very powerful keep positions from decades or years like Anthony Fauci 50 years Our people who are in the tank with industry And what we need to do is unravel that across the government and that's really what people say that's the deep state that really is what it's a systemic corruption within our agencies that is driven by agency capture Can we actually just talk about the coronavirus maybe pandemic for a second and I just want to tie in two concepts Sometimes again, there's a lot of mainstream misinformation about it There is a lot that came out about you particularly as it relates to vaccines I just want to give you an opportunity to set the record straight Just on what you think happened COVID all that corruption your thought on vaccines the efficacy of our programs How we should change what we keep the same just maybe a chance to clear the ear so that we can get some of the Gobbledy-gook on the internet set straight I Mean it's hard to you know, I wrote a 250,000 paid book about it and I've written a couple of books and so it's hard to summarize, you know what went wrong and in a In a second, but it's but essentially we had instead of a Public health response to what public health crisis we had a militarized and monetized response that was the inverse of what of Everything that you would want to do if you actually wanted to protect public health We've known you know if you look at WHO protocols or the CDC protocols the EU the NHS and Britain All those they all had protocols are how to manage the pandemic they all said unanimously You do not use lockdowns mass lockdowns you quarantine the sick You protect the vulnerable but you keep society moving because the consequences of not do of shutting down society will be Cataclysmic beyond anything that the disease is going to impose Everybody knew that and so you know, we had these these agencies that that had drilled for years and years This alternative, you know militarized response And instead of you know doing what you want to do which is to get early treatment to people to have I mean you know We live in the age of the internet. We should have had a A grid that connected all 15 million frontline doctors every country around the world And figured out what are you doing that works in your country, you know and try and then Distilling that information and processing and getting it to other doctors Well, we knew it was working we knew I've remector in hydroxychloric and we're working we knew that since 2004 Because NIH did the study that said hydroxychloric and obliterates coronavirus We knew what would work at that time and what was the response They the response was they could not allow early treatment to occur Why because there's a little non-federal law That says if there is a drug that is shown effective against the target disease it is ill and I a drug that is proof for any purpose It is illegal to issue an emergency use authorization for a vaccine So if they had admitted that hydroxychloric and our eye remector worked against On a virus it would have destroyed their whole hundred billion dollar vaccine, you know enterprise So they had to kill early treatments And they went after stuff that they knew worked they this was the first respiratory virus in history Where people would go to the hospital And they would test positive for coronavirus and be symptomatic they were sick. Hey, that's why they went to the hospital And the hospital would say to them there is no treatment go home till your lips turn blue and you can't breathe And come back and we will give you two things that are going to kill you Remdesivir and hydroxychloric and ventilation So People still look at in this country and anti-foujisi era I mean we were doing things a couple of miles from me In Malapu There were police pulling servers out of the surf and giving them thousand dollar tickets and telling them to go on And I'm out of the sunshine where where coronavirus doesn't spread and lock him in their home where it does And every time they sent some one of these people home from the hospital sick it was a super spreader of that Oh you look at our record of coronavirus and this is when nobody can explain who is you know defending Fauci etc We had the highest body count in the world by far from corona virus Oh, we have 4.2% of the world's population. We had 16% of the covid deaths How does anybody explain that? And you go to nations that didn't do what we told them Nigeria, Nigeria is the highest malaria burden in the world So everybody everybody gets hydroxychloric and once a week they call it Sunday Sunday everybody in the country takes it on Sunday They had the highest riverpline in the Spurden So I have the countries on Ivermectin Nigeria never had an epidemic It had a death rate in Nigeria of 14 people per million population All our death rate 3000 per million population Blacks in our countries were dying at 3.6 times the rate of whites Why were American blacks dying in Nigeria and blacks weren't And then you go to Haiti Haiti had a and by the way, Nigeria had a 1.3% vaccination rate 80 had a 1.4% vaccination rate And they had a death rate of 15 per-poll per million population These are the countries that don't even Fauci and Bill Gates said We got to get them vaccinated. We got to do whatever you can because they're gonna get totally wiped out because they're poverty and guess right They never had a pandemic across Africa. There was a 10% vaccination rate and guess what They had a death rate of about 340 Some people think that the death rate here was overstated Because of incentives to do that do you believe that as well? Maybe part of that death rate is it was over and said but you believe looking back on this That Fauci As well as the pharma companies Bill Gates investments in those areas that let us down a path You'll recall at the medical industrial the pharma industrial complex you believe the pharma industrial complex dictated our response to coronavirus and then freebrog on that you jump in Yeah, but do you believe that that that's the I don't have any question. I believe this was you know as I said It was a military response. I mean looking who was running The look at who was running the coronavirus response wouldn't you think it would be hh as Well when they at one warp speed Had to present its declassify its organizational charts to show to the FDA committee called verbaq when they demanded it And warp speed went in and showed me organizational chart charts The the the the agency running warp speed and pandemic response was not hhs. It was nsa national security agency Avril Haynes is the director of national intelligence. So she was running operation warp speed And who was manufacturing it wasn't Pfizer Moderna. It was 140 military contractors Who you know headlines ready and you say you know and then you know all of this clamped out on on Civil rights that we saw the the censorship On the closing the churches the you know that the closing of the right to assemble the banning of jury trials against pharmaceutical companies They crushed the seventh amendment the first amendment They closed down 3.3 million businesses with no due process no just compensation They they obliterated the fourth amendment right to you know to Against warrantless searches and seizures With all these intrusive You know you you you you have to show your medical records to go out and out of your house Or to get into a public building freeberg what what is correct here? Do you believe in what is incorrect about Roberts? What's Roberts saying if anything? Well look I mean there's obviously a lot of things I could say by the way I was on the executive team at monsanto for a couple of years So you know I one one thing I will say is I sat on the at the table Facing the EPA and the USDA and certainly didn't feel like a very cozy relationship in at least what I saw in the few years I was there It was it did feel like a very kind of independent regulatory and challenging Frankly regulatory process that monsanto had to manage and deal with and go through and in releasing new products You know, I don't think that this notion that they were kind of embedded parties that Did our whims and wishes really placed through at least for my experience sitting there And I'm not a long time monsanto executive. I built a software company sold it to monsanto and sat on the exact team for a few years after the acquisition But I guess the the more Kind of I think bigger framing question for you Robert is really around vaccines in general. I think you're your commentary around the the COVID response And you know the influencing forces there Didn't start with COVID right I mean you've you've been a kind of You know outspoken voice on vaccines in general for some time Is that a fair statement because I think that that's part