Skip to content
The Joe Rogan ExperienceThe Joe Rogan Experience

Joe Rogan Experience #2437 - Rand Paul

U.S. Senator Rand Paul Rand Paul is the junior United States Senator from Kentucky and a member of the Republican Party. He is the chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and serves on several others, including the Committee on Foreign Relations. Paul is also a physician and the author of several books, the most recent of which is “Deception: The Great Covid Cover-Up.” Look for it wherever books are sold. https://www.paul.senate.gov https://www.regnery.com/9781684515134/deception/ https://rumble.com/c/RandPaul Perplexity: Download the app or ask Perplexity anything at https://pplx.ai/rogan. Get a free welcome kit with your first subscription of AG1 at https://drinkag1.com/joerogan VISIT HTTPS://PALEOVALLEY.COM/ROGAN

Joe Roganhost
Jan 13, 20262h 43mWatch on YouTube ↗

EVERY SPOKEN WORD

  1. 0:000:02

    Intro

    1. SP

      [upbeat music]

  2. 0:023:09

    Rand Paul’s pandemic dissent: schools, kids’ risk, and Sweden’s approach

    1. SP

      Joe Rogan Podcast, check it out! The Joe Rogan Experience. [upbeat music] Train by day, Joe Rogan Podcast by night, all day. [upbeat music]

    2. JR

      Nice to meet you, sir.

    3. SP

      Thanks for having me.

    4. JR

      My pleasure.

    5. SP

      Great to be in Austin, you know? [chuckles]

    6. JR

      Have you been here be- you've been here before.

    7. SP

      You know, I grew up in Texas, and so we used to come up here, uh, for live music. I went to Baylor, and there was no music, no dancing. If you wanted to hear some live music, you came to Austin. So I've been here many times.

    8. JR

      Nice. It's a great spot. Uh, so here's your book, Deception: The Great Cover-Up. You were, uh, a lone voice of reason during the pandemic that, uh, you know, for me, y- you were extremely valuable, and, uh, I was cheering you on every step of the way. When you were grilling Anthony Fauci, "With all due respect, you do not know what you are talking about" That, that guy was driving me fucking crazy. It was, it was mind-numbing how many people were going along with it and how many people just accepted what he was saying, ignored all the evidence that pointed to gain-of-function research, didn't freak out when it was quite obvious that he was lying about gain-of-function research, and I just thank God that you were grilling him, and at least it was on the record, and we could all watch it and see it.

    9. SP

      One of the greatest tragedies, and we knew this f- within days, was that children weren't getting sick, but that should have been used to our advantage. Children did not get sick. No child without a healthy, uh, without a health issue really died. Zero.

    10. JR

      Well, they got sick, but it wasn't dangerous for them.

    11. SP

      Right. But they, they-

    12. JR

      My kids both got it.

    13. SP

      Right, but most of them had a very mild illness, and the point is, is that we knew this in China in the first couple of weeks, and we could have left the schools open, and some countries left the schools open. For the most part, Sweden left their schools open and treated this completely different and turned out with a similar... Everybody wound up with a similar death rate, with primarily the people dying were people who were older and overweight or both.

    14. JR

      Right. And well, the, the argument was, "You're gonna bring it home, and you're gonna infect your grandma, and she's gonna die."

    15. SP

      Right.

    16. JR

      That was the-

    17. SP

      The argument didn't really hold water, though, because everybody got it anyway. And so-

    18. JR

      But we didn't know that in the beginning, right?

    19. SP

      Well-

    20. JR

      In the beginning, they were lying, and they were saying that... Although we now know that there was no data that showed that the vaccine-

    21. SP

      Right

    22. JR

      ... stopped infection-

    23. SP

      Right

    24. JR

      ... stopped transmission.

    25. SP

      But here's another thought: You could have said, "Yeah, kids could take it to their grandparents, so until the kid has gotten it and recovered for two weeks, tell them not to visit their grandparents." You know what I mean? And-

    26. JR

      Well, the problem was the people that live with their grandparents.

    27. SP

      Yeah, I know.

    28. JR

      You know?

    29. SP

      And there would be, there would be the exceptions to the rule, but most of the people, the death rate we already knew in China was very, very small once you added in the kids. Initially, they were saying it was a three percent death rate, which would have been, instead of one million people, you know, would have been significantly more. Three million people may have died, but they knew the death rate was less than that in China early on. But part of the reason they thought it was so high is they weren't counting all the asymptomatic cases. You know, they knew how many people were sick and how many people died, but the denominator

  3. 3:094:24

    Natural immunity vs. official messaging—and why it mattered for workers

    1. SP

      was the number of people who actually were sick or who actually got the infection, but they weren't counting millions of people. And, uh, but Anthony Fauci denied this at every step. He denied that natural immunity would protect you, and one of my favorite quotes was from a guy named Martin Kulldorff. He was an epidemiologist-

    2. JR

      Yeah, I know who he is

    3. SP

      ... at Harvard, who ended up getting fired. But recently, he tweeted out, it was about a year or two ago, he said, "Well, we knew about natural immunity from the time of the Athenian plague in 436 BC, and we knew that knowledge until 2020, then we lost all knowledge [chuckles] of natural immunity. But the good news is, in 2025, we're starting to get back that knowledge." But this was... Anthony Fauci knew better. You know, he, he, he couldn't even read his own basic immunology books about, you know, m- the fact that you do develop immunity. Is it perfect? No. Can you get COVID more than once? Yes, but I defy you to tell me somebody who got it the second time, who died the second time. You know what I mean?

