Tariffs wind down?; Noem; Ukraine; Iran; Milei; "White Culture"; RFK; Penis-Gate | Yaron Brook Show

Bubble Wall is here from 2311 Racing.

You know it's slower than a pace car waiting at the car wash.

That's when I fire up Chamba Casino.

It turns those slow minutes into fast fun.

With new games every week, you'll never get bored.

Next time you're stuck in the slow lane, speed up with Chamba.

Play now at ChambaCasino.com.

Let's Chamba.

Sponsored by Chamba Casino, no purchase necessary.

BGW GroupFord, we're prohibited by law, 21 plus terms and conditions apply.

The ladder, fundamental principles of freedom, rational self-interest, and individual rights.

This is the Iran Rochelle.

Oh, I need everybody welcome to your own book show on this Friday.

Friday the 13th.

I didn't realize that.

It's the 13th.

Those of you who are superstitious out there, it's bad only.

Anyway, I think we've got a fun show today.

I think we've got some entertaining topics.

An usual, less serious.

We've got, yeah, I mean, the white culture, I think you'll find quite entertaining.

I would say definitely an entertaining video.

And then, of course, we cap it all off.

We finish it all off and head into the weekend with the discussion of penis gate.

I didn't make that term up.

It's from the Wall Street Journal.

So don't ask me and it has nothing to do with Jeffy Epstein.

So you'll have to wait.

You'll have to wait to find out.

Yeah, huh.

You'll have to wait to find out about penis gate.

It's got to do with the Olympics.

It's a big scandal in the Olympics.

But yeah, you know, so let's get started and get rolling.

I didn't want to mention there will be shows over the weekend Saturday and Sunday Saturday.

I think both days expected to be around 2 p.m. East Coast time.

Maybe Sunday 1 p.m. East Coast time.

But shows both days.

Topics to be determined.

I'll figure them out.

Hopefully tomorrow.

Next Sunday will be a member's only show, I think.

But we will see.

All right.

Let's jump in.

So the lead story today is tariffs.

And some good news.

Good news on the telephone.

At least according to financial times.

Now, this is just financial time.

So they might be wrong.

But it seems to be some verification or from other sources as well.

But it seems like the Trump administration has discovered something unpredictable completely

about tariffs.

Something completely surprising that nobody could have anticipated at all in advance.

It seems that they've now realized that tariffs are actually increasing the price of every day.

Items.

I don't like beer and soda cans and things like that.

And it's planning to scale back some tariffs on steel and aluminum in particular.

I mean, shocking.

I mean, who would have expected that?

Who?

Who could have predicted that this would happen?

So a number of different things.

The as we've talked about the tariffs on steel and aluminum are causing places of things

made from steel and aluminum to increase significantly.

Increase significantly.

Oh, God.

I'm sorry.

I'm reading a comment from Wyatt, which brings a smile to my face.

What can I say?

We'll get to that in a minute.

We'll get to that in the super chat.

But no, I didn't know and don't know anything about this lawsuit.

And probably will not comment on the lawsuit either.

But anyway, Donald Trump.

So tariffs on steel and aluminum make products that are made from steel and aluminum.

More expensive, including beer cans that are made from aluminum and soda cans made from aluminum.

And the prices are gone up because aluminum prices are gone up because of tariffs on aluminum.

It's very, very, very, very, very, very predictable.

Very predictable.

So this is all about affordability.

Remember, this is all about people's angst about about prices going up.

Yeah, tariffs do that.

They don't cause inflation, but they call some prices to go up.

They don't cause all prices to go up.

Tariffs are not a monetary phenomena.

They don't shift them in that direction.

But what happens is some prices go up.

They go up the prices of things that affected directly or indirectly by tariffs.

Other prices, you know, don't move necessarily.

They might go down.

But the tariff goods go up.

And so, for example, beer cans, soda cans, aluminum, that's one cost.

So according to officials in the Commerce Department and US Trade Representative's office,

they now believe, shockingly again, it's surprising.

I mean, obviously they don't have an economist in either the Commerce Department or the US Trade Office.

You'd think they'd have economists, but obviously they don't because there's no economist in the world who didn't know this is what would happen.

They now believe the tariffs were hurting consumers by raising prices for goods,

just as, such as pie tins and food and drink cans.

According to Financial Times, Trump's tariff blitzes pushed US duties to the highest level since before the Second World War.

But the President has repeatedly walked back some of his stifist levies and made voter-angie anger at US affordability crisis.

It goes on, the ladies move, on the metals tariffs.

It's also designed to bring clarity, to bring clarity, to an increasingly complicated law-being process in Washington that has emerged in Trump imposed levies.

Again, who would have known that tariffs lead to colonialism and lead to lobbying and lead to every single business out there trying to get exclusions and protections from the tariffs because they're bad for American businesses and bad for American consumers?

But again, nobody knew this.

This has all been an amazing miraculous revelation that has been achieved by the Department of Commerce, so good for the Trump administration.

I'm in a good mood because of peniscate.

It goes on, the administration has so far largely allowed US businesses to lobby for products made of steel of aluminum made by rival farming producers to be hit with tariffs in the so-called inclusion process.

You see Americans who now have to pay more for their aluminum after charge higher prices.

But the importer that imports that final product doesn't have to pay tariffs, at least, supposedly.

So at the Trump administration has increased the tariffs on the foreign producer coming in so that Americans could compete.

So even when they didn't intend to put tariffs originally, they did put tariffs in order to protect the American company that gets really complicated.

The process has been run by the Commerce Department, which has mostly approved requests from domestic companies, which have cited the national security risks associated with goods, including bicycle parts.

Because, I mean, God, what would we do from a national security perspective if war broke out and we couldn't manufacture bicycle parts in the United States?

I mean, these people are insane, crazy, ignorant, stupid, corrupt.

I don't know what would you want to use and then extrapolate those to Trump.

Again, from the British times, but the mechanism is led to sprawling lists of household goods, subjected to tariffs of up to 50% on their metal content.

Now, some people I know, some people I know will say, you are, you're just using mainstream media sources.

How do you know the financial times is right?

Because I've been saying this from the day tariffs were imposed, because this is just basic, simple economics 101, because this is easily verifiable.

You can go out and look at prices and check and see.

And indeed, all of you out there who use alternative media sources, yeah, you'll never read about the damage tariffs do.

You'll never read about who pays for the tariffs. You'll never read about the actual cost of them.

You'll never read about how the, in fact, domestic prices, because your alternative sources are obsessed with defending anything Trump does.

And they don't do reporting.

They don't actually go and look and talk to sources and actually do investigative reporting at all.

It continues. Officials felt, felt. The television was too complicated to enforce.

Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Victory Lane? Yeah, it's even better with Chumba by my side.

Race to ChumbaCasino.com. Let's Chumba.

No purchase necessary, VTW Group, voidware prohibited by law, CTNCs, 21 plus sponsored by ChumbaCasino.

And need to be simplified.

It's one interpretation, too complicated to enforce.

Countries including the UK, Mexico and Canada, as well as EU members, could stand to benefit from any using of US tariffs and goods made of steel and aluminum.

Why not get rid of the tariffs on steel and aluminum to begin with? That'll simplify everything.

One European business leader, who declined to be named, said they knew of a company that had sent four identical containers of machinery to the US and was charged different rates for each one.

The Commerce Department last offered US companies an opportunity to nominate foreign suppliers to be hit with tariffs in October.

But Blue passed its own 60-day deadline to Greenlight New Levy, so note that the Commerce Department has an official policy where they go out to American companies and tell them,

you can nominate things that we will put tariffs on. Please nominate things for us to add tariffs on in order to protect you.

I mean, at some point you have to say, yeah, it's just insane. It's just incredibly, it's so stupid, it's so nuts. What is the point?

I mean, one of the biggest problems with the tariffs, indeed, are not just the price hikes, those are simple.

But the bigger problem might be the complexity. There are 232 tariffs, plus the inclusion process and even if the Supreme Court gets rid of IEPA, then what happens?

And what is Trump going to use instead and how is that going to probably increase even more?

So, there's no end to it.

Indeed, it sounds like the White House has communicated to companies, corporations, that have adjustments in the works, but details and timing remain unclear.

I wonder if anybody treated on that. I wonder if anybody treated on that.

Huh, insight information, maybe.

Hey, pretty insane.

What's the journal today? Yesterday, I think Peter and Avala came up with a letter basically claiming that foreigners are paying U.S. tariffs.

And today, what's the journal published a letter by Scott Linsker, basically challenging.

Peter and Avala.

And Avala's argument is basically this.

The United States is the only buyer of certain goods. The United States market is so big, we dominate the buyer.

So, when a Chinese company has goods that it needs to sell, it can't sell to anybody else.

Otherwise, the United States. So, given the tariffs and they still want to sell into the United States, they have to lower prices.

So, they have to absorb the cost of their tariffs.

And indeed, that would be the case. If there were many suppliers and only one buyer, the suppliers would have to absorb the prices.