of the media narrative around your history and legacy Is that you have been kind of outspoken on vaccines and the You know the the risks and the and the effects that you that you consider to be kind of I don't know if it's implied or explicit with respect to the use and and wide adoption of vaccines over time Maybe you could share a little bit about your broader perspective in the years leading up to COVID and how that then kind of informed your point of view specifically on COVID You know my objective is not to vaccines. I'm not any vaccine. I fully vaccinated my kids were fully vaccinated I wish at this point that I had not done that because I know enough about them now but I principal objective is that vaccines um in this the childhood vaccines are immune from pre licensing safety testing Of the 72 when I got was a kid I got three vaccines My children got 72 doses of 16 vaccines And the vaccines are the one medical product that does not have to go through placebo controlled trials where you test and expose versus unexplosed population prior to licensure And that there's a number of historical reasons for that the kind of the kind of the military Uh, beginning is the these vaccines were regarded as um as national security defenses against Biological attacks on our countries so they wanted to make sure of the Russians attacked us with anthrax Or some of their biological agent they could quickly formulate and deploy vaccine at 200 million Americans with no regulatory impediments So they they call them biologics from medicines and exempted by theologics from pre licensing safety trial I've litigated on that it should not one of them has ever been tested pre licensure against so nobody knows What the you know you can say that the Vaccine is effective against the target disease But you can't say that it's not causing worse problems Now I'll just summarize this story In the the vaccine schedule exploded in 1986 The vaccine industry succeeded in getting Ronald Reagan to sign a law and my uncle was also you know a group that was pressured By why at which was losing 20 dollars in downstream liabilities On every vaccine have made because it was lawsuits For every dollar that it made and they and and probably they went to Reagan and said we're gonna get out of the vaccine business And you're gonna be left without a vaccine supply unless you give us full immunity from liability and Reagan you know reluctantly sign that And so today no matter how negligence the company no matter how grievous your injury no matter how reckless their conduct you cannot sue them That caused it gold rush because now you've got a product But That there's no downstream liability Europe immune from that There's no upstream safety testing so that's a $250 million saving And there's no marketing or advertising cost so because On the federal government's gonna mandate this product to 76 million American children where they like it or not And there's no better product in the world and so there was a gold rush and instead of three vaccines We quickly ended up with 72 and now we're going to you know toward 80 right now And there's no end to sight and a lot of those vaccines were unneccessary. They're not even for casual disease Here's what happened in night beginning in 1989 We experienced that chronic disease epidemic in this country And it's unlike anything in any history We went from having 6% of Americans affected by chronic disease to 54% by 2006 and what do I mean by chronic disease? I mean neurological disease that I never saw when I was a kid 80 DAD HD, special A language like Tix to Red syndrome um ASD autism narcolepsy all these suddenly appeared autism rates went from one to 10,000 to one every 34 1989 was the year this began The allergic disease peanut allergies suddenly appeared Food allergies exima suddenly appeared And it relaxes and asthma you know which had been around But it exploded and then autoimmune disease is like rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile diabetes I never knew a kid I had 11 siblings about 70 cousins I never knew anybody with any of these diseases and And son why do five my kids have allergies? so uh So then If you look at the manufacturer's inserts for those 72 vaccines There's 420 diseases Had have been associated with the vaccines that are listed And including every one of those diseases that went epidemic in 1989 And this is the country which the most happily vaccinated and this was happening here unlike any other country in the world And so we have this you know this and and you know they what's good for the pharma This pharma now makes 60 billion on the vaccines when I was a kid they were making 250 million now They make 60 billion a year plus 100 billion from COVID vaccine Freiberk do you believe that these vaccines are over prescribed and And are part of The rise in ADHD and and all this litany of diseases I'm just asking Freiberk who's our resident scientist here do you do believe this? You know explicitly as a scientist I'm curious. I don't think there's direct evidence supporting that relationship I think that there's a lot of environmental factors that have been driving changes in You know the rate of problems with auto immunity it relates to our food products our food System it relates to environmental chemistry like Robert has talked about generally. I think there's a lot of environmental Conditioning that's caused this rise in in in problems in human I interrupt for a second because I don't think it's solely the vaccines our children today are swimming or hunting a toxic soup But there's a timeline and actually I talked to colleges that I've used many my lawsuits probably the most famous in the country Phil Landrigan Looked at the timeline of the explosion of all these chronic diseases And he said there's only a finite number of things that have caused it you know one is glyphosate Things that went became ubiquitous against it in every demographic Beginning and around 1993 1989 I'm one of Ms. Glyphosate neonic it to a patented size pf. A's cell phones ultra-sat and he made the whole list I and so it's a finite number And the question is and vaccines are part of that and you know, it is suspicious because the vaccines the list all of these aside effects now I've I put together books You know one of my books on this subject on connecting these As 14 hunter references and 400 studies digested so the science out there is pretty clear But we get this NIH refused to study these things Because it knows that whatever wherever they follow the dots is gonna end up with a big shot And so they simply have stopped studying them and they've turned themselves into an incubator from the pharmaceutical products And they don't do this kind of basic research I want to just give you guys one example The most common vaccine in the world is called the DTP vaccine to theory of tetanus and tussus We gave it in this country and beginning around 79 It was killing or Causing severe brain injury and one out of every 300 kids who got it You see a la study funded by NIH that found it so they got rid of it That's what caused all the lawsuits and eventually precipitated the passage of the vaccine We stopped it here. They stopped in Europe but Bill Gates and WHO are still giving it to 161 million African children every year Is the most popular vaccine on earth Bill Gates says publicly it saved 30 million lives He went to the Danish government and said we've saved 30 million lives. We'll use support this program in 2017 The Danish said show me the study that shows that it saved all those lives He couldn't do it so they went down and they conducted a study in West Africa with a Danes operate all these health clinics And they looked at 30 years of data And as it turned out in a nation called Kenny Bissau Half the kids in that country at the age two months had received the vaccine and half and not It was a perfect natural experiment And they looked at 30 years of data and what they found was that The kids who received the vaccine were not dying of diphtheria tendus and perturbsis But girls who received the vaccine were dying At 10 times the rate of unvaccinated girls and they were not dying of anything ever anybody ever associated with the vaccine They were dying of diphtheria Bill Artsia, Malaria, Anemia, Minor cuts and scrapes and mainly pulmonary respiratory disease and pneumonia And what the researchers concluded and this was a study funded by the Danish government And of an order switch of vaccine company and the scientists were all pro-vaccine The day said is this vaccine is killing more people than the disease ever were Nobody knew it because nobody associated the people who were dying because they were dying all these different things That were only the unvaccinated kids so the vaccine had saved