    4. JR

      Right.

    5. SP

      People got it less severely so the second time they got it, if they got it at all.

    6. JR

      Much less severely so. I got it twice, and the second time, I couldn't even believe it was actually COVID.

    7. SP

      Right.

    8. JR

      It was back when we were testing every day. We would test all the guests. We'd test all the staff-

    9. SP

      Right

    10. JR

      ... before we did the show, and I came in, and I had the sniffles.

    11. SP

      Right.

    12. JR

      That's it. And they said, "Do you have COVID?" And I was like, "This is hilarious." [chuckles]

  4. 4:245:33

    Media narratives and the Gupta episode: “horse dewormer” and consensus pressure

    1. SP

      And I understand you did so well because your personal doctor was Sanjay Gupta.

    2. JR

      Bah! [laughing]

    3. SP

      [laughing] That is... That clip of you and, and he on the program is my favorite clip of all time. [chuckles]

    4. JR

      I don't know what he thought was gonna happen.

    5. SP

      [laughing]

    6. JR

      I think he just thought he was gonna come in here, and CNN was gonna send their medical mercenary in with all his knowledge.

    7. SP

      Right.

    8. JR

      But y- you can't argue with someone when you can't use facts.

    9. SP

      Right.

    10. JR

      So he didn't have any facts at his disposal, and he was working for a network that was openly lying about me taking veterinary medicine. Like, the whole thing was-

    11. SP

      Right

    12. JR

      ... surreal. And for someone who is, you know, up until 2020, I mean, I was reasonably distrustful of mainstream news, but in a normal way.

    13. SP

      Mm.

    14. JR

      Like, I'm sure they bend things a little bit or twist things a little bit.

    15. SP

      Right.

    16. JR

      I, I would have never thought I would watch a campaign against me like that, where every night it was horse dewormer, horse dewormer-

    17. SP

      Right

    18. JR

      ... Joe Rogan, dangerous conspiracy theories, COVID denier, vaccine denier. I was like, "This is f-... fascinating!

  5. 5:338:25

    Treatments, remdesivir, and the steroid reversal: what worked in severe cases

    1. SP

      I think it, it brings up a broader question, too, that when people tell you there's a consensus, and because the consensus exists, you cannot object. I think that's a real danger to openness, to new ideas, but it's also a danger in medicine. And, and in medicine to say, "This is the consensus, and we're not going to do this." So in the first month of this, maybe first or second month, Fauci comes in, and I said, "You know, many people who die from the flesh-eating bacteria, which is not the same, but it's a serious illness, the- what they give them to try to treat them to prevent death and loss of limbs is high-dose IV steroids." And I had a friend whose life was saved. He didn't lose any of his limbs, and he had this terrible illness. And so I asked Anthony Fauci, I said, "Do you think there's a chance, as they're getting very, very sick and their lungs are filling up with fluid, that we could try high-dose IV steroids like we do in other infections?" He says, "Oh, no, no, we've tried that." Turns out, and we, we mention this in the book, the best treatment when you are just about to go on the ventilator or on the ventilator, when you have a 50% chance of dying at that point, was IV steroids, an old generic medicine that, uh, big pharma doesn't make much money off of.

    2. JR

      Which steroids in particular were they using?

    3. SP

      Uh, it's, it's called Solu-Medrol, but it's just IV steroids, and it was a 36% percent reduction in death, which is pretty significant when you're in the ICU. The people in the ICU were very, very sick. It was a, a, a third of them had a reduction in death by, by taking IV steroids, but he was dismissing it from the very beginning and already acting like, "Oh, I know it's not going to work, and we're gonna try remdesivir," which turned out not to work very well.

    4. JR

      Not only that, it gives people kidney failure.

    5. SP

      Yeah.

    6. JR

      Well, I mean, he has a history of using medicine that has already been through the approval rating with, you know, what they did with AZT during the-

    7. SP

      Right

    8. JR

      ... the pandemic of AIDS.

    9. SP

      Right.

    10. JR

      And, uh, that, that proved to be horrific, a, a terrible disaster. It's just amazing that the same guy ran the same playbook, you know?

    11. SP

      Yeah. No, and it, it was really sad, and the other thing about natural immunity that needed to be brought up is, so all the people that were declared essential kept working. Like, if you worked in a meat processing factory, these are hardworking people. Many of them, you know, they're, they're busting their butt all day long, and there'd be, like, 296 people at a meat packing f- place in Missouri. All of them got COVID. Most of them survived, but what we should have been telling them is, "Two weeks after you got it, come back to work. You don't have to wear a mask now. You've had it. You have immunity. You won't spread it to your family. And guess what? All the unknown about whether you're gonna die or not, you survived, [chuckles] and you're done."