But that is, of course, ludicrous. It's typical of Peter and Avala was complete and uttered detachment from reality, logic, and economics.

But other than that, Peter and Avala was phenomenal.

Here's Scott Linsker. If the U.S. actually had the market power, he describes foreign exporters would in many cases lower their prices to keep selling in the goods here.

That's offsetting the tariffs domestic costs. In practice, however, the United States hasn't been hegemonic in global markets for many years.

Thanks to the proliferation of regional supply chains and growing economies outside our borders.

Probably since the 1950s, we haven't been hegemonic in that sense.

Given the relatively low and declining U.S. share of global merchandise trade, economists predicted in 2024 that producers abroad would respond to U.S. tariffs not by lowering their price, but by diverting trade elsewhere and forcing Americans to bear the tariffs cost.

This is exactly what happened. God, economists correct, again, at least the three market ones.

China, for example, saw its U.S. exports decline in 2025, yet had strong overall export growth and a record trade surplus thanks to higher sales in other markets.

U.S. non-fuel import prices, which include discounts and rebates, but exclude tariffs, would show major declines.

If exporters were eating Mr. Trump's tariffs, they would lower their prices and say, they haven't.

But they were slightly up in 2025. They can actually, they feel like they can actually charge a little bit more.

Many studies, not only from Harvard and then Keel Institute, which Mr. Navarro blithely dismisses, but also the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank, the Tax Foundation, economists, and Goldman Sachs, among others, have examined real world transactions and found that U.S. companies and consumers are bearing almost all the tariff burden via higher retail prices or input costs.

There are exceptions, but the data confirm they are not the rule. Mr. Navarro needed, however, read wonky economic papers to see that Americans are paying Mr. Trump's tariffs, God forbid.

Navarro claims to be an economist, read a wonky economic paper.

Instead, he could ask the thousands of American business owners and farmers who say they're suffering under the weight of Mr. Trump's ill-conceived trade war.

They have voiced these concerns and shareholder earnings calls, media interviews, court challenges, bankruptcy filings, regulatory comments, and town hall meetings.

Hundreds of small business owners from across the country have even formed a coalition called We Pay the Tariffs.

These good folks would jump at the chance to go to the White House and tell Mr. Navarro who exactly is paying these taxes.

If that is, they had enough lobbying clout to get through the fund door.

And of course, there's a consequence of all this.

Another article by Scott Lintergum published yesterday in Bloomberg has the title of global trade is leaving the U.S. behind.

As we've talked about many times in this show, other countries are moving forward with trade agreements.

Here's a quote from the article.

America's departure from the epicent of global trade began years ago and has accelerated in recent months.

According to World Trade Organization, the U.S. share of global merchandise trade inputs plus exports in the third quarter was the lowest for that period of the year since 2014.

And the draw and the drop from 2024 was larger than the cumulative loss between 2015 and 2024.

Bloomberg News adds that inbound container volume through North America, some 80% of which is the U.S. went from the world leader to a laggard last year.

Boston Consulting Group projects the trend will continue in the years ahead with the U.S. share of world trade falling from 12% in 2024 to 9% in 2034 because of policies pursued by the Trump administration.

And these are going to be harder reverse. Remember, Biden didn't reverse any of the tariff policies that Trump put in place in his first term.

Even bigger moves he writes are happening beneath the surface, especially regarding China.

When Trump fired his opening tariff salvo in 2018, the U.S. absorbed roughly 19% of Chinese exports.

But the share tumbled to 11% by the end of last year. China total exports and trade surplus of nevertheless continue to grow because exporters there targeted other markets, notably in Southeast Asia, but also in Africa, Europe and Latin America.

So there is a great reallocation going on.

Many of those other nations he writes are trading more with each other and relatively less with the U.S.

Last year, Indian exports to China, the Middle East and North Africa increased even as high U.S. tariffs weighed on sales in America.

Brazil, Chile, Argentina and Peru enjoyed record exports, only again mainly to increase trade with China in the rest of the world, not the U.S.

The U.S. remains a massive economy, of course, and not every market has followed China's lead.

Canada and Mexico still depend on the U.S. economy and are highly integrated into the North American supply chain.

But that's something Trump seems to really want to change, right?

I mean, the consequence of these trade policies, because the American economy is so big, are relatively small.

But over time, if you compound the effect over years, over the next 10 years, where they expect the U.S. share of world trade to decline so much, it is huge.

That is, we as Americans become poorer. We as Americans have a lower standard of living and quality of life.

That is the outcome. That is the consequence of Trump's trade policies.

Over the long term, the U.S. retreat from the global economy will make Washington less influential as economic integration deepens elsewhere and other governments set new standards in trade agreements to which America is not a party.

It will make the U.S. less resilient as nationalized supply chains create single choke points, like the one that caused the U.S. baby formula market to collapse in 2022.

It will make America less secure as the commercial ties that historically reduced on conflict risk become more brittle and attenuated.

And it will make the U.S. poorer as multinational specialization gives way to duplicative inefficiencies.

Others refusal to follow Trump's protectionist lead shows that most governments and companies understand these costs.

After 10 years of U.S. retreat from global economy, it's unclear if anyone in Washington still does.

So, yeah, Democrats or Republicans, the one thing they share is hatred of globalization.

So, that is where we are with regard to trade.

Washington, when a major story, another one you won't read in alternative media, you have to be part of the mainstream media to actually have reporters who actually do the digging and actually go find all this out.

I mean, I'm not going to read much, I'm not going to read you this, I'll read you a summary of it.

But I think it gives you a sense of the competence, the stupidity, the pettiness, the narcissism, not just of Trump, but of many of his cabinet members.

In this case, Chrissy Norm at the Department of Homeland Security, an important position, a massive department, second only maybe to defense and size and influence.

And of course, she's the one who called the two people killed by DHS, by ICE, domestic terrorists.

I mean, she's just a liar and an evader and just sucks up to Trump at every opportunity.

But way beyond that, she's obsessed with media appearances.

You know, she's obsessed with appearing on TV, she's obsessed with the image, she's obsessed with Trump loving him.

Here's kind of a summary of the Wall Street Journal article.

Throughout her tenure as Secretary of Homeland Security, a sprawling agency charged with carrying out Trump's central campaign promise of mass deportation.

Chrissy Norm was attempted to burnish her personal stardom at every turn.

With Cohen Lewandowski, Trump's former campaign manager at her side, she has staged a headline grabbing immigration crackdown,

while sidelineing rivals and dissenters.

She's carried out confrontational operations over the objections of longtime immigration officials, who warned such flashy displays will discredit the department's ultimate mission, according to two dozen Cohen and former administration officials.

Instead, she's made the case that her approach would lead to more arrests and as well as induce more people to leave on their own.

Within DHS, Norm and Lewandowski frequently berate senior level staff, get polygraph tasks to employees that don't they don't trust and a fired employees in one incident.

Lewandowski fired a US coast, a coast guard pilot after Norm's blanket was left behind on a plane.

Now, according to the story, they then had a immediately higher the pilot back, like within a few hours, because they realized that without the pilot, they were stranded where they were.

There was nobody else who could fly the plane, so they had to rehire him in order to fly him back.

Because of a blanket, yes, because of a blanket.

Since taking office, the Secretary has also closely monitored how her national profile compared to other administration officials.

Top of a list was Tom Holman, the guy who went to Minneapolis to say face and is withdrawn ice or Minneapolis.

Trump's borders are with whom she has been in a battle for power and influence inside the administration.

I guess she thought she was the borders are.

What does Holman do it?

No, routinely berated staff.

If she saw Holman on TV and kept track both of their appearances to make sure she was on TV more than him.

According to people familiar with the matter, it's like narcissism, like spreads.

Or maybe she was always narcissistic, that's what attracted Trump to her.

Though some in Trump's inner circle have tried to persuade the president to fire no.

And Lewandowski, according to administration officials, he has so far resisted, saying publicly he has no plans to dismiss her.

The DHS spokesman said no one serves at the pleasure of the president and has successfully clamped down in inefficiencies to say billions of dollars.

Calling her efforts a rowing success.

She said all officials are on the same page and in agreement on the president's immigration crackdown.

You can find the full article in the Wall Street Journal.

It's just full of revelations about this crap and spending and the waste and the abuse and the mismanagement and, again, infighting and disagreements.

And the consequence of that infighting is you send people to Minnesota on a train to do what they're supposed to do and you get people killed.

They're real consequences, real consequences to administration that is this amateur and pathetic and uninterested in what's good for the American people.

You see that with the tariffs, if they were interested in the maker people, tariffs would be much much lower or nonexistent.

And you see that with no, she doesn't get about the American people. She just wants a pure intelligence. She wants opportunity. She wants to show Trump she can deport more people than anybody else.

Standard is not truth or doing a good job. Standard is piezing Trump and the standard is being on TV a lot, getting your face on TV.

Well, when Americans get shot, you're going to be in TV a lot, so huge advantage, getting American shot.

I mean, what's going on with these people, philosophically, they're narcissists. This is what they want.