them From diphtheria tendus and perturbsis about it had ruined their immune system So that they could not defend themselves against other diseases and that's the danger Of not having placebo controlled trials prior to introducing the product particularly when you're going to mandate a product for healthy people Let's with our remaining time here move on to energy You end the environment you've got an incredible track record I remember growing up in New York the amazing work you did For the watershed project and I'll let you expand upon that in a moment But the only confounding thing I found in your position and I'm curious if it's changed or not is that you spend decades trying to close the Indian point nuclear power plant In a time when clearly nuclear power has gotten safer and is Clearly I think we're the world believes and certainly everybody who's on this panel believes nuclear is a key point in the transition To renewable so what is your actual position? Explain it to us as basically as you can on nuclear power and do you regret or have you read thought your position on Indian point? No, I mean any point is the leaky trillion and the odds every day But I don't see how you can say it safe and you know they still haven't figured out what to do with the ways They're now storing it, you know, it's it's 18 miles from mid-diamond hadn't Um if a you know the the shack Where they were stored storing uh the fuel rods at the structural integrity of a Kmart uh terrorist attack against it would you know would basically render New York In a have uninhabited for you know the next 5,000 years or so so to have To put to put something that risk is so closed and you know 10 million people doesn't make any sense now nuclear power i'm all for it if they can ever make it safe Or if they ever make it economical and it's not me saying it's not safe. It's the insurance industry They can't get an insurance policy if they can't get an insurance policy then I would say I don't want it But the nuclear American nuclear industry. I mean you go look at what Fukushima They're poisoning the Pacific every day With huge amounts of really deadly radiation and they and out their only solution to it is to suck the water out Of the groundwater and stored in these big tanks and if you just go on the internet and look at a picture of the Fukushima water tanks And they go on to the horizon and there's no end to it. Robert, can I just make a point The thing with nuclear that's worth separating is It's not the fundamental technology there that's broken in either example that you use But it's the profiting motive that caused both the industrial engineering of both plants to be subpar Because Fukushima for example was engineered not to the seismic levels that you really needed or elevation Even conceiting all that Here's what I would say is that you know in our country There's no Nuclear is regarded as so dangerous and they can't get insurance So the industry had to go to Congress in a sleazy legislative maneuver In the middle of the night and get the price Anderson act pass So that there so that to shift their accident burden onto the American public So if their plant goes up I and I was 10 miles from that plant and I'm gonna have to pay for it So I don't think that's free market capitalism. I believe In free markets and I can tell you this There is no public utility on the face of the earth I will build one of those plants without massive public subsidies not one nobody will ever do it and then They have to store the waste for the next 30,000 years Which is five times the length of recorded human history and if you tell me how that you know if they had to Amortize that rate up front. There's no way anybody do it number number two or three or four whatever I've gotten to It cost now Between nine and sixteen billion dollars to build a nuclear power plant Just the construction costs and then you got to get the technicians and then you've got to get you know the waste disposal The regular outage isn't all of this There's no way that it could compete in a free market. I believe in free market capitalism I am a radical free marketer I believe that our energy systems should reflect the marketplace And they right now you can build a solar plant For a billion dollars giga-watt You can build a wind plant for one point two billion dollars a giga-watt A coal plant will cost you about three and a half billion dollars a giga-watt and then you have to pay for the fuel I cutting down the mountains of West Virginia Poisoning 22,000 miles of streamed Burning you know putting mercury that gets into every fresh water fish in America Sterilizing the lakes of the Appalachians if they had to internalize that cause coal which says is the you know It's for nuke which says it's too cheap to meter it turns out it's the most expensive way to boil a pot of water That's ever been deviled. I'm just trying to make the point that if you look at the levelized cost of energy now What you're saying is exactly why solar and wind are winning? It's just so much cleaner. It makes so much more sense. There's not fuel cause and if the impediment is Distribution is that we don't have a grid system that can effectively, you know, orchestrate of variable power And that's what we let me let me provide a counter that maybe it's not about distribution But it's about scaling production capacity. So you know, if you look over nearly any historical time scale since we've had Industrial energy production on earth For every one percent increase in GDP per capita you see a roughly 1.2 percent increase in energy consumption per capita And so if you forecast out by the end of the century The GDP per capita estimates in the US and around the world We need to increase global energy production by roughly You know anywhere from five to ten x and You know the current system of pulling carbon out of the ground and burning it up and pulling heat energy out of it doesn't scale Doesn't make sense obviously put aside the carbon effect problem And there appears to be you know a reasonable chance of a pretty serious material shortage for renewable sources By the middle of next decade So what do you think is the right answer to long-range energy security and what sort of technologies should we be embracing? And do you think that they scale fast enough to kind of allow us to have our economy grow in the way that it needs to to support The the population demands over the next century I mean, I'm agnostic about the energy sources and I think you need a you know, you have to be eclectic about it and a lot of them are Are you know make sense locally, but we we have I mean we have enough energy we have enough wind energy In North Dakota North Dakota is the windiest place on earth outside of the Arctic North Dakota Montana and Texas we have enough wind energy to produce five times the amount of our entire grid um The problem is The North Dakota wind farmer cannot get his product to market Because it dissipates in a you know, we have an antique An or antiquated grid system That simply will not efficiently move electrons across country and we need a DC grid system that you know With off ramps and the big cities etc that can do that In North Dakota if you have an acre of farmland It's worth about 300 bucks if you put a wind turbine on it. It's worth about 32 hundred bucks So every farmer in North Dakota wants to put wind turbines in their cornfields And the problem is they cannot get that energy to market that is the only choke point And if we and the same is true, you know and uh and you know, we have great solar power in this country um We we have you know, we have an abundance of of renewable energy in this country and the power of the problem is The incumbents were were were operating on rules under rules that were written by the incumbents The reward the dirtiest filthyest most poise has most toxic fuels from hell rather than to cleat cheap clean green All some fuels from heaven and we ought to reverse that and and make it Make them all competitive seems like technology and economics have reversed that in a way. Yeah One last question on this so as president would you support initiatives That could advance and allow approval of safe nuclear fission Production systems to be built here in the US Well, I will like like I say I support new And new technologies of new that are safe, you know, were they but but as long as they can compete in a marketplace You show me and by by the way, I think we should be doing science even when there's no, you know I can have an end to it so we should be looking at this stuff But I would not promote new if it's not competitive in the marketplace and it's you know and and that means You know cleaning up your mess after yourself, which you know is a lesson. We were all supposed to learn