    12. JR

      Right.

    13. SP

      But instead, we told people, "You might get it again, and you still might die, and you've got to wear a mask all day long," when in reality, we should have been celebrating the people who recovered and letting them have their freedom back.

    14. JR

      Well, there was also this kooky thing where after you got over the disease, they wanted you to get vaccinated-

    15. SP

      Hmm

    16. JR

      ... which was strange. It was almost like you-- they wanted you to join the team.

    17. SP

      Yeah.

    18. JR

      Like, take the blood oath.

  6. 8:2520:20

    Vaccine risk-benefit, myocarditis concerns, and liability protection for manufacturers

    1. SP

      Yeah. I, I met a man in Orange County, and his mom was, like, 83, and she was very sick, and she ultimately died during C- during- from COVID, probably. But she went to the hospital with COVID. They wouldn't admit her until she was vaccinated for COVID while she had COVID, which is actually against all recommendations, and this is the problem with the mass vaccination thing. If you're going to Walgreens, do you think they ask you if you've had COVID recently before they gave you a shot? And so really, the, the best medical recommendation for a young person is, one, you don't need the COVID vaccine, but you certainly shouldn't be taking it close to when you've had an infection because you've got an immune response that's going against the disease. Then you add in another stimulant to it, that's actually related to an increase in the rate of the heart inflammation that comes along with vaccinating some of the young people.

    2. JR

      Well, there's also the weirdness of the, uh, what, what happened during the Reagan administration with vaccines, where they're no longer liable-

    3. SP

      Right

    4. JR

      ... for any vaccine injuries. And when you call this a vaccine, it's very different than any vaccine that had ever been used before, but yet you have all of these injuries that people have no recourse.

    5. SP

      Yeah. My dad was in Congress at the time and voted against, you know, g- giving them the liability protection, and he also was there when they had the swine flu epidemic, and in that, more people died from the swine flu vaccine, and I think there were no deaths from swine flu. They said, "Oh, it's gonna take over the world, and, you know, we're gonna lose, you know, 5% of our public." Nobody died. The, um, epidemic quickly stopped, but then several people got Guillain-Barré, and a few people died from the vaccine. And I'm not against vaccines. Look, there, there are m- many miracles to vaccines, but they should be used judiciously, and the risks and benefit for each individual... And it turns out COVID had an age differential that was more significant probably than any disease we've ever seen. It really was an old person's disease.

    6. JR

      Yeah, an old person and people with comorbidities.

    7. SP

      Exactly.

    8. JR

      It was really bad for obese people, but, uh, you know, the disease aside, what, what was it like for you to watch this play being run? Because that's essentially what it was. It was like there was a play being run, and you had to follow whatever their narrative was to the T, or you'd be attacked. You'd, you-- I mean, uh, and you would see these people that were acting like soldiers for, -

    9. SP

      Hmm

    10. JR

      ... for the pharmaceutical drug complex. I mean, they would-

    11. SP

      Right

    12. JR

      ... they would go out there and just brutally attack anybody who deviated from the narrative, say the most awful things, talk about how you, there's blood on your hands, and, like-

    13. SP

      Right

    14. JR

      ... it was very strange.

    15. SP

      ... Well, i- i- the, the, the belief in the vaccines and the belief that you should do it was like a religious belief, and that's the way they treated it. So if you didn't believe in it, you were a, you were someone to be demonized as a non-believer. You were to be cast out-

    16. JR

      Yeah.

    17. SP

      And you weren't patriotic if you weren't wearing a mask, and even if I've already had it, I'm walking down the hallway, you know, between the office buildings and the Capitol, and all those reporters, they're 22 years old. Most of them are journalist majors. They never had a science course in their life, and they're lecturing me about why I should be wearing a mask, and it's like, I already had the disease. I've been-- I've healed up three weeks. I don't need to wear a mask. I'm, I've got immunity. "Well, how do you know that?" But even in the beginning when they said they didn't know, they did know. We had a, a outbreak in 2003. It was a different coronavirus. It was the first SARS virus, but we knew that those people, 17 years later, still had T-cells and still had immunity to it. One of the-- my favorite stories, and we include this in the book, was there was a woman, and she was 102. She goes to the hospital, and they bring her family in. They're talking to her daughter, who's 85, says: "We don't think your mom's gonna make it." And she said, "Have you met my mom?" And they said, "Well..." And she survived. But while she was there, they decided to test her for antibodies to the Spanish flu, because when she was six months old, her mother was coming across the Atlantic. Her mom died from the Spanish flu. She got it, survived. They tested her 100 years later. She still had antibodies to the Spanish flu. So immunity lasts a long damn time.

    18. JR

      Wow, that's crazy.