So they've learned from Trump, but they're probably always narcissists. That's why they go into politics.

And they want that picture in the newspaper. They want that used to be the case. Now they want to be on TV or on Twitter or whatever, whatever the medium is that they want attention on.

But yeah, this is who they are. This is who we voted in. We voted in a narcissist and chief. And he's appointed a bunch of narcissists to run various departments of the government.

Alright, a few items on Ukraine.

Hey, it's Cole Swindell. After I give everything I've got to land a perfect vocal, I usually take five before jumping into the next track.

And I've learned exactly how to recharge in that time. Some folks grab coffee. I hit a quick good lookspin.

Next thing you know, the break is just as fun as land down the track. A better break makes for a better take.

Need a break? Let's jump. No purchase necessary. BGW Group void were prohibited by law. 21 plus TNC supply sponsored by Chamba Casino.

This is Trump today talking about the the piece deal between Russia and Ukraine. And I have told you I've cited lava of the Russian Foreign Minister a few days ago about how, yeah, I mean they're not retreating from any,

anything that they have demanded, including vast quantities of territory in Ukraine and demilitarization and no security guarantees and all these things that the Russians are not budging.

They're not moving an inch on any of those things. And indeed lava was blaming Trump for reneging on supposedly a deal that he had made with Putin in Alaska, which you know, I don't think Trump knows he made a deal with Putin.

So it really looked like it was the Russians really holding up any piece deal. Well, this is Trump today quote, Zelensky gonna have to get moving.

Russia wants to make a deal. And Zelensky is going to have to get moving. Otherwise, he's going to miss a great opportunity. He has to move.

So Trump, no matter how you spin it, no matter what happens in the world, no matter how many people talk to him, no matter how much sense they try to drive into him, no matter how many facts they present to him, no matter what Putin does or says, no matter what love does or says Trump.

And his mini self with cough, it's always Ukraine's fault. It's always Ukraine's fault. Trump, I mean Russia can do no wrong. Russia, the good guys, they want peace, they begging for peace, they constantly don't want to do anything for peace.

Zelensky just hasn't surrendered yet. Zelensky needs a surrender. And until he surrenders, I'll be no piece and Trump is saying, you got a surrender.

It's just, I keep saying it's unbelievable, but it's unbelievable. How corrupt, dumb, or I'm not sure what exactly this president is.

I know I just lost another 20 subscribers. It is what it is. I have to call it the way it is. Putin can do no wrong according to Trump. And again, I don't think Putin has anything on him. Like some people think I just think he admires. Put it. He loves Putin. It's a bromance.

Mike says it's no longer unbelievable. Sure. It's just God.

I don't know what to say to you guys. It's possibly because I've been saying it for 10 years now. And I feel like I'm just repeating myself, repeating myself, but I have to because that's the news. That's what's going on. Trump is is worse than any of us thought.

Certainly as bad as I thought, maybe worse than I thought, and much worse than many of you guys thought. And every day, every single day, there are multiple instances of this.

And yet many of you still go, yeah, but he's better. Come on. Is he really? Really?

All right, speaking of Ukraine, while Trump has cut off eight Ukraine, I mean, Ukraine gets annoyed from the United States. I mean, intelligence information. And we sell sell sell SEL weapons to Europe, NATO, and then to the Europeans.

And then Europeans give it to Ukraine, indeed, while Trump is cut off all eight Ukraine. And now he's trying to force them to surrender to Russia. Ukraine has gotten much more aid from Europe.

And there's actually arguably, you know, improving his position vis-a-vis Russia. Russia's advance were very slow. There we were slower now. In some funds, Ukraine is making slow progress.

And if you look at the amount of military equipment flowing into Ukraine right now from Europe, from Europe,

you know, this is going to be Europe could produce a lot more military stuff for Ukraine than Russia can.

The Russians will not be able to keep up. They won't be able to advance in 2026. And they're likely to start falling behind and starting to lose territory in the future.

I mean, there's just that much military aid flowing in. Remember, I told you about this factory in Germany that's not producing more artillery shells than the entire production in the United States.

I mean, if the Germans really get serious about military production, they can produce. They can produce.

So, yeah, it's in addition. It's kind of funny story. I don't know what to make of this. You guys, supposedly, China is now agreed as of today.

The Chinese foreign minister met with with Ukraine's foreign minister. And they have agreed to provide energy aid to Ukraine.

I guess there's a lot of damage, of course, the energy infrastructure to power plants and things like that. The Chinese are very good at building power plants. And they're providing energy.

They want to provide energy expertise to the Ukrainians.

Why it says, the German Islamists will become a mighty machine. How many Islamists are they in Germany? I mean, I'm really curious.

Anybody have a number for what percentage of the German population, not a Muslim, but Islamists? What percentage?

Yeah, I'm curious because this stupidity, and it is stupidity after all, Germany's not Islamist and are going to become Islamist.

Islamism is a threat to Germany. It's a past, but as Islamism threatens the existence of Germany, give me a break.

Anyway, China and Ukraine signing deals of cooperation.

America can, but Chinese can. In addition, Zelensky today in Germany, in Munich, this is quoting Zelensky.

Today I have received the first jointly produced attack drone. This is a modern battle tested Ukrainian technology powered by AI built in Germany.

It will strike scout and protect our soldiers. This year, 10,000 drones manufactured here will go to Ukraine.

So Germany, minus the Islamist, has opened the first Ukrainian co-production lines in Europe, so they are working with the Ukrainians to build drones.

Overall, by the end of the year, 10 more joint ventures producing Ukrainian drones are expected to be launched, I think, all over Europe.

So Ukraine has among the best drones in the world, not best in terms of technology, best in terms of usability, best in terms of battlefield proof of concept.

And they're building those drones all over Europe, which means Europe is building massive capacity and drone manufacturing, maybe more so than the United States.

And it's providing those drones to Ukraine because they're building them together, so again, more positive steps.

And finally, it appears that Ukraine has a laser, anti-drone laser called Sunray Laser, that can silently take out Russian drones.

They'd be testing a silent, undetectable laser system capable of downing drones instantly, like invisible lightning, at a fraction of the cost of US equivalents.

I wonder if Israel has any involvement here. I hope so, although I doubt it, given Israel's reluctance to sell any military equipment to Ukraine.

The truck-mounted Sunray could be bought for a few hundred thousand dollars, making it a cost-effective, high-tech defense against Russia's constant drone attacks.

So there's the New York Post. That would be interesting and very cool.

We talked about the fact that the US is building laser systems against drones. That's maybe what happened around the El Paso if we're shutting down, if the US was testing those lasers.

Israel is now deployed laser systems against drones. They have them deployed underground, ready to take down Ukrainian or Israel drones.

And now Ukraine has laser technology to down drone. So drones might be the future of the battlefield, but if lasers are effective and fast and quick and cheap in downing those drones, maybe that basically takes away the advantage the drones have.

I mean, warfare is evolving, and it's not clear in five years where that evolution will lead to. Not clear at all.

All right, quickly, Iran. We've talked about this, but now it's official, I guess. Trump has said that he has asked the USS Gerald Ford and its carrier strike group to be deployed to the Middle East from the Caribbean.

Remember, they're not far from here. I'm in Puerto Rico. This is the carrier group that was there was a raid again, Venezuela.

Again, as part of the effort to put pressure on the Iranians, this will be the second aircraft carrier group to be stationed in the Middle East together with the USS Abraham Lincoln, who has been there for more than two weeks.

The Ford is the largest aircraft carrier in the US fleet, the most advanced one. And this means, you know, it's going to be really, really interesting to see what this means.

Because it'll take anyway from two weeks to a month for the USS probably a month for the USS Ford to get to the Middle East. Does that mean any attack on Iran is being delayed now by a month?

Is there going to be an attack on Iran? Is anybody really planning one? What is exactly going on? But always it's just a pressure thing and all the assets will come home when Trump gets a deal, which will probably be a weak deal, because I can't imagine Iran agreeing to anything stronger. They would rather be attacked, I think.

So this is going to be a real test. We'll see. But nothing happening anytime soon, at least if you believe this story now could be all diversion tactics and the attack is imminent.

We will see what happens tomorrow has been declared a demonstration date by the son of the Shah who has asked Iranians all over the world, including Iran itself, demonstrate tomorrow against the regime.

Demonstrations will be occurring all over Europe and assume in some places in the United States.

And we'll see if Demonstrations go out into the streets in Iran to what extent is the murder of 30 to 40,000 Iranians going to slow down the Iranians going to stop the Iranians from actually demonstrating in the street.

It's going to be interesting in the meantime, while the Iranians are killing their own people in mass, the Iranian embassy in Paris hosted a large lavish reception for the 47th anniversary of the so-called Islamic Revolution.

And it was attended by lots of high-ranking guests, European guests, French guests.

I mean, again, unbelievable that the West can look at what's happening in Iran and just pretend it's not happening.

Treat the Iranians just like they have always.

Treat this as a regime as a legitimate regime.