in kindergarten They have to show us what they're gonna do with the ways how they're gonna internalize their cause Rather than what they're doing now, which is to externalize their cause and internalize their profits Okay, we have covered a lot of territory and I hate to get to Controversial ones like culture wars, but it's gonna come up in the presidential election I personally don't think this is what's important in the presidential election. I think the fiscal stuff the energy stuff The the wars and political stuff we've discussed today are much more important but I'm curious you're take on The issues around Disney, DeSantis, trans And this cohort of issues which have become an obsession it seems between Certain members of certain political parties or both parties the media And certainly it's taken over a lot of discussions amongst the generation on social media What's your take on all this and when you get caught up in these debates and the presidential debates About trans athletes as put one example do you think a trans Woman who was a biological male should be able to be put in a Female prison do you think they should be able to play on a female basketball team and change with a bunch of 15 year old girls in a high school locker room? I've already said first one is in this I think that people I believe in bodily autonomy and that people's choices about what they wanted to with their body should be respected and people should not be ashamed I do not believe that As somebody who was born a biological man Should be able to compete later on in life whatever choice they made on a woman's team. I mean I have a a niece who is playing softball at at BC she has worked She has devoted her entire life to getting that scholarship and it's it's consumed her And I've watched you know during my lifetime women sports go from essentially non-existent To to equitable mainly with men sports and I think that's important and I don't think that you know um Women should lose ground um in in anyway, so I would you know I've said on I don't believe that that's the right thing, but I think everybody should be respected Let me ask a question then about parents who are struggling with this issue At what age should a doctor be allowed to perform gender reassignment Surgery on a individual you believe adults so at what age should you be able to have gender surgery Because this is going to come up multiple times in this debate. I think I also ought to have that choice I don't think a child should have that choice Except with you know certainly not without apparent parental permission and I really don't you know I know that the um The real you know it's a live and let's start by saying this This is a difficult issue and it's an issue that we should not be judging people on and we should not be hating people about We should much be trying to solve people problems and Give people as much leeway as possible to and as much respect In fact as much leeway to exercise their choices and much respect those choices we possibly can Within that framework. I don't believe that it's uh at a child without their parental permission should be allowed to choose that kind of surgery because What if their parents agree to it should a 15 year old be able to be I that's a very difficult question and I don't feel like I'm equipped to answer it. I'm not gonna You know I interfere. Yeah, I think this panel agrees with this is a very difficult issue and you know people should be yeah, what do you think about Things like critical race theory and maybe we can just use that as a way to just talk about The state of US education in general. Are we preparing our children for the task at hand And what is the task at hand maybe in your eyes and how does it need to change if at all? Now, you know, I think critical race theory as much as I understand it um is You know though listen we should not be hiding from people we should be honest people about the history in this country of genocide of racism and those things So the oh, you know, we need to be honest about that with each other Not to shame people not to make people people feel badly not to make people feel guilty But to understand the the milestones that we never want to not go near again and to move forward with those things I you know in turn I don't really understand the The battle over critical race theory in schools, but you know to the extent If somebody would say that this has to that that theme Has to dominate all historical um teaching I would be against that I think it's very very important, you know America Our country has has done wonderful things in the world we have a history of idealism we have a history of moral authority and leadership and we have a history of doing bad things too But I think for children for the sake of national unity for the sake of you know for we need to instill children With the sense of optimism and hope and love and also with love of history I mean I grew up learning history and learning you know kind of the heroic aspects of history which I now understand Or not the only parts of history Um, but it's really important for children to have have role models to look up to and have an optimistic view of our country and to have To understand what the shared values are and by values. I mean aspirational values You know the things that our country is supposed to stand for When we are at our best for example over in the in San Francisco we canceled advanced placement classes because it made People feel bad. Do you think that was a good decision? No in the name of equity? No, we should be inspiring our children towards excellence And we should be able to as adults give them measures of what we mean by excellence And you know that inspires kids and inspires the best out of them and you know We need to we need to have those kind of metrics so that doesn't make any sense to me But then what's your view on for example just educational diversity in charter schools and you're just position on the teachers unions Yeah, I mean my view is that we ought to be putting huge resources into public schools And making them the best schools in the world and I think if we you know Right now we're making just out of bombers for a billion dollars That cannot fly in the rain And I think if we just cut production of a couple of those we can make all our schools the best schools in the world Do they need competition? Do you believe in vouchers and parents getting to choose which school they go to because it does seem Like there's not a lot of competition and that these teachers unions have a shringle hold On these schools. I have to look at that issue more. I mean my inclination is that we should be putting resources into making our public schools the best schools in the world But you said you believed in free markets When with regard to energy why not free markets in regard to education? Well, it's it hasn't it be all I need to look okay fair enough Yeah, let's talk about censorship. Let's talk about the media One of the things that happened during the COVID pandemic is that a lot of people grew Suspicious of the mainstream media even more suspicious than they already had been It seemed like the media was carrying water on certain issues It was almost impossible for the media to take seriously the idea that the virus might have come from the Wuhan lab for example people Who put forward that I think reasonable explanation were called conspiracy theorists The media didn't want to look into why for example this is an example Fauci lifted Obama's moratorium on gain a function research Couldn't get the media to really cover whether you know masking toddlers in Schools did anything positive and then you know when we found out that the mRNA Chats didn't prevent COVID the way they said they never even really asked The CEOs of Pfizer and these other companies when did you know this when do you know that the vaccines didn't do what you said? They're gonna do and I remember at Davos you had a rebel news. It was this guerrilla media outfit that Acosta and burla the the CEO of Pfizer out in the street and they were just asking him questions that The media is supposed to ask like you know when did you know? What did you know and when did you know it with respect to whether the the vaccines prevented the spread And you couldn't get the New York Times or any of the mainstream outlets to cover this at all so it felt to this guerrilla media outfit So any event that's a long wind up, but you know Robert what's your take on the media? Why can't we get what seems to be on this media coverage? How does this fit into your theory of regulatory capture who are they sort of carrying water for it and why? You know I in 2015 I wrote a book on Simon Arisle and there was a documentary that came out that time called Trace