    19. SP

      [chuckles]

    20. JR

      But w- w- what was it like being in the government and, and seeing a- all this play out and that it was illogical, it, it didn't make any sense, but yet everyone was following the playbook?

    21. SP

      Um, well, people without any kind of scientific background were lecturing people. Uh, Sherrod Brown, Sherrod Brown from Ohio, was a senator. He was the worst. He would stop the proceedings and start pointing and yelling at me for not having a mask. In the House, they made him wear the mask, and so you got everybody in there with a mask. I got the, the infection, like, in March of 2020, so I got it just as it came over. I'm all healed up. I volunteered in the hospital when I was done 'cause I had immunity, and at that time, you're right, we didn't know everything, and there were some risks to the orderlies and nurses. So when they had to rotate patients that were on the ventilator, I would go in and help them, so one less person had to go in the room because I had immunity, and everybody acknowledged that I did at my local hospital. They didn't ask... There was no vaccine at the time anyway, and so but they all acknowledged that, "Oh, this is great. He's coming in, he has immunity, and he can help take the place of someone else who's having to, to risk being in the room when we move patients around."

    22. JR

      One of my favorite scenes was, uh, there was a musical performance where there was a bunch of flutists-

    23. SP

      [chuckles]

    24. JR

      ... and they had masks on with a hole cut out so they could play their flute-

    25. SP

      [laughing]

    26. JR

      -through the mask. I was like-

    27. SP

      Yeah

    28. JR

      ... "This is wild." I mean-

    29. SP

      Well, yeah. Explain to me the science of that I can eat my peanuts for 20 minutes on the plane, and w- my favorite is the some of the flight attendants were great. Some of them would actually come up to me and pass messages. I would get a little folded-up message, "Thank you for what you're doing. Thank you for challenging Fauci." But then some of them were Karens, and it brings out the worst in you. A little bit of power can bring out the worst in people, and some of them were, you know, "Sir, you're not eating your peanuts faster. Eat your peanuts faster. You need to put your mask on in between peanuts."

    30. JR

      They don't really serve peanuts on planes anymore.

  7. 20:2028:00

    Masks, six-feet rules, and ‘public health humility’ vs. mandates

    1. SP

      ... for seventy years, abused the civil liberties of people protesting for civil rights. He abused, uh, the liberty and pers- the privacy of people protesting the Vietnam War, and so Hoover was a terrible person with his longevity. I think Fauci ranks right up there with his disregard for people's privacy. But even the stuff about the masks, do you know that we studied pandemics for a decade? Bill Gates has been given gazillions of dollars, and he's gotten the government to spend money, and when we studied pandemics, all the way up until 2020, there was never a recommendation for masks among the public for respiratory virus.

    2. JR

      He recommended against-

    3. SP

      [chuckles]

    4. JR

      Fauci recommended against masks in a very public interview. That was a video where he was talking about, you know, it's not gonna help you, and worse, maybe you'll mess with your face, and-

    5. SP

      Yeah, well, the, uh, the good one was the-- it was that Birdwell woman. She was in the administration, and she writes him a letter in January. She says, "I have to go to a conference. Should I wear a mask?" And he writes back to her, "Uh, no, we've, we've done all the studies, and there's no evidence that for a respiratory virus, it works." And it turns out almost all the masks, the cloth masks, you know, you've heard all this, the pores were bigger than the virus.

    6. JR

      Yeah.

    7. SP

      The virus goes through them. The surgical mask, a little better, but if you have these big gaps on either side, you think the virus isn't going around the mask? And it probably goes through that mask also. The N95 mask, if you're a doctor or nurse and you're going in and out of a room, and you wash your hands and throw away the mask, there probably is some value. So in the, in the hospital, they recommended this. But one of the reasons Anthony Fauci was such a danger is what he recommended was actually dangerous. So he's wearing a Washington Nationals cloth mask to show people, or he's wearing a Black Lives Matter mask to show people he cares. But if that's the advice, and you're seventy-five years old, and your wife has COVID, and you're going into her room to take her food, and you wear a cloth mask, you are risking getting COVID and dying yourself. He didn't tell-- he gave us the wrong advice, and then people thought they were safe with a cloth mask, so they're actually doing something they shouldn't do. Or they're, you know, eighty-five years old, and they're going to church, but they're wearing a cloth mask. Well, know that you probably shouldn't go to church, frankly. You shouldn't be told you can't go to church, but actually, the advice early on to avoid crowds and stay home if you were older or vulnerable. But the kids should have just gone to school and tried to stay away from, you know, people. But eventually, it happened anyway. It, it went everywhere. There was no stopping this virus.

    8. JR

      Well, there's never been a respiratory virus that stopped with a vaccine anyway, right?