I mean, maybe you say, look, in a sense, I'm not going to spend money or blood in sending people to fight in Iran.

That's fine, I understand that completely.

That doesn't mean you go to an Iranian party.

That doesn't mean you celebrate Ayatullah.

It doesn't mean you whitewash the regime.

At the very least, you would expect European high-ranking officials to denounce the regime, to call them out, to take them all stand against them.

Me? I would shut down all the embassies in Europe, send them all packing home, kick them out of every international organization that they still belong to.

But that's me. I would have bombed them a long time ago, so there would be no need of any of that.

But they are doing nothing.

Zero, zilch, nada.

That's pretty amazing.

Hey, it's Baba Wallace from 2311 Racing.

You know what it feels like forever?

Sitting on a plane waiting for takeoff.

Good thing I've got Jamba Casino, with daily boost in social casino games on tap.

This is a kind of fun that makes time fly.

Why not turbocharge your downtime? Play now at JambaCasino.com. Let's Jamba.

Sponsored by Jamba Casino, no purchase necessary, VGW GroupFord, where prohibited by law, 21 plus terms and conditions apply.

All right, good news.

Milay, I told you about this.

Milay, you remember, he passed a reform of some of the taxes.

Make it, make it, you know, basically give amnesty for people who are holding dollars.

And so that's all passed.

And that's great.

And then yesterday, before yesterday, the Senate and Argentina passed Milay's labor reform bill,

which makes it much easier to hire people, to fire people, a little more difficult for unions to go and strike.

Now, it's not a perfect bill, it's not less if it capitalism and employment.

He doesn't have the votes for any of that, even if you wanted to.

But it is a huge win to liberalize the labor market, the peronists,

the fascist like socialist opposition.

Oppose this.

Now, Milay had to make about 28 concessions, you know, so changes in the bill in order to get it passed.

But it ultimately did pass, revolutionizing, revolutionizing employment in Argentina.

Not perfect, far from perfect, but much, much better.

And in the meantime, while the Senators were debating the bill, a small group of protesters were outside throwing more tough cocktails,

admired police, who responded with water cannons and tear gas.

But other than that, very little, the Argentina people broadly support Milay's reforms.

This is a bill, the passage of this bill, will give some indication to investors and others about Milay's ability to actually get reforms done.

Will give an indication of how strong he is politically.

Remember, he still doesn't have a majority in parliament.

He's just significantly bolstered his position there after the last election.

Unfortunately, things like Milay wanted to make it possible to have companies pay the worker directly into virtual wallets,

like something called the Mercado Libra, which is an electronic wallet that people haven't used quite a bit in Argentina.

He wanted employees to be able to deposit wages directly there, banks opposed it, lobbied heavily in the Senate.

So now you still have to deposit it in a bank.

So things like that, he had to give into.

But which is sad, because there is a real effort in the FinTech community in Argentina to try to disrupt the world of finance.

So we will see what happens.

But here are some key changes.

It's going to lower companies non-salary costs, such as social security contributions.

So the employer's employing people is just going to be cheaper.

Seven funds.

It creates an obligation.

And obligatory fund employers contribute into to finance seven payments.

But this fund, it's giving employees a lot more flexibility in terms of dealing with sevens, whereas previous laws dictated it clearly.

It also now is the definition of what is sevens.

So a bunch of things that just, they reduce collective bargaining, make it a little harder.

Again, revolutionary fund, Argentina may be enough for the rest of us.

And by the way, this bill also removes taxes on sales of cars, cell phones, and other consumer goods, so it reduces taxes.

Argentina today has the highest cost of labor in Latin America, significantly higher than Brazil, Mexico, and what four times, five times higher than Chile.

This is aimed at dramatically reducing those costs, dramatically reducing those costs.

So yeah, good news. Malay continues with his reforms.

And I think this will have a long term and incredibly positive impact on the Argentina economy.

It takes time for these things to have an impact, but we'll have an impact.

Hey, it's Cole Swindell. After I give everything I've got to land a perfect vocal, I usually take five before jumping into the next track.

And I've learned exactly how to recharge in that time. Some folks grab coffee, I hit a quick good lookspin.

Next thing you know, the break is just as fun as land down the track.

A better break makes for a better take. Need a break? Let's chumbo.

No purchase necessary, BGW Group void were prohibited by law, 21 plus TNC supply, sponsored by Chumbo Casino.

I know to the more entertaining part of the show today.

Let me show you this first video.

So Trump has nominated a known kind of anti-Semitic anti-Israel racist individual to be kind of the undersecretary department of state, undersecretary for like international organizations, something like that.

His name is Jimmy Call and Jimmy Call testified before Congress I think it was this morning.

No, it was yesterday, sorry, it was yesterday, yesterday morning.

And some of the stuff is pretty entertaining. It's pretty funny.

So this is an exchange between him. This is Jimmy Call.

And Senator Moofy from Connecticut.

And I'll let you watch it and notice whoops, that's the next video.

And just notice how well, I mean, you'll see, you don't, you don't have to, I don't have to tell you what the news.

I think I'm ready. So here it is.

Tell me how you define white identity and what you think is being erased about white identity.

Certain types of Anglo-derived culture that comes from our history.

Let me think about this.

He's written a book on white identity by the way. So just to see, you know, this is not a new question for him.

So watch as he maneuvers around this question. It's, I think, super entertaining.

You know, Senator, I would say if you were to look at the book by one of your former Senate colleagues born fighting about the sort of Scotch Irish military culture and certain pride that went with that, that would.

So what identity is Scotch Irish military culture?

Interesting.

Be one example. Obviously, you could have sub elements of that culture. You could have Italians. You could have Irish.

Did you know that the Italians are sub culture of the Scotch Irish military culture?

I mean, the guy is digging himself in a deep, deep, deep hole, deep hole.

Italians? Scotch, Scotch, Irish. Yeah, Scotch, Irish. Some Scots.

I mean, we could go into a whole history of Scotland and immigration to the United States.

A lot of Scots came to the US. Some of them came to Ireland.

That is, all Scots immigrated to Ireland and ultimately immigrated to the United States.

So there's this Scott Irish, which is going to be, you know, Protestant Irish, a Protestant Scott.

And, you know, a lot of poor Scots emigrated, a lot of educated Scots.

You know, Scotland had a disproportionate impact on the founding of America.

But white identity. Notice he was asked to define white identity.

Is Scotch Irish Italians a sub culture of Scotch Irish? That's interesting.

Those are in many ways more. You're worried about white culture. You're not worried about.

You're now retreating to ethnic identity. You don't speak about ethnic identity.

You speak about white identity. So tell me the values that stitch together white identity.

This is good.

And then make it different than black identity.

I would say that the white church is very different than the black church in terms of its tone and style on average.

Foods, food ways could often be different.

Music could be different.

Music could be different.

Those are being erased.

Music could be different.

If you look at the Super Bowl, half time show, which was not in English this year.

So white food, you know, that bland, tasteless, pretty disgusting food.

That food is in danger because white identities in danger.

What else was there? You know, white churches.

White churches are endangered because white identities are endangered.

And then of course white music is endangered because because bad money saying at the Super Bowl in Spanish.

Ooh, that's not a white language.

Well, wait a minute.

I scratched my head because I think I think Spain is considered white, but I'm not sure.

And what does all this add up to exactly nothing and he's mumbling and he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about?

And he's trying to not sound as racist as he really is by hedging himself and mumbling.

And he doesn't know where to take this.

You think he'd be prepared for this line of questioning.

He's been nominated for months.

He's known he's going to have to testify.

He's known these are the questions he's going to get.

And this is the best he could do.

White music.

What does he mean by that?

Mick Jagger.

Beatles.

Well, those are not, those are British.

So they're not Irish scotch.

Well, from Liverpool.

That's England.

Where do you go with this?

And again, bad money.

But think of all the whites that are performed in a half-time shows.

And even if that were true, one show,

diminishes white music.

Whatever the hell that is.

M&M was there.

But he's saying African music.

See, this is the problem.

It's a white guy pretending to be a black guy singing black music.

At least that's how he thinks, not me, right?

Because everything's categorized to ethnicities.

And rap, which is what M&M does,

is not white music, even though he's white.

And you could go on and on with this absurdity nonsense.

This is racism is stupid.

Racism is stupid.

And it's dumb.

It attracts dumb people, immoral,

but ultimately it makes you stupid, right?

I don't know what he's like.

But racism makes you stupid no matter what you are.

So I don't know anybody with a name like Lady Gaga.

He says Lady Gaga was there pretty sure she's white.

I don't really.

Gaga.

That's not a white name.

Certainly not a scotch Irish name.

Gaga.

Gaga.

I don't know what.

Yeah.

I don't know.

This is going to be a race.

Music can be different.

If you look at the Super Bowl halftime show,

which not in English, this is my ability to access white.

Churches.

Or white food.

Or white music.

Is being erased.

I am concerned with the majority common American culture

that we had for some time that, through particularly mass immigration,

I think has become much more vulcanized than I think that we can's us.

And again, I'm not running away from that comment.