Amounts It was a really good amount documentary on the the mercury based Preservative that was in a lot of vaccines at that time and it's been removed from most except for the flu vaccine now But I took that I had a very close relationship with Roger ails Who is the founder fox news I had this weird relationship because when I was 19 years old I spent three months in a tent with him in East Africa and We you know he would like when he started fox news He became like Darth Vader to me and we were an sati cool Every issue, but we always he was a very funny guy And very clever, but and he was also very loyal to his friends and he wouldn't make All of the hosts of fox news put me on so I was the only in farm Alice who was going on Hannity and Bill O'Reilly and Neil Cavuto It said regularly like weekly And he made them do that, but I went to him with this with this um This Movie and showed it to him and he found it compelling and he had a Relative who he believed as vaccine injured a very very close relative And he But he believed what was going on and what the documentary, you know the thrust of the documentary was And he said I cannot let you talk about this on fox news. I'm sorry. It was the first time he ever saw me this and he said Um if I let you if any of my hosts let you on to talk about this I would have to fire them And he said um and if I didn't farm I'd get a call from rooper within 10 minutes And he said to me at that time that 70% of the revenues for his not on network news Uh, prime time We're pharmaceutical ads and that um that he said of 22 ad space is that we sell on the net work news On that evening news 17 of those are pharmaceutical the we cannot afford To uh to offend our biggest um our biggest The funder is advertisers and you know I had this interesting experience with Jake Tapper Where where when I worked on my Rolling Stone article deadly immunity Which was about this secret meeting that took place in Simpson with Georgia by cdc and all of the vaccine companies and FDA etc Where they decided to hide the autism effect from the American people and we I got the transcripts farm and publish in Rolling Stone And and Jake Tapper worked for 21 days with me on a on a doc on a exclusive story And he was gonna add simultaneously was with Rolling Stone publishing it And Tapper the night before he went on he called me and total distress and he said it's been pulled by corporate all things gone He said never in my career as corporate killed one of my stories and I'm really angry and then I called it back in xA He's never spoken to me again But you know there are consequences for these newscasters who depart from the orthodoxy And they know it you know if you look at Anderson Cooper He's got a now probably a 13 million dollar year salary Um, but if you actually do the math probably around 10 million of that comes from Pfizer Which sponsors this show so you know that's he's working for them. He's not working for us And you know they know they're working for Explosive stuff And I can't disagree with you as having been a publisher of my whole career There why why even why even have pharmaceutical ads on TV. I mean only doctors can prescribe them Yeah, it was illegal Prior to 1997 so there's only two nations in the world that allow pharmaceutical advertising on TV one is New Zealand and the others the United States we both have you know these huge pharmaceutical sales so we take three to four times The amount of pharmaceutical drugs as a European takes and we have the worst health results were 79th In terms of you know health impacts Uh, you know health outcomes among all nations and so you know and also pharmaceutical drugs a third biggest killer of Americans After cancer and artists acts so it is not helping when when they when FDA changed that rule Um, the AMA was against it like all the medical institutions that you can't do this it is gonna destroy health in America And but you know they did it And the problem is that these uh that the pharmaceutical companies now know not not only can you know I have this platform for broadcasting their product But they also control content on the As far as I can tell I think the left Just to be blunt hates you more than the right And so you want to just comment on Your ability to get the mainstream media to pay attention particularly folks on the left and give you the air time so that you can get your message And how much the party matters in this process for you? I don't know that they're gonna I mean it was kind of dramatic what happened this week to them Not to make because I'm used to it the ABC you know one of their the a person who describes herself As the journalist journalist and gave me a long talk when I got to ABC um That uh When I got to the green room that she was not somebody who had ever censored or cut and they're not working a cherry pick Because I said to her I don't I'm very uncomfortable doing it taped interview with you Because I know what you guys do when I tape an interview you cut it up you cherry pick it you dice it and you do and you then you play things out of contact And she said you won't do this see that from me. I'm a journalist journalist. I don't take orders from anybody. I do and then She asked me She says you know in the interview I didn't want to talk about vaccine. I'm not going around the country talking about vaccines If you see my speeches, I'm I don't mention vaccines. I But if somebody asks me about vaccines, I'm gonna tell the truth I'm not looking to talk about I don't I know a lot about them, but I'm not leading with that Because I I'm interested in a lot of other issues Oh, she says um Everything you've said about vaccines about vaccines notism has been debunked and um, you know vaccines. It's cleared Do not cause autism What do you have to say by that and Then I said to my who and then I went into a long diatribe where I cited the cases the dates the publications And the studies that show that yeah, obviously it caused autism and She cut out that whole section and then and then So she had her question Which stated the industry talking point and then she brackets the the The news Report on me with something at the beginning that says you know, he's known to be a chronic liar in a disinformation spreader And then the end she said we had to remove things he said because they were false The whole thing was so weird that she has gotten criticism even from the left Because you know, I mean it well what is the news? Castor's supposed to do and they supposed to manipulate public information is their job Protect Americans from dangerous thoughts Are the audiences do they have such contempt for their audiences? That the think that the audiences can't make up their own minds and what is their whole vision About the traditional role of the American media as the guardians of free speech in the first amendment It's contrary you can be sure our commitment to you is to not take out one sentence of anything you said There's some stuff I'd like you to take out I mean, I also found that a crazy decision for them to make If you're if they actually believe that what you're saying about vaccines which they put on the table Is incorrect or what you said about autism or COVID is incorrect. They should be trained enough to Rebut it and have a thoughtful debate about you. I'll be even more blunt than the submission my my short takeaway about you Robert is that you are this odd person Which is born and raised by the establishment But raising a lot of very uncomfortable questions about the establishment and I think that that's very complicated for people to deal with and I don't think that folks Will be very supportive you in the mainstream and I think the reason is because It'll cause them to question all these systems that they put a lot of trust into that they work within And so I'm not even sure whether they're trying to play gotcha journalism about vaccines or which is a much bigger thing Which is here is a guy that I do think it's very similar to Trump that says He came out of the house and told us what was happening in the house and it actually turned out that was happening the Dave Sheppell quote from Saturday Night Live I think you're a very different person than him But that comment is very much the same. I think people Are attracted to the truth and the confirmatory evidence about when they think that there's frankly corruption And when it's laid bare in plain English I think it's validating for those on the outside because we're like we knew it and then for folks on the inside They're like we need to bury it and I think that that's what you're gonna be up against this entire election cycle So whether it's us whether it's Rogan Folks that'll give you the chance for you to just lay your case out For millions of people who can smartly