    9. SP

      No. The, the flu vaccine doesn't really stop with it either, and I'm trying to get more statistics on the, on the flu vaccine as well to see if it's accurate, because I think they lie to us every year about... You know, they say, "Oh, well, it was a, you know, it wasn't this, it wa- it wasn't even the same ca- category or type, but you're getting some crossover effect." Uh, I think most of the time, that is, um, being inflated. What they're, what they're telling you is not actually true, and I'm trying to get them at the CDC to study all of this again because they have the power and the numbers to look at large numbers. And let's be objective and tell people, you know, "What is the odds next year the flu vaccine will work for you?" And we used to say: "Well, it might not work, but if you're at risk, go ahead and take it." So it used to be over fifty or over sixty-five. Now, they want everybody to take the flu vaccine, and it probably, i- it is probably better, unless your child has an immunodeficiency disease, to go ahead and get these and develop immunity over time.

    10. JR

      ... And what do you think is going on? Like, why are they recommending this? Is this purely a profit thing?

    11. SP

      Um, I think if they were here, they would argue that it's, it's, it's science and it isn't for profit, but they argue vigorously against revealing if they're receiving money from Big Pharma. So what I ask is, if you're on the vaccine committee and you're gonna recommend that every child get a COVID vaccine, shouldn't you have to release whether you get royalties, you know, from Big Pharma? And Anthony Fauci, in committee, said, "We don't have to do it. The law," and he quoted the law, "says we don't have to do it." So for two, three, four years now, I'm still trying to get this passed. I've gotten all the Republicans to agree to it, and I've gotten all the Democrats but two or three, and I'm still trying to get it passed unanimously. But it would say, if you're a government scientist and you get royalties from Pfizer or from one of the big companies, you have to actually, uh, list it on a form, and really, you should be then recused from voting.

    12. JR

      Yeah, well, also, why, why are doctors allowed to be financially incentivized?

    13. SP

      Yeah, that, that should be un- that should be considered to be unethical or-

    14. JR

      Yes

    15. SP

      ... inappropriate. We did change some of the things with pharma and gifts to doctors about 10 years ago. It is better than it used to be as far as gifts to doctors, except for then they, they don't call this a gift. I think this should be under the gift ban. You should not be get- getting paid to use certain, uh, choose certain things, because I, I think it, it's-- really, I think it's actually malpractice to give children the COVID vaccine.

    16. JR

      Are you aware of, uh, Mary Talley Bodin?

    17. SP

      Yep.

    18. JR

      Yeah. You know her story?

    19. SP

      Not a lot. I've met her before, I think.

    20. JR

      She told me that if... You know, she has a small practice that's in, like, a strip mall, I believe, outside of Houston. She said that in her small practice, if she had vaccinated everyone, she would have been compensated $1.5 million.

    21. SP

      It's, it's a significant amount of money, yeah, and the people I've listed-

    22. JR

      That's crazy!

    23. SP

      Yeah. No, it's insane, and it's the-- it's, it's the one sort of exception to... We have all these things preventing kickbacks to doctors, except for vaccines, and that's somehow exempt. Um, so yeah. Now, we've looked at whether legislation could fix this, and I don't think we've found a good answer, but I have definitely looked to see if there's a way Congress can try to fix this.

    24. JR

      What's amazing to me is how many people in the general public are not skeptical, how many people in the general public will hear this kind of conversation, and immediately their hackles get up, and they want to argue against this. [gasps] "Vaccines have saved more-- vaccines are so important."

    25. SP

      Right.

    26. JR

      "Vac- ah!"

    27. SP

      Um-

    28. JR

      They get-- And there's-- they have no information. They have- they've done no research. They've never looked at it objectively. They don't understand the whole history of compensation and, and w- w- what happened with the, the immunity.

    29. SP

      So in the, in the book, I tell the tor- story of George Washington, one, to let people know I'm not against, and the smallpox vaccine was amazing. And in George Washington's day, it was actually live, so that what you did is, if you'd had smallpox and you were doing pretty well, and you survived, and you didn't have a bad case, you had a minor case, you had four or five pocks, not a lot, uh, as you were recovering, they'd open a scab, take pus from your arm, stab somebody else's arm, and take the pus from your infection and stick it into someone else. That's a live vaccine. That's, that's crazy. But... And they did have some people die from it, but the death rate from smallpox was one out of three, and when it would show up in Boston, you'd have, like, 20,000 people die, and the whole town would get it. It was terrible, and so people actually chose, but people weren't being forced to do it. But the George Washington case is very instructive. Martha wants to come visit him at the camps, at the war camps, and there were more deaths in the Revolutionary War from disease than there were from bullets. He says, "You can't come until you're vaccinated for smallpox." It wouldn't vaccinate. It was called inoculated because you're getting stuck with a disease, not a vaccine. And, uh, but people say, "Well, I guess Washington took it, too, if he believed so much in this." Well, it's like, no, 'cause he'd already had smallpox. He got smallpox when he was 15 in Barbados. They understood immunity. We have understood immunity for thousands of years, and yet it just went out the window with Anthony Fauci saying, "Well, we just don't know. We just won't-- We just don't know." We do know. W- we don't always know how perfect it's gonna be, but we do know that nobody got COVID the second time around and had a worse case the second time around.