I'm not apologizing for it.

I'm way over my time.

I think you're struggling to answer this question, right?

Because underlying your beliefs is a sentiment

that white culture is just simply better.

Tell me, yeah, I think Santa Mofi's absolutely right.

This guy is just a racist.

And he can't answer the question.

Now, he wrote a post where he's explaining

and he was much more articulate, somebody edited it.

He's thought about it and he says he's not a racist

and he's not about white superiority.

It's just about all these immigrants.

He's also, you know, but if you go back to his tweets

over the last 10 years, he's made derogatory comments

or comments minimizing the Holocaust.

He's made comments about replacement theory.

We've talked about replacement theory in the past.

He's talked about the superiority of white culture,

white values, very derogatory against immigrants.

But at the end of the day, you know,

what they hate is immigration.

What they hate is immigrants.

What they hate is, you know, they like pizza

so they like Italian immigrants coming.

They're kind of white and they're kind of European.

So that's okay.

But they don't like, they don't like to affair.

I mean, that's what they consider it.

They don't like these Latin American people coming over.

They don't like Asians coming suddenly South Asians.

They don't like this.

Now, the good news is he did so badly in this hearing

that it's probably the case that he will not be confirmed

that they will, which was confirmation.

There's another, you know, there's some other exchanges

that are also a pretty funny, you know, about his views.

About his views.

He comes across as a complete numbscal.

And I'm sure he is.

And yeah, I think a number of Republicans now have said

that they will not vote for him.

So it looks like he will actually not be confirmed.

So maybe there is a little bit,

a sliver of sanity in the Senate,

even among Republicans.

So they will actually go against Trump

on the, maybe on this one,

because he is trying to appoint a explicit white,

white-identitarian for the Department of State.

I mean, Trump is exactly who he said he was.

Who I said he was.

Who he said he was, you just have to believe him.

All right, now let's talk about somebody who is,

who was approved by the Senate,

who Senate Republicans voted for.

And they should be, I mean,

if they're not ashamed of themselves already,

they never will be.

Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing,

another checkered flag for the books.

Time to celebrate with Chamba.

Jump in at chambacasino.com.

Let's Chamba.

No purchase necessary, VTW Group.

Boy, we're prohibited by law.

CCNC, 21 plus, sponsored by Chamba Casino.

But they should be ashamed of themselves

and they should be ashamed.

I'm gonna play you this clip.

It's 11 seconds long.

It's self-explanatory.

I don't know that there's much I can comment on it.

It's just really funny, for many reasons.

But listen to this clip of RFK explaining

why he's not scared of germs.

Why is RFK the head of Health and Human Services

Department in the United States government,

the senior most position when he comes to health,

why he is not afraid of germs.

And I said, I'm not scared of a germ.

You know, I use the snort cocaine off of toilet seats.

And then I, yeah, I know this disease will kill me,

right, if I don't.

And I,

I mean, does it get any better

than that?

I mean, I Health and Human Services guy

is basically telling us that it's okay

to snort cocaine off of a toilet seat.

Go for it, guys.

I mean,

he snorts cocaine.

That's bad enough,

but then he does that off of a toilet seat.

I mean, I wonder what else is okay

to do off of a toilet seat?

Eat.

This actually happened.

This is, this is not AI.

Remember, this is a guy who admits

that a worm ate part of his brain.

He probably got that worm on the toilet seat.

Now, yeah, I don't know.

Maybe it is AI, you know,

I didn't spend a lot of time verifying this video.

So maybe it is AI, you know,

maybe you'll tell me it's AI

and I'll have to attract these story.

It's a funny story no matter what.

So, you know, but there you go.

But, you know, the worm eating his brain is real

and, and,

I'll number one, number one, authority

in the Health and Human Services Department's recommends.

I mean, it's now,

it's now on every package of cocaine,

you're gonna get best if snorted off of a toilet seat.

This is, this is,

this is good, this is good.

All right, finally, it turns out

that there is a scandal at the Winter Olympics.

So, when the World Anti-Doping Agency,

this is again from the War of Seagun,

when the World Anti-Doping Agency delivered

the pre-games briefing, you know, in Milan,

at the eve of the Winter Olympics,

they fielded questions about the most urgent issues

in global sports.

For example, whether ski jumpers

are injecting themselves with performance enhancing

supplements to enlarge their penises.

Now, you might ask,

why would a ski jumper

want to enlarge their penis?

Now, this is not a permanent enlargement.

This is a temporary enlargement.

Why would they want to temporarily enlarge their penises?

It changes the sense of gravity, that's pretty funny.

No, it turns out that it really does affect aerodynamics.

It turns out that the larger the,

what do you call it, the space of the fabric

on your trousers,

the further you fly, the further you go.

So, it's just simple aerodynamics.

If a ski jumper happens to require a slightly bigger suit,

the broader surface area allows him to catch more air

underneath and fly even longer.

Now, in a sport, and this is not tongue and cheek,

this is actually an article, some reading an article,

but this is funny.

In a sport where a few inches can make

a huge difference, size matters, suit size really does matter.

As a result, suit tempering has long been a prickly issue

at the highest levels of ski jumping,

where equipment is rigorously examined

and athletes fudge their measurements

to gain a few extra inches of material.

But until now, nobody had imagined manipulating

what went inside the suit to justify a bigger suit.

Oh God, it turns out that no athlete in Milan

has been accused of using shots of higher loronic acid

for those of you really interested.

If you inject higher loronic acid into your penis,

it will expand.

It will grow.

I'm sure some of you,

some of you might be interested in this.

I'm not recommending, not a recommendation

for me or the Wall Street Journal.

So no athletes has been accused of doing this,

but it started about a year ago, last year,

when an equipment technician of the Norwegian team

was secretly filmed making illegal alterations

as suits after they had been cleared by inspectors.

When a whistleblower shared the covert footage,

investigators meant to the scene of their alleged crime,

the crotch area.

That's the scene of their alleged crime,

according to the Olympic Committee.

The cheating scandal ripped through the sport

and spoke at the international outrage,

Norway's top ski jumpers were disqualified

from the competition and later sanctioned,

the team's coaches and equipment managers

were slapped with lengthy suspensions,

the embarrassing national saga brought shame to the country

and pride itself on having fun,

and pride itself on having fun while dominating winter sports.

Since then, an October study published

in the journal Frontiers in Sports,

an active living showed just how much could be gained

by a nearly imperceptible amount of extra fabric,

enlarging the suit by around three quarters of an inch

was enough to increase lift by five percent

and lengthen jumps by more than 16 feet.

Wow.

The latest twist came from a January report

in the German newspaper Build

about other possibly possible enlargements.

The sudden interest in cutting edge,

in the cutting edge of ski jumping,

exploded on Thursday when an anti-doping authorities

found themselves answering questions

about tabloid-fueled speculation.

German media coined the phrase penis gate.

There's no evidence that anybody has enlarged a penis

in order to get a bigger suit,

but now that the science justifies it

by increasing your jump by 16 feet,

which could be the difference between getting a medal or not,

who knows in the future what these ski jumpers might or might not

be able to do.

What these ski jumpers might or might not be willing to do.

All right, that is it for the news for this Friday, February 13th.

And that'll keep you smiling over the weekend.

I hope we need some of that.

All right, thank you guys.

And let's turn to our super chat.

Before we do that, I want to remind you of a few things.

One, I am doing this seminar in London.

On February 28th, it'll be from 1 to 5 p.m.

And it'll be on everything to do with capitalism

or anything to do with capitalism.

Mainly going to be addressing issues that you guys think are relevant.

I might ask all those attendees in advance.

What would you like me to talk about?

What would you like to ask about capitalism?

What issues would you like covered?

But generally, I mean, we'll talk about the profit motive.

We'll talk about profit.

We'll talk about how capitalism works.

How it works as a system.

Why prosperity exploded after 1800?

Why is human life spans doubled?

What is it, the drove capitalism?

What caused it?

I gave this course on capitalism at the Peterson Academy.

So this will be a part of that course.

We will cover some of this material.

And then we'll talk about it's morality and its efficiency.

We'll talk about economics.

And we'll talk about history.

And we'll talk about morality and philosophy.

You can join us.

And you can sign up for this event.

Again, it's on February 28th on Saturday, between 1 and 5 p.m.

London time.

It'll be in London, central London, probably.

You can find information about it on my website,

urunbrookshow.com, urunbrookshow.com.

And just go down the first page and you'll

find the London event there.

You click on the link with tickets.

And there is a full description of the event.

There is the price.

There is how to pay.

It should be really simple, hopefully, this year.

Let me know if that is not the case.

And yeah, it would be great if we got,

I don't know, it doesn't people.

I think that is kind of the optimal amount.

Number of people to have a conversation about capitalism.

We're also glad to dinner together afterwards

if you're up for that.

And so overall, you'll have a lot of time

to just hang out and ask questions and interact

and engage and socialize and cover material and do all that.

So I think it's 300 pounds, 325 pounds exactly.