and intelligently make up their decision I think that's what it comes down to so I really just want to say thank you for Giving us so much time and just being as honest as you were and transparent as you were sacks closing thoughts here with I agree with that. I mean I think I Think that's a great Reference Jamoth to to the Sheppell quote I think that The ABC News interview was really telling because I think it's one thing if they had edited the interview for time And just cut certain things but they didn't do that They cut out your side of the conversation and then declared you guilty of Misinformation but not letting the audience hear what it is that you said they simply declared you guilty of it and I think In that case, I think this is an example of how dissenting views are labeled as misinformation as Really a suppression tactic You know, they can't prove that it was misinformation. They didn't give you the chance to to say your your side of it And I think this is a tactic now of the elite to declare certain inconvenient Truce or viewpoints out of bounds. They don't want them being considered And I think what's very interesting about your campaign is you are gonna force I think elites and you know various kinds foreign policy elites Anderson Cooper Political elites media elites financial Consider views yeah, that I you know whether you agree with them or not I think you've made them in a very articulate way and I know enough about Certain of your views Like with respect to the origins of Ukraine war to say yeah, I agree with that. I believe that's true So I don't think they can dismiss you today's conspiracy There is sacks as we've talked about our tomorrow's pollers today's conspiracy. There is our tomorrow's policy Let's go ahead Jema. I really think that this is what's gonna be scary as if you're As its election kind of rules forward the contrast and compare on the democratic side is gonna be very Troublesome to the establishment and I just encourage you to just Just keep sticking to it and telling people what you think freeberg any final thoughts as we wrap can I say one last Yes, and my And I want to because it's such a great platform What I've always said to be but you know If I'm if I'm promoting misinformation, which I'm constantly accused of Show me what it is identify don't just say I'm an infamous information promoter show me the piece that you don't agree with or that You know, I made a false statement I would say that I have not promoted any misinformation if Unless misinformation is just a euphemism for anything that departs from government orthodoxies But every pose I have probably the most robust Fact checking operation in North America because I know these attacks are coming So we have 300 and over 320 MD physicians PhD scientists On my advisory board who see everything that goes out And everything that I posted on Instagram was cited or sourced work to a government paid database Or peer reviewed publication. I don't know anything and by the way that doesn't mean I won't make a mistake At some point but guess what if I made a mistake People would point it out and you know what I would do I'd change it and a public You're opinion in the face of new facts exactly You show me fact that's the only thing that'll change my opinion show me facts and I will change it so fast But you know you need to show me facts So just on on the competition between you and Biden for this nomination I want to say that the Kennedy family has been involved in public life for for decades And many Kennedys has served in public life and I honestly don't remember one time With any Kennedy you served in public life where they've been accused Of receiving money from a foreign government not once and we're now up to 12 Biden's I think who've received a payment You know from foreign governments potentially in this larger 100 buying scandal. Do you have a point of view on that? I mean The fact that it appears that honor Biden and other members of the buying family receive payments from foreign governments is that How do you interpret that is that something that you think is fair game in this campaign to talk about? I you know, I don't know enough about it David the Render judgment on it. I don't know the intricacies of those relationships I think the optics are Unfortunate But uh, you know, I would leave it. I think it is fair game for people who are looking into it to criticize and question it I don't know enough about I'm not in the position to be able to do that all right on that I would just like to say I grew up in a Catholic How sold Irish Catholic in Brooklyn on the wall in my grandmother and grandfather's dining room were three people Bobby Kennedy Robert Kennedy and Jesus Christ It's been an honor to have you on the program and thank you for giving us two hours of vibrant debate We wish you well and we'd like to have you on again and perhaps if this platform allows September for debates And they will not host you on the debates We will here on the oil and podcast. I'll let you go and On behalf of all the besties. Thank you for giving us two hours and deeply engaging on these topics That's like thank you. I really enjoyed it All right, this I think went spectacularly well Let's go around the horn here and get immediate reactions freedberg. I want to start with you because I think You on the science issues maybe held back a little bit and let him speak We didn't have much of a dialogue with him. I'd say we we all kind of had a few opening Statements but let him kind of speak his mind. I don't know. We'll see how the episode plays With listeners it was really him having a platform to speak his mind for the past you know two hours And you know, it's interesting. I mean obviously he's a candidate that's challenging the the current sitting president for his own parties nomination So you know really kind of You know interesting moment to participate in and you know, but we did kind of give him the platform to kind of speak his mind I think my observation is this guy Robert clearly has A very deep-rooted anti-establishment energy and That plays through in many of his points of view anti-establishment kind of Energy I think manifests as both conspiracy theories where you know as people have kind of classified some of his claims Which typically you know involved looking at call it correlation or circumstance but not necessarily having the causality Uh or the tie to demonstrate or or have proof of point or evidence of point And I think that that's really where he trips me up on a couple of points personally Which ones would you say other points that trip you most where were you like? Uh, I think the general statement that there are kind of you know embedded Interests in government is a good general statement. Okay, you start to try and tie together different kind of Correlations or circumstances and say that's evidence. It's not really it doesn't resonate crew with me as someone who who likes to kind of see empirical Truth kind of be demonstrated I think some of these points around we know that pfoAs one you know one of these products one of these chemistries He talked about that's in the environment They're very damaging to the environment. They're very damaging the human health And there are others that he makes claims around that don't have that same level of evidence But they all get kind of bucketed together that all this stuff is bad that all nuclear is bad Because they're you know is a Facility that was built in the 1950s and 1960s that had some degree of bad engineering and what some might argue isn't necessarily a major hazard Is radioactive leak but has above kind of standards of radiation leak and therefore all nuclear is threatening Those are the sorts of things that kind of trip me up with him that one can up a little bit. Yeah as well The nuclear issue that matters to me this is all just bullshit talking rambling about social issues and you know Like what the fuck are we gonna do with education and wars none of it fucking matters if we cannot solve the debt and budget crisis Problem in this country we are running into the ground the United States is really just I know you do and I think the US is in a tight-getting moment that then you're key issue So for me, this is the thing that I told you guys I'm focused on with every candidate is how much do you think about the prioritization Of the fiscal the federal budget. How do you think about the debt level and how do you think about the boundary conditions? And it's clear that that's not really a concrete part of his platform nor is it by the way for any other candidate that I've seen so far I do That that's kind of where I sit and it's very unpopular. Chimoff. Let's have your response here to I think it's good to have your opinion I just think that your