  8. 28:0043:23

    Fauci, gain-of-function, records destruction, and the politics of accountability

    1. JR

      Well, one thing we do know is that when Biden left office, he was granted this biz- very bizarre pardon-

    2. SP

      [chuckles] Yeah

    3. JR

      ... where he got a pardon that goes back to 2014 for crimes he was never accused of-

    4. SP

      Yeah

    5. JR

      ... never convicted. I mean, is that-- it's gotta be one of the first times that anybody's ever been pardoned for-

    6. SP

      Yeah, and I, I think it should be challenged, and so we have, um... Under the Biden administration, I sent criminal referrals for Anthony Fauci to Merrick Garland, um, twice, and I sent them evidence that he had lied to Congress, which was a felony. They just ignored me. I've been working with Bobby Kennedy, and he's been very helpful on this. I have good relationship with him. He's given us a lot of information, and we've looked at the communications, and in Anthony Fauci's communications, we now have evidence that he was telling people, like Francis Collins, "Read this and destroy it." Well, you can't do that. The executive branch, when they communicate, they're required to keep their communications, and they're required to do it on government devices. So we have this evidence, and I've summarized it again in a criminal referral to, uh, Trump's attorney general, and I still haven't gotten action. But there's a couple reasons we should do it. One, he, he shouldn't get away with lying. He shouldn't get away with destroying records. But two, we should check the pardon. Is an autopen pardon valid? And is a pardon a retrospective pardon back 10 years that doesn't mention a crime? Can you, can you give people a pardon for everything they did in a 10-year period? I can't imagine, and I think the court might narrow that, but it doesn't happen unless the, the Trump Justice Department will do something, and I've, I've been sending them referrals, and I can't get them to do anything. Um, I can't guarantee they'll win. They might lose, but they ought to go to court. Take this, take it to court.

    7. JR

      [lips smack] When y- you were having that conversation with him about gain-of-function research, which clearly, gain-of-function research was being done at the Wuhan lab-

    8. SP

      Right

    9. JR

      ... what, uh-- and he was just standing in front saying that under the definition of gain-of-function research, that that does not qualify.... What was that like?

    10. SP

      I- I- We all knew he was lying, and he was parsing words. He was, uh, trying to have a semantics type of argument. But one of the reasons we know he's lying, and one of the things that I presented as evidence, is there was a group, uh, text chain on February 1st of 2020. So you have all these virologists who are saying privately it came from the lab and publicly it didn't. You have them all communicating, but one of the things Anthony Fauci says about the Wuhan lab is, he says: "We know it's, we know it's, um, it's, it's dangerous and possible 'cause we know they're doing gain-of-function research, so we're funding them." He would never admit we're funding them, 'cause we were funding EcoHealth-

    11. JR

      Right

    12. SP

      ... this intermediary. So he said, "Oh, we're not funding them. Well, we're funding them through EcoHealth. It's not gain-of-function," except for then he says the experiments they're doing are gain-of-function. And so I think everything about it was dishonest. He got away with it because people in the scientific community still to this day defend him, and people on the left made it a partisan- I don't know why this is a Republican-Democrat issue, but all of the main networks still defend him. You know, he was given a million-dollar prize? Some nonprofit, uh, gave him a million-dollar prize. A- Well, how does a bureaucrat get to accept a, a million-dollar prize while they're working for the government?

    13. JR

      You tell me.

    14. SP

      [chuckles]

    15. JR

      You work for the government. [laughing]

    16. SP

      Then when he leaves the government, he gets twenty-four/seven limo service and security. He's got people in front of his home stopping traffic like you do for a president getting in the car, which I'm okay for former presidents, but that's about it. You know, Anthony Fauci should have never got this. I will say that Trump ended it, you know, and everybody said, "Oh, he'll be, he'll be killed." And it's like, you know, I guarantee a lot of us have more threats than Anthony Fauci has, and none of us have a, a limo picking us up every day.

    17. JR

      Well, I'm sure he has threats.

    18. SP

      Um-

    19. JR

      I'm sure Anthony Fauci has threats, and I think he probably, you know, should be concerned.

    20. SP

      But so, uh, yeah, but the government-

    21. JR

      Just based on what everybody knows.

    22. SP

      Right, but the government doesn't... You know, you're a famous person.

    23. JR

      Right.

    24. SP

      Government doesn't pay for your limousine.

    25. JR

      Right. Right.

    26. SP

      He shouldn't have a limousine paid for by the government with twenty-four/seven security.

    27. JR

      No, no, I agree. I mean, it's-- Also, how much money did he make? Do we know?