So please join us in London February 28th from 1 to 5 p.m.

The sooner you guys sign up the better,

because I will end registrations,

I guess I want to reach probably 15.

Also, the sooner I know how many people are coming,

if it's going to be 5, 10 or 15,

the sooner I can book a room and actually get a room

that I'll fit for purpose for what we need.

So please consider doing that.

Be great to hang out in London.

I know I have a lot of listeners in London.

It's the 2nd, 3rd, most watched, the UK at least.

The 2nd, 3rd, most watched place in the world

after the United States.

It's I think US, Canada, UK, Australia, Germany.

I think that's the order.

So yeah, let's do something fun in London that day.

And the opportunity to support my efforts

to bring these ideas to the world.

So join us.

Oi.

Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing.

Victory Lane?

Yeah, it's even better with Jamba by my side.

Race to chumpacaceno.com.

Let's Jamba.

No purchase necessary.

VTW Group.

Boy, we're prohibited by law.

CTNCs.

21 plus.

Sponsored by chumpacaceno.

Remind that we have AOI has a conference in Porto on April 18th.

And it's, it'll be me and Anca and me Anca and Tultz Funny and a program to be determined.

But it'll be a promise a lot of fun and interesting.

And Porto is an actually place and it's relatively, I think, cheap to get to because of Ryan

Air.

And yeah, join us.

If you're anyway in Europe, if you're a student, you can get a scholarship.

If you're not a student, well, not just students, anyone under 34 can get a scholarship.

If you're, if you're an adult and you have to pay, you can get a discount 26 YBS 10.

Find out all the information you need on iynvand.org slash start here.

Objectivism comes to you, your objective is out there.

You should come, come in and support us and help us and, and, you know, engage with

the growing community of European objectivists.

So come join us.

Equal to reality is always a good join, but I'm saving for a new house.

All right.

No, that's good.

And what else did I want to do today?

Let's do Defenders of Capitalism, Defenders of Capitalism.com, Defenders of Capitalism.com.

Check out the website, Michael Williams and Michael and I do a Defenders of Capitalism

course for Leadership Program in the Rockies of Year.

So a lot of good content on Defenders of Capitalism.com.

Check it out and get involved if you can.

And then HendershotInnerShutWealth.com slash YBS, Hendershot with 2Ts, strategies for reducing

your capital gains taxes.

Check out the interview I did with Robert Hendershot on YouTube, on my playlists, on the sponsors.

I think he'll enjoy the interview.

Robert's a fascinating guy, really, really, really smart of the charts.

And if the product is of interest, then contact HendershotWealth.com, HendershotWealth.com slash

YBS.

All right.

Last lesson, forget, you can ask questions.

You ask, I answer, you can do a sticker to support the show, trade, value for value.

And you can go to patreon, patreon.com, where you can become a multi-support of the show

with a regular monthly contribution, anywhere from $2,000 to $2,000, whatever you choose.

Incredibly, I value that, incredibly, it gives predictability.

And we're targeting about 10 new subscribers to patreon in month.

So we've got a way to go still.

I think we're over about three or four, so almost halfway, we'd half the month.

So please consider doing that.

If you're not yet a subscriber to the one book show, please do it over there.

Patreon is the easiest, I think, for you and for me, in terms of interaction, although

PayPal is fine, I'm not asking you to switch, but Patreon, I think, is easier.

All right, I think those are the announcements.

Let's now turn to super chat.

We've got $350 questions, so we'll start with those.

Thank you.

James.

I intellectuals more Christian than a general population that wants to be selfish.

Most Americans put their capitalism before their Christianity, while most intellectuals

put their altruism before their secularism, why the inversion.

I mean, so let's be clear, intellectuals tend not to be Christian in their metaphysics

and epistemology, at least not explicitly, but everybody is Christian when he comes

to morality.

The difference between intellectuals and the general public is not religiosity.

The difference between them is how seriously they take ideas.

Common people can't afford to take altruism too seriously.

They've got a life to live, and they feel the consequences of the altruism immediately

on themselves.

Those have to take altruism seriously, because they're intellectuals, they deal with ideas.

And this is an important, crucial, foundational idea, and they have to preach it.

They might not, in their personal lives, practice it, but they have to preach it.

They have to advocate it for it, because it's part of their philosophy.

A common person also preaches and advocates for it, and certainly prays for it in church.

But they don't live it, because the two connected to reality, and they've got to survive

somehow.

Again, the intellectual, when they preach, just like the common man, preaches it with

a megaphone, and it reaches all of us, they have the influence.

So it's not really that much of a difference between them.

It's just that one has a big megaphone, and the other one doesn't.

And the one takes ideas more seriously, because it's their profession than the other.

That's the real difference.

And most intellectuals, the secular altruists, I mean secular altruists get their altruism

ultimately from Christianity, but through Kant and Marx and postmodernists, and Peter

Singer, who's a temporary altruistic philosopher, and many others, the altruism today is very

much a secular ideology rooted in Christianity, but secularized, Augustine Kant, Augustine.

Is it Augustine?

Okay.

Now I can't remember.

People tell me I mispronounced this name, and I can't remember how I mispronounced

him.

Anyway, Kant was a secular altruist, and he coined the term altruism.

He came up with a word altruism.

So yes, if you're in the business of ideas, you take ideas seriously, and the only ideas

in ethics that exist really today, in the culture, they're among intellectuals, is

oh, it's Augustine Kant, Augustine Kant.

Thank you.

It's Augustine Kant.

That's the mistake I make.

Michael.

Thank you, James.

Michael.

Mamdani just opened New York's first free grocery store in the West Village.

People were waiting in line for hours, so we'd stop.

They did.

Why did they open it in one of the richest parts of Manhattan, where people spend $11

on a cup of coffee?

I have no idea.

I have no idea.

I don't know how free grocery store works.

I left a read up on that story.

I left a read up on that, but where did they open it in the West Village?

I guess it's a pretty chic, hit place to live, not cheap, so no poor people there, and

yet they hand out free coffee.

I mean, the reason they open it there is the people who voted for Mamdani.

Right?

Who voted for Mamdani?

It wasn't the poor.

It was the rich young people.

Rich young people were used to call them old age yuppies.

They're the ones who voted for Mamdani, so this is consistent.

Shahzbad, also $50, thank you.

Thank you, Michael.

Thank you, Shahzbad.

What the stunts is, this is a story out of Atlas Shrugged.

This is a question out of Atlas Shrugged.

They thought the 20th century motor company name was a magic formula that brought value

to the company.

But after they ruined everything, the magic was reversed, and they couldn't give a motor

away as a gift.

Beware America, yes.

That is reputation will last as long as it's justified, as long as you live up to the

reputation.

Reputation will not survive a scandal, will not survive bad quality, will not survive bad

ethics, and regaining reputation is almost impossible, very, very difficult.

And that is very much true about America.

America has a history, it has a promise, it has an ideas at the foundation, but if you

don't live up to them, they will be forgotten, they will be gone, forgotten and gone.

And this is the sense in which being immoral doesn't work in the world out there.

People figure it out, and you live a miserable life, and people figure it out.

All right, clock.

Ice is now even targeting immigrants of European descent.

I guess federal agents can't hit their quarters by family targeting people accused of existing

while brown, so the system is being turned on itself.

Yeah, I don't know.

I mean, the problem with targeting white illegal immigrants is how do you find them?

There's no identifier like there is with being brown skinned, and you know, you might be

wrong, but you know, if you land up being wrong with a brown-skilled person who cares,

if they land up being too wrong with a bunch of Europeans or Americans who happen to be

white, there'll be a big backlash against them.

So yeah, I mean, look, ice is going to be going to try to use ice and all kinds of things,

you know, to test it out, see what we will let it get away with.

I mean, one of the best things that's happened this week is the decision by Homan to withdraw

from Minneapolis, which basically is a victory for all of us who've spoken up, primarily

a victory for all those people who demonstrated and filmed what the ice agents were doing.

You know, it's a victory for the voices who have opposed ice, and that's good because

that was suggested.

I'll think twice about engaging in the same tactics in other cities, and other cities

will be encouraged to demonstrate and to oppose them because it was successful in Minneapolis.

Drew McIntyre here from WWE.

Wheeled in the Claymore can be a life of chaos.

When I'm not dominating in the ring, Chumba Casino is how this warrior takes a wee break.

With hundreds of online social games and new weekly releases, there's always something fresh

to try.

And those daily boosts, next level, even my free time feels like foul-hallen.

So when life feels like a battle, kick up your feet, have some fun, and let's chumba.

All right Liam, a three-part question.

Is it morally acceptable to tell white lies if the people around you don't care about

the truth, and telling the truth would cause upset because these people don't actually

want to know reality?

For example, my in-laws are very superficial, phony, everything fine type people.

When asking how I'm doing, they don't really want to know the reality.

They want to pretend that everything's rosy as you know problem lying to phony people.

Well, I mean, you have to be careful because you have to be, make sure you're really

being objective about them being phony and you have to be really careful you don't get

into a habit of doing that.