opinion is an opinion and you present it as this canonical fact and that's what I have An issue with I just think that's intellectually not accurate So I respect the fact that you think that that's an issue But I think there's a lot of smart people that would say that's not the issue that you think it is and there are other issues Where did you find yourself, Chimoff in this process? agreeing with him or Disagreing with him all political candidates At some point have a fork in the road Which is that they're going to be a truth teller of their own truth or they're going to be conformist to talking points To try to offend the least amount of people okay And the first path is much riskier But it actually has much larger discontinuous outcomes i.e. Trump The other path is a good antidote to the first path When the first path is what's in power and you saw Biden take that path So for me, I don't agree with some of the things that he said in fact there are things like nuclear which I just think he's wrong about sure But what do I appreciate is that there is a version of his truth That is researched and reasoned from his own lived experience as well as history and facts And then he's also willing to say I just don't know enough about it So let me rethink it and then come back to you. I thought the comment about you know school choice was an example Right and I think that that's healthy so on balance I would rather have candidates in that first bucket Which are truth tellers that have the potential to cause disagreement Versus the placators who say nothing And this is where I do agree with freeberg whatever the issues are that may be important The point is placating doesn't work anymore and you need some kind of Confrontation on hard topics for there to be any progress now and so I prefer those kinds of people that are able to draw hard line agitators Non-conform and I personally am so I've always been and I have been very anti-establishment the idea of Terrying down all these institutions of power gives me glee. I find it gleeful Sacks when we look at this This incredible, you know almost two-hour conversation we had here I think we did hold him and force him on certain issues more than you would normally get an in interview without being sensational. We didn't lead with vaccines. We didn't lead with Culture words we talked about really important issues Where did you find yourself in most agreement with him and where did you find yourself in least agreement with him? Well, I want to make sure we see the forest for the trees here because I think you can disagree with this or that tree You can get lost down the rabbit hole of some of these very technical scientific debates But here's the forest is you've got this sion of wealth and privilege who comes from the most prominent famous democratic family and he was set in his life to go become an environmental lawyer who go fight against big corporate Environmental polluters and somewhere along the way He realized it wasn't just big corporations is the problem It was the agencies the government agencies that were supposed to be regulating them And he realized that there was a revolving door going on between industry and these agencies And so he ended up litigating not just against big companies, but against government agencies I think that's a really interesting place for a candidate to come from and what you heard him say or what what I took away from it Is that he has a very sophisticated critique of regulatory capture and it goes beyond just The environmental area it goes also to big pharma and it goes to the military industrial complex When he's talking about all these unnecessary wars that the United States has gotten into and who can doubt that after we spent 20 years And eight trillion dollars bogged down and forever wars the Middle East who can doubt That the military does a complex to have played a malign role in our foreign policy and we've got You know all these generals when they retire from the Pentagon they go right onto the boards these defense contractors So there's enough right about his critique that I think you can't dismiss it You can't just say this guy's a conspiracy theorist or a nut He's saying too many things that I know to be true And there's a lot of other areas where I don't know what the truth is But he is making I'd say sensible arguments. He's presenting data and he's asking you to challenge him on the data So in any event I think he's got this very interesting critique of regulatory capture What he's basically saying is that we have a ruling elite in this country that is managing the country for its own benefit And that is screwing the middle class and that critique actually is very similar to what Trump and DeSantis and people on the right are saying The only difference is that I think people on the right are blaming ideology They're saying that the ruling elite is following this woke ideology What Kennedy is saying that is at the ruling class is is following the money But you know what think of both be right. I think these critiques are very compatible So look you might disagree with this or that part of it But I think that this overall critique the forest you know forget about the trees I think this forest could find purchase With the electorate because I think people just feel like there's something true about this What I will say is this is exactly how Trump got elected and there was a great piece I think it was in the Atlantic when he was running the first time around That talked a lot about the psychology of his appeal That he comes from wealth he comes from the system But he is the anti-system system product that he came out of this machine of wealth this machine of industry This machine of influence and he said this entire system needs to be torn down And if by the way the psychology that they highlighted and and it speaks to Trump not necessarily to Robert But what they highlighted with if you look historically at the rise of authoritarian regimes Coming out of democracies It's typically the folks that are come from an influence of from a point of influence and from the point of privilege and power And they then decided they wanted to tear down the system that produced them and you trust the bully That comes out of the machine versus the outsider who doesn't really know the machine and doesn't really have access And that's partially why I think maybe he has a shot at being the anti-biden Alternative more so perhaps in this go around than Trump is look he's not a bully and he's he's not gonna tear everything down Yeah, listen, I and I've heard him on other interviews And what he said is we need a peaceful revolution. We need to reorganize these government agencies So he's not saying maybe that's why he does win over Trump right maybe he becomes the less extreme He's not the bully, but he's like I know how to dismantle and and you know He's like deals and quite They're incredible free speech supporting the rule of law burgeoning the middle class I mean these are not things that are really controversial in the end and they're good moral right they're good values He's very morally grounded. I think my concern is just the framework for how you kind of Rationalize and and make decisions if you're allowing kind of an influence in you endo And correlation be kind of the driving force instead of having you know Make sure you just at least gather and sort the empirical evidence to make those decisions. That's what he's doing He just reached a different conclusion than you. Yeah, he's just exactly because he's saying that the other conclusion is just the orthodox conclusion Which is nothing to see here. Yeah, by the way, I'm not an orthodox guy and I'm not like following Saxo folks Have said you're pushing RFK Because you think he's a weaker candidate against the Republicans your response No, I don't necessarily think he'd be a weaker candidate for all the reasons we're talking about I think he'd be Preferred full to to Biden in a lot of people's views So so look for me. This is not like partisan I just think he's really interesting. I think he is a breath of fresh air I think there are many aspects of his critique of our system and the corruption of our ruling class that Hit home. I think regulatory capture is a huge issue. I think a lot of these agencies do need to be reorganized Well, it is the invisible hand that we don't know how to quantify well in all these other discussions that we have And he does put his finger on this really ugly uncomfortable truth Which is there's a cloistered set of insiders for which there's a revolving door between power and money and it's going to be very awkward for a small number of people to hear that message as he gets more attention Which is probably why the media industrial complex will not