    28. SP

      We know he got the million-dollar prize. We know he made more than the president towards the end. He was making $450,000 a year, but his wife, if he ever had an ethical problem, you know who he went to, his wife. His wife was in charge of, uh, bioethics for the NIH. So if it was a question of whether or not his royalties were a conflict, he would ask his wife to find out if he was acting unethically. She made about two fifty, so they're really making a combined seven hundred, which I don't-- I'm not against money. You work hard, people pay you money, I'm all for it, but I am against the government paying bureaucrats that kind of money, and so... And he really-- There, there should be term limits for people in those positions. You shouldn't be there for 40 years. So he appointed all the people beneath him, and he stacked the deck. And, you know, I asked the question, and this was an email from Francis Collins to Anthony Fauci. He says, "Take him down," talking about Jay Bhattacharya, the head of the NIH now, talking about, uh, Martin Kulldorff, and then an epidemiologist from Oxford. "Take them down." And so when I have scientists come before my committee, I'll ask them the first question: "Have you ever, or would you ever, send another scientist a note saying to take down a fellow scientist you disagreed with?" My goodness, what kind of-- That sounds like the mafia or something.

    29. JR

      Yeah.

    30. SP

      Doesn't sound like someone who's supposed to be above the fray, objective scientist.

  9. 43:2354:31

    Drug ads, pharma influence, and the hemp/THC crackdown in Texas and beyond

    1. JR

      Well, it's also, it's also, there's a giant incentive that in this country and in New Zealand, they're the only two countries in the world where they allow pharmaceutical drug companies to advertise.

    2. SP

      Yeah.

    3. JR

      And it's, it's a problem. I very rarely watch regular television, but every now and then I'll just go, "What are these fucking crazy people up to?"

    4. SP

      Yeah.

    5. JR

      And I'll watch MSNBC or CNN-

    6. SP

      And see a million drug ads.

    7. JR

      And the number of drug ads is staggering-

    8. SP

      Yeah

    9. JR

      ... and the weirdness in those ads, the calm tone of their voice as they list off these horrific side effects. [laughing]

    10. SP

      Well, and the thing that's hard to imagine is there's sometimes for a disease that, like, five thousand people in the country have, a disease that-

    11. JR

      Right

    12. SP

      ... as a physician, even though I know the names of most of the diseases, I'll be kind of uncertain on that. I don't remember seeing anybody ever with, with that disease, and yet it's being advertised on MSNBC. And then the question is: do you think that affects what the, the newscasters are saying on the news?

    13. JR

      Right.

    14. SP

      And it does. That's why they're, they're so all in with this. Um, but you're right.

    15. JR

      But it's not-- They're not trying to use those ads to sell those drugs. They're using the money by putting those ads up to make sure that those-

    16. SP

      You're probably right

    17. JR

      ... pundits don't talk badly about the pharmaceutical drug companies.

    18. SP

      It's probably more about shaping the news than it is getting sales.

    19. JR

      Well, the, the proof is in the pudding. There have absolutely been horrific side effects of a bunch of different pharmac-

    20. SP

      Right

    21. JR

      ... pharmaceutical drugs. You don't hear a peep about any of that stuff-

    22. SP

      Right

    23. JR

      ... on CNN.

    24. SP

      And you wonder who's buying a drug when they say, "Well, you could die, you could become paralyzed, you could have a stroke, you could have a blood clot." [laughing]

    25. JR

      Explosive, bloody diarrhea. Yeah. Loss all your memory, suicidal ideation. It's just, they just list them off.

    26. SP

      Yeah.

    27. JR

      But-

    28. SP

      And they list them off like this-

    29. JR

      But-

    30. SP

      ... "Consult your doctor."

  10. 54:311:05:10

    ‘Pretty names’ in government: banking, Fed interest on reserves, and unintended incentives

    1. SP

      I know this is gonna be shocking to you, but that's the story of government.

    2. JR

      Yeah.

    3. SP

      Most things that come out in government, if you look beneath the surface, they all, they all have pretty names, they have acronyms, say, patriotism, the Patriot Act. How-

    4. JR

      Right.

    5. SP

      You must be anti-patriotic if you're not for the Patriot Act. But most of the things they say, it's the opposite, or someone has put something forward that really is about... Like, let's say it's a banking regulation. You say, "This is gonna protect the poor people." But it turns out the banking regulation is easier paid for and absorbed by big banks. And so what happens to your small local bank, and you say, "How come all the small banks get gobbled up by big banks?" It's 'cause you put regulations on that who favored? The big banks favor the regulations 'cause it puts the small bank out of business, they get absorbed by the big bank, and then the new banks trying to come in can't afford the compliance cost. Um, right now, one of the extraordinary things we're doing with, with banks, and I don't think many people know this, the Federal Reserve is now paying interest to big banks on keeping reserves at the Federal Reserve. There's $3 trillion there. Last year, the big banks, primarily the big banks in New York, got $187 billion in interest. Previously, that interest would go back to the Treasury to offset the debt. That's about ten percent of our debt. So our debt is ten percent worse because we're now paying, and we never did this before 2010. We never paid interest on, on reserves. And what it means to pay interest on reserves is that it's an incentive for the Fed just to leave it there. Why loan it to you if you're expanding a business, when I can just leave it here and get four percent? It also keeps interest rates from going down, 'cause if the Fed pays the big bank four percent, are they gonna loan it to you for three and a half when it can just sit at the Fed and gain four? So it's, it's kind of, you know... President Trump always wants what he wants, and sometimes he wants good things, but he, you know, may not go about it the best way. He wants interest rates to be lower. I think most people do. But one way to make interest lower is tell the Fed they can't pay interest, uh, to these big banks.