But look, when somebody asks you how it's going, that's a private question.

You don't owe them an exact, and nobody who asks, how's it going?

Really wants to know, how's it going?

It's more of a greeting than an actually inquiry into the state of your being.

So generally, say, fine and walking away or just fine and continuing a conversation in

a different direction, it's fine, it's not really lying, it's more of a hello.

So, I mean, what are you going to say if somebody asks you how you're doing?

Oh, God, you know, today, you know, this happened and that happened and I'm feeling a

little down, nobody wants to know all that.

Nobody's asking about all that.

That's not what how you're doing.

Now, if somebody really, if you know somebody's really interested in how you are and

asks out of a genuine, then you give them the right answer.

But how you're doing is not a question that requires an answer, it's a, it's a greeting.

You have to be very careful about white lies.

You know, you have to be sure that you're not gaining any value by doing it.

You have to be sure that the people you're engaging in the white lies with are indeed,

you know, not interested in the truth.

It's much easier, generally, I mean, aside from these pleasantries,

that actually tell people the truth.

Much easier and you get into a lot less trouble and you don't confuse things.

But I understand family, family sometimes, not quite lying, but

abbreviating makes a lot of sense and it makes things go smoother.

I get it.

So I think you have to be careful.

You're not rationalizing line.

So I'm not saying you are Liam because I don't think you are.

And I think from the context of what you're presenting, you're not.

And certainly people don't have to know all the truth.

You can tell them something without telling them everything.

Nobody has a right to the information you have.

And a lot of ways to scoot,

answering what sometimes is just inappropriate questions.

Questions that are probing, probing into stuff that it's none of somebody's business.

Moulton's blend up.

You were recently featured on a Stossal segment about socialism and how communes don't work.

The only communes that have survived have done so via capitalism.

Great segment.

Wish more people understood this.

Yes, I mean, it's actually a clip that I did for Stossal years ago

that when he was doing his communes show, he found, they actually called me up and said,

can we use this and can you give us a reference?

And I sent him a couple of books, reference, you know, where I, this was about the

people to see him and, you know, the context.

Then so they used my segment.

I actually got an email yesterday from Stossal asking me about put a week or something,

which I owe him a reply on.

So I need to, I need to do that tonight or tomorrow.

But yeah, Stossal is very friendly and very interested in likes.

I don't know if he likes me personally, I don't know.

But he likes my stuff.

He likes, I do, I do a good interview.

I do a good interview.

I can say that to myself.

I do a good interview.

I don't know why I don't have a lot more subscribers, given how many times I've been in Stossal

and how many millions of views the Stossal stuff I've done gets.

You think some of them would come over to subscribe to this show?

But no, they like me in Stossal.

They don't like me here.

Yeah.

Lywin, Stossal was always a journalist.

So many of our problems seem to be epistemological.

People simply don't believe what's true due to tribalism, religion, evasion.

How can people learn and or accept proper epistemology?

It's not about accepting proper epistemology.

Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing.

Victory Lane?

Yeah, it's even better with Jamba by my side.

Race to chumpacacino.com.

Let's Jamba.

No purchase necessary.

VTW Group.

Void we're prohibited by law.

CTNCs.

21 plus.

Sponsored by Chumpacacino.

It's not about epistemology.

It's about the foundation of epistemology.

It's about thinking.

It's about thinking.

People don't believe what's true.

People are tribalists.

People evade and go on religion because they chew is not to think.

It's not that they don't know the theory of concepts.

It's not that they don't know the theory of how to validate truth.

It's that they won't think and they haven't been encouraged or trained to do so.

So the best we can do is reform our educational system, teach people the value and the method

of thinking through teaching science and math and history with a causal links and just

emphasize your thinking and rewarding them for thinking.

But that's a massive cultural change.

Massive cultural change.

But it's not any particular epistemological issue.

It's they can't think and they choose not to.

It's not that they can't, well some of them can't, but they choose not to.

And that can only be cured by a complete revolution in education.

It's why it's going to take a long, long time for objectives and to win.

Andrew, if ideas are the driver of history,

is it the lack thereof that led to the rise of Trump?

What gives rise to the marginalization of ideas over time?

Well, it's not that ideas are marginalised.

It's that bad ideas win out over good ideas.

So the good ideas of the Enlightenment created America.

They had sway over America for 150 years.

That sway has been diminishing for 150 years and there's overlap, I know.

And you know, the slow, consistent, steady erosion of enlightenment ideas has led

to the lack of people's ability to think, which is led to tribalism, which has led to

they wanting to appease their emotions, which has led to the election of Trump.

So it's the erosion of particular good ideas and the expansion of bad ideas.

Iron Man has just not been enough of a force in the culture to reverse the march of

collectivism and altruism and mysticism in the world in which we live.

So in that, that will lead to Trump, yeah, and worse.

Why it says, Bonnie, this is called Bonnie, just filed suit against bitter for fraudulent

transfer. I don't even know what that means. Is there a degree of indication for you

in Bonnie realised he backed the wrong horse?

I have no comment. I don't know what the law suits about.

You know, no, and look, I'm not going to say anything. I don't want to say anything because

I don't want to be in the other side of a lawsuit or anything, but you know, it is what it is.

It's not surprising. It's not surprising, I guess, that I'll say that. It's just not surprising.

But I'd been vindicated a long time ago. And I don't need vindication,

vindication from whom, invocation to what? You know, I've known I've known I've been right.

The people I care about know that I was right.

Beyond that, why do I care? I mean, this is a problem between

called Bonnie and Craig. And again, I don't know the nature of an lawsuit. I don't know what

he's suing bitter for. As far as I know, bitter has no ass. I mean, business, not particularly wealthy.

I just don't, I don't understand. I don't know. So I look into it, but I'm not going to talk

about it on the show. I'm just not interested in dabbling in other people's problems. And again,

I don't need vindication. I've been, you know, I've been right all along. And I've been

right on lots of things all along. And one day, one day, you know, a lot of people will know that.

And today, today, a lot of people know that one day more people will know that.

Even more. Not you have a job with them. Why did Rand say the virtue of integrity is

consistency? Aren't there many consistent evil operators out there? Yeah. Well, I mean, she didn't,

she didn't, if you read the whole thing, she didn't mean consistency with anything. She meant

consistency with pro life ideas, with pro life values. So you can't take a sentence out of context.

And that's a sentence out of context. I mean, I mean, Rand is very clear that integrity is not

integrity to any values. It's not consistency with anything. It's consistency with pro life values.

Steven, do you think loss of male as in USPS is not liable for damages arising out of the loss of male

includes intentional losing one's male? I do not know. How do you prove intentionality?

I guess if you could prove intentionality, maybe they're still liable, but how would you prove intentionality?

But I don't know. I'm not involved. And him, if Islamism isn't a threat to Germany,

it's not what I said. God, you guys are so, you take my words and you twist them. It is so frustrating.

It really is frustrating because I don't think you're dumb. And I don't think I'm in articulate.

So you're purposefully not listening or you're purposefully twisting my words.

If Islamism is a threat to Germany, then there's no war to declare after all,

a no rationale for vetting the EU either by your standard. Really? Is that what I said?

What did I actually say?

I said that Islamists want a threat to Germany not being able to produce stuff cannons,

because that was the context, and drones militarily. And I said that Islamists were not going

to overtake Germany. That doesn't mean they won't commit terrorist attacks. It doesn't mean they

won't kill Germans. It doesn't mean they're not a threat to day-to-day Germans. They're not a threat

to Germany as a political entity. They're not going to take over Germany as a country.

But does that mean? Does that mean they're not a threat to individual Germans? Does that mean

they're not a terrorist threat? Yeah, they are. So you deal with the terrorist threat by declaring war.

This is, I mean, Islamists, you know, forces are invading. They don't have the military

forced invading. So their terrorist threat needs to be dealt with by declaring war that the

ideology needs to be clearly articulated as an enemy ideology, and they need to be kicked out.

And why? I did give you a hard time about Germany's Islamists, and it was justified. I didn't take

you out of context. I gave you a hard time because you were dropping context. And a name is dropping

context. Again, Islamism is a threat to Germany in a sense of, in a same sense, Akaida is a threat

to the United States. Is Akaida going to overturn the government of the United States? No. Is Akaida

going to make the United States a Muslim country? No. But is Akaida trying to kill Americans? Yes.

Is killing Americans count as a threat to America? Yes. So Akaida is a threat to America.

Islamists in Germany and outside of Germany trying to kill Germans? Yes. Are they going to succeed

to overthrow the German government? No. Are they going to turn Germany into Sharia law? No. But

are they a threat? Yes, because they're trying to kill Germans. I mean, is this that hard? I've

said this like a hundred times over the last, I don't know, five years. So, you know, I don't

know, and I think I'm pretty clear. So, you know, you should really think about, are you being

dishonest with yourself in not understanding this? It's not hard. Not hard.

There are kinds of threats. Some are threats to the very existence of a state.

Russia is a threat to Germany. It could overtake Germany. It could run it over.