you know will do his best to prevent that message from getting out The media is going to block this guy at every angle because you know why podcast could play a huge role Just like in 2016 social media broke through and played a huge role. Yeah, I think in 2024 I think that podcast could break through podcast will decide the way that unorthodox candidates get their message out It could be the way it's getting their message out because if after two hours of this you don't want to learn more about him Or you're not going to consider him more fully I think it's impossible because he's so well spoken. I should say he's got a moral compass He's got a track record and he's got interesting for tea What he isn't saying is he's not just throwing bombs and There may be things that you can debate with him about his interpretation of What he looks at you know, and that's very fair criticism I think but his critique is well reason and so you have to unpack the nuances of it to understand why he got to it And also to try to prove him wrong that is very powerful because it's not just Him randomly screaming about how things aren't working No, and and I the moments I thought were very important here and especially for the listeners who are listening who are making important decisions I want to maybe change the political system There were multiple times on the issue of cran surgery and I'm going to be very nuanced here with the permission of the parents He said I need to do more research on it on freeberg challenging him about Spending spending he said I need to I need to give that some worth off but broadly speaking You know, I think we can take money out of the military budget and billion dollar plans that don't fly in the rain There were many moments where he he conceded I need to give that some more thought I need to be thoughtful about that That's not something that you typically hear but in a platform like this with You know the nuance that we've created on this platform having discussions And the audience also being nuanced and having depth we know the fans of this podcast are in a lot of positions of power I'm sure a hundred percent or very high percentage of the people listen to this podcast actually vote and are very influential within their own circles I think this kind of platform we have a very deep discussion and somebody could say You know what I need to go deeper on that and think about it when I asked him about weapons in Taiwan And then I said hey, why wouldn't you give an answer that you defend Taiwan Biden gave it So I don't want to check my cargy wouldn't want to do that. That's a really good answer By the way the official the official policy of the United States towards Taiwan is strategic ambiguity Which means we don't say whether we'll defend it it depends on the circumstances And and Biden when he he's now said multiple times that he would defend it and his own staff walked it back Because they said we're not changing strategic ambiguity. So Yeah, I mean the policy he said in that case actually is the United States policy So let me ask you guys a question if he won the democratic nomination And he's up against Trump who do you vote for obvious? Yeah, of course I heard of Kay and I think sacks would have a hard time He won't say who he's voted for previously. I think sacks would vote or a tax is not gonna say are you are you saying? Sacks doesn't like to say he's just a macavallion and Reserving judgment on the general until I know who both candidates are okay He won't even sacks won't even tell us who vote who we voted for I would love for RFK junior beyond the ballot and have that choice for sure And and as possible I would as possible I would vote for him it depends who the other person isn't really because you wouldn't even tell us who you voted for or if you voted in the last election Well, that's my right Jason. I don't have to tell you I just think it's it's intellectually dishonest since you talk about politics so much that I do I think you should tell us who you vote for. I talk about issues. I talk about issues now I decide to balance those issues because every candidate is a complex mix of issues. That's ultimately my decision Yeah, but somebody who injects politics into everything to not just say I'm not the one injecting Go ahead for a second. So to follow up on the question I asked I would love to see Donald Trump come on the show and give him an opportunity to have a conversation and see If folks can have a different point of view coming out of that as well as Joe Biden and maybe some of the other candidates running for the Republican nomination and I want to see if the the points of Focus for us can you know maybe Match up with one or more of these candidates So far I still will come on right We think yeah So Nikki Hall is in and then Trump will do it and then Biden will not I think Trump would do it because he somebody would I mean he had he had he did something with barstool right Jason Do you want to do you want me to do the announcement on the the summit? Oh, please Okay, so but We are confirmed and signed on our venue and so we are confirmed For all in summit 2023 in Los Angeles September 10th through 12 Secure the bag baby. Let's go. We'll put out the um and I think it's gonna be Really exciting because we'll have an opportunity to at this point in the year We have a lot of time to put together a really high quality Agenda for conversations. We each want to have with really amazing people. So I'm excited about that We've kind of started to put together some ideas on what we want to talk about who we want to invite to have those conversations Of us put out some invites so very good job by the way and you'll be leading you're the this is your AI summit So I'm I'm handing everything off to you. I'm helping with the parties basically But you're driving congratulations your team is exceptional. I just want to let the audience know we're doing it together And I mean, I'm stepping back and letting you drive I consider this like you were I care very deeply about Content and I want to you know make sure that we experience yeah, and the experience and have a chance to have the conversations We want to have with the folks we want to talk with so it would nothing could be better than you building on top of the first one And then we just keep going from there to moth and sax if they want to build on it from there There'll be three. This is what everybody wants to know is tickets. There's gonna be three ticket tiers There'll still be a VIP one for 7500 that gets you into the dinners. Oh, sorry Yeah, that's that's an important point the VIP experience this year. We got some feedback on the last go around Um, that we needed to make sure there was a degree of differentiation so the VIP experience will include Special VIP dinners early access to the theater gift bags special sections during the parties. So hopefully it elevates the experience a bit for folks that are able to Pay the higher ticket fee which actually helps support the whole program no bottle service I mean bottle service you put your card But hopefully as a way to kind of support the overall program and keep the cost down for everyone else and then it's a $1,500 General admission pass which includes access to the parties and then we'll still have the scholarship Can I tell you guys a funny story? Yeah, when I joined the ownership group that bought the warriors I heard a rumor Which was that when we were competing it was us versus Ellison To buy the warriors And Ellison had an idea. I don't know if this is true or not This is what I heard that he had a he had an idea for a new stadium And he's like he wanted to make it an ultra VIP stadium And so there's only five thousand seats and I saw like Singapore Airlines first class seats So you go to the stadium to watch do you but it'd be like everybody would be like up close and you could touch and outside Also had a thousand guillotines so you could just yeah I mean, it's hard not for a family to go see the other That's true or not, but I thought it was very fun. It's a crazy expensive now. It's like crazy 100 dollars for nosebleed seats for the dictator Tremoff polyhapatia for David Sacks who set up this episode and Friedberg the Sultan of science. We hope you enjoy this. It's the first of many to come We will still be doing regular dockets. We might have to go to two episodes a week on weeks like this who knows But give us your feedback share the show and we'll see you all at the all in summer We're like your winners ride You We open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with Love you. West. I sweet Besties That's my dog We should all just get a room and just have one big hug your Because they're all just like this like sexual tension. We just need to release the house