Others are threat to some things within that political entity.

Sorry. It's frustrating, guys. It just is. What can I say? You know, I think I'm pretty clear.

And if people ask me questions like, I'm a babbling idiot. And I don't believe that's the case.

Hey, it's Cole Swindell. After I give everything I've got to land a perfect vocal,

I usually take five before jumping into the next track. And I've learned exactly how to recharge

in that time. Some folks grab coffee. I hit a quick good look spin. Next thing you know,

the break is just as fun as land down the track. A better break makes for a better take.

Need a break? Let's jump. No purchase necessary. BGW Group void were prohibited by law.

21 plus TNC supply sponsored by Chamba Casino.

You declare war. Again, I've said this a million times because it's not just individual

attacks in the country. It's a coordinated network with international implications with state

support. I've written about this extensively. It's in, you know, winning a winnable war. It's in my

essays I wrote after 9-11. It's in a dozen talks I've given. It's in, I don't know, 50 different

shows I've done on here. It's not individuals just waking up one day. Those are criminals.

Individuals waking up one day deciding to go up and kill a bunch. No, this is an ideological

front that is funded and where there's training and where there's an ideological strategy

that is based on people outside of Germany and outside of Europe based in states. There is no

terrorism without states. States support terrorism without terrorism without states. Terrorism would

evaporate. This is why it's so important to get rid of you on. Much of the terrorism in Europe would

go away. The Islamist threat to Germany would not complete you eliminate because you'd still get

Qatar and you get Saudi Arabia. But a lot of it would go away when you get rid of you on. How does

that work you on? Isn't it just individuals waking up? I mean, I'm sure I'll get that question

again and again and again. I explained it again. Impatiently, but I did explain it. We'll see

how long it takes. The same people. That's the same question again.

Stephen, have you thought about sovereign immunity? It's the doctrine that says no one can ever

sue government entities without they consent. I mean, sovereign immunity, of course they'll never

get consent to be sued. Sovereign immunity doesn't exactly mean that. It makes it very difficult

to sue the government. You can still sue it. I'm against sovereign immunity. Now, you know, you have

I'm, look, I think there's a real problem in the United States, a real big significant problem

in the United States of too many lawsuits, of using the legal system for things that it isn't

designed to do. And somebody needs to do the thinking about how to fix the liability system.

I understand why you want to give people immunity when anybody can sue anybody for so many

different things. We need a more rational liability system in this country. There's a book

called liability by Peter Hubert that spells it out how the left basically destroyed our court

system and our ability, you know, the standards by which these lawsuits get adjudicated. That needs

to be fixed. And ultimately in a proper society, there was no such thing as sovereign immunity.

I mean, the sovereign has to be accountable for everything that they do.

But we need to get rid of the sheer number of fervilist lawsuits and the ability of people

to use the legal system to, you know, to really penalize other people, penalize companies,

penalize, you know, and it could be used to, I guess, to penalize government agencies or cops,

for example. But I'm against it. Certainly in an ideal situation, in ideal government.

Stephen catch, what dictionary is the best? I don't know. I don't know. Oxford, you know,

Oxford dictionary is one that Leonard Peacoff used these old ones, new ones. But I don't know,

I'm not, not a particular expert on dictionaries. Oivind, you said something yesterday about

Western shows, not being unapologetically heroic. Yes, I have a recommendation, a night of seven

kingdoms. It is fantastic with the truly inspiring protagonist. So I'm watching it. I caught up

yesterday. So there's still one more, I think, there's still the seasons isn't finished. But I think

the first four or five episodes I've seen. And it's cute. I just don't, it's not, it's not

inspiring to me. I mean, the hero is a little bit of a doofus and he's portrayed that way,

he's a little dumb. He's a little slow. What's he heroic about? What is he fighting for?

He's joining the, this tournament way, the goal of the tournament is to kill and

main your opponent ultimately. This is not heroism in the sense that I want to see it. And it's not,

it's not terrorism in a modern sense in kind of a modern way that would appeal and have resonance

in the modern world. These are nights though. I mean, I find it very hard. I mean, I like Game of Thrones,

but it was, it's very hard to really like it because it's about kings and queens and power and

sheer, just a sheer want for power. Now, in the show, seven kingdoms, a night of seven kids,

there was an element of he's the good guy helping out the week in the innocent, which is what a

night's supposed to do versus the power-lusting, sadistic monsters of the Targaryen clan. And okay,

I get that and I'm, I'm all for it and I like it. But you know, I want more, I want bigger and

more important values to fight for. And again, I, I think it too has to make him a little dumb.

It has to make him, I don't know, begin strong. I'm curious how he does in the fights. The fights

are going to start next episode. I assume he's going to win. Yeah, I mean, I like the show,

but I just don't, don't think of it as an apologetic heroic. It's, it's difficult to make

things unapologetically heroic in the context of nights and kings and queens. You can, you can.

And he will be heroic. But not, for me, not that inspiring. Sorry, I even, Steven, who was the

more moral party in the recent Thailand Cambodia border standoff did recently ended why I don't know.

I don't know. Thailand is the stronger party. Cambodia is the weaker party. But in terms of who

is right and who is wrong, I don't know. I don't even know why they're doing it. Why now? It's,

it's a dispute over land. But I don't know who's right or who's wrong about it. And probably

isn't any right or wrong. It's, yeah. And if you want to see heroic, yeah, so I don't know. I'd

have to research the history. I'd have to go into it. And it's not of that interesting.

If you want heroic, I like the show that it's on prime right now called Night Manager. Night

Manager, which is kind of a spy thriller James Bond like. It's, well, it's not James Bond,

because it's more down-to-earth realistic. But it's, it's very heroic that lead characters very

heroic. There's a season one, which is excellent. Season two is good. It's based in John the

career. Now, John the career was very cynical. But that cynicism does not come across in the show.

So I'd recommend Night Manager.

I'd recommend Night Manager. Okay. Newly then, if ICE is abolished, will that mean there's

no more border patrol, would individuals arrive in the US unverified? How will police track these

individuals when they have committed a crime? So one, no, there are two different entities. There

is the border patrol and there's ICE. The border patrol has always been around and it's responsible

for the border. ICE was created in the 2000s specifically to to to hunt down, I guess, illegal

immigrants once they entered the United States in the United States. So if you abolished ICE,

nothing would change at the border. You would still have border patrol at the border. You'd

still have border patrol and customs. It's the border patrol and customs. At the airports,

you'd still have all of that. Now, we can talk about what should happen to that, but that would

still exist. Police, why should police track individuals when they commit a crime? If they commit

a crime, they should go to jail. Now, if you want to jail and then they find out that we legal

deport them. So I don't think you need a big vast entity to deport criminals.

So if you commit crime, so if you're a time that's justice and then you put them on a plane and

you're out of here, so that's not hard to do. You don't need a whole big massive, what is it?

$70 billion or something like that entity in order to do it. Both agencies are under the

Department of Homeland Security and they're both under the umbrella of, I guess, border patrol,

something, something, something, but they're two separate entities. All right, last question

it appears. I think in Britain, this is in Jennifer, I think in Britain, you have to pay the

other legal fees if you lose. Seems like you're a good idea. Yes, I agree. It does seem like you're

a good idea that would be a positive innovation in the United States if that happened.

But more importantly than that, what you really need is a reconceptualization of liability.

There's in the United States, there's a deep pocket theory where something happens to you,

you sue the person or entity with the deepest pockets. And the courts will accept that even if they

had a tangential relationship with what happened to you. What happened and it's fascinating,

right? This is the book of liability. What happened in the 60s and early 70s is that law professors,

leftist law professors came to the conclusion that the best way to redistribute wealth in the

United States was not through the tax system because they didn't have enough political power to do

that, but through the court system. And they basically set up to make the courts in a sense no fault,

that is make the courts a mechanism to redistribute wealth from anybody to anybody who had an accident

from people and corporations who have money. So if you slip on the street on a banana peel,

you don't have to prove the, I don't know, Saks Fifth Avenue across the street actually placed

a banana peel there. Saks Fifth Avenue will pay you because that is a just moral thing to do.

It's a way to redistribute wealth from those who have to, those who haven't. And now is explicitly

their agenda and they succeed it. So in America today, it's so easy to sue, it's so easy to win,

it's so easy to get big, outrageous law, you know, and most lawsuits are settled. So if people get

money in settlements and a lot of it has nothing to do with fault, then you do with fault.

All right. All right, guys, have a great weekend. And I hope you have a good weekend. I

will be doing some show tomorrow and Sunday. So stay tuned. Tomorrow it will be at 2 p.m. Eastern

time. Sunday, I'm not sure. Maybe one, maybe two. We'll see. Thank you to all the super

chatters. Thank you, everybody. I really appreciate it, particularly the $50 guys,

shots about Michael and James. I really appreciate that. And it's somebody, Liam asked a three-part

question that added up to $60. So thank you, Liam. Thank you guys. I will see you all tomorrow.

Have a great weekend. Bye.