    6. JR

      Have you ever had a conversation with him about this?

    7. SP

      I've been trying for, like, three months to get a conversation with Bessent, and I held up one of their, uh-- with the Secretary of Treasury, I held up [chuckles] one of their appointees last week, which is one of the things you do to get the attention of the people you want to talk to. And they've agreed to meet with me, but we're already, you know, halfway into January. But I'm trying to get a meeting with Bessent to talk to him about this idea of paying interest because they said, "Oh, it'll only take thirty billion dollars to set up the system." Then it was a trillion, now it's three trillion, and I think it just keeps growing and growing, but that money really isn't being productive, and it's a gift to these big banks.

    8. JR

      Oof! When it comes to this, uh, this THC thing, what, what can be done?

    9. SP

      Trump's been good on some things. You know, the whole idea of changing it from Schedule I to Schedule III-

    10. JR

      Yeah

    11. SP

      ... is an improvement. It's still illegal without a prescription, but a lot of the research with marijuana didn't happen because Schedule I's just almost impossible.

    12. JR

      Right.

    13. SP

      You gotta have, like, safes and guards and everything to deal with, with a Schedule I drug, and so very little research occurred on marijuana over time. And, um, so d- lowering the schedule is a good idea. Um, state by state has kind of worked in the sense that it's allowed people to see what it's like and get used to it. Um, but some of the states have, have backtracked, and some are worried that they went too far. Um, it's harder to determine, I think, a- acute intoxication if someone's driving-

    14. JR

      Right

    15. SP

      ... under the influence, to do a test. I, I would guess the technology should be out there, but I don't know that it's widely available.

    16. JR

      I think it would have to be a blood test, right? I, I, I don't know. If you're, if you've consumed an edible, you're not gonna be able to get something with a breathalyzer.

    17. SP

      I don't, I don't know that for certain. Your, your breath is amazing what it actually has in it.

    18. JR

      Mm.

    19. SP

      So I, I don't know the answer to that, if the technology-

    20. JR

      So maybe just the-

    21. SP

      Yeah

    22. JR

      ... the testing is not-

    23. SP

      W- yeah

    24. JR

      ... adequate.

    25. SP

      Which reminds me, there's a guy in California I've met. Just, you meet extraordinary people. He's actually studying, uh, contents of what you exhale to look for cancer markers. So, I mean, they're really minute-

    26. JR

      Mm

    27. SP

      ... but he's gonna try to diagnose things like, you know, you'll hear of a friend, you know, who's, like, forty-five years old and has pancreatic cancer, or we actually have a former senator right now, Ben Sasse, who says he has Stage IV pancreatic cancer, and the reason it, it spreads before you know you have it. But he's trying to get a... And he has a test that measures markers just from what you exhale to try to pick up on cancers before they be detected.

    28. JR

      Mm. So there's a possibility that they can come up with some sort of a detection method to find out if you're intoxicated?

    29. SP

      I think probably, and I, I don't know the technology that well.

    30. JR

      Uh, but it's either way, uh, just for responsible use for adults, it just doesn't make any sense that they would change it from what it is now and make it more restrictive.

  11. 1:05:101:30:25

    Venezuela, interdictions, and regime change: war vs. crime framing

    1. SP

      Yeah, and, um, I'll give you an example what I think is bizarre. So we've been, uh, blowing up these people in boats o- o- off the coast of Venezuela. They're accused of running drugs, but nobody knows their names, and nobody's put up any evidence. When we've, um, had them, September 2nd, two of them were still clinging to the wreckage. They're shipwrecked. Um, they blew them up. And so what m- I think is bizarre is I hear mostly my Republican colleagues say, "Well, um, we shouldn't have to. How do we know they're not armed?" And it's like, but, but there's this thing called presumption of innocence. They say it doesn't apply. Well, it actually always has applied on the oceans. We have always-- We've had drug interdiction, but we have always stopped boats and asked to search them. If they flee or shoot at the Coast Guard, they will get shot and blown up, but it's usually an escalatory sort of steps.... We know that when the Coast Guard boards vessels off of Miami and off of California, one in four of the boats they board don't have any drugs on them. So I, I look at my colleagues who say they're pro-life, and they, they value God's inspiration in life, but they don't give a shit about these people in the boats. And are they terrible people in the boats? I don't know. They're probably poor people in Venezuela and Colombia, and really, they say, "Well, we're at war with them. They're committing war by bringing drugs into America." They're not even coming here. They're going to these islands in the south part of the Caribbean, and the cocaine, and it's not fentanyl at all, the cocaine's going to Europe. Those little boats can't get here. Uh, no one's even asked this common question: Those boats have these four engines on them, they're outboard boats. You can probably go about 100 miles before you have to refuel.

    2. JR

      Right.

    3. SP

      They're 2,000 miles from us.

    4. JR

      Right.

    5. SP

      They'd have to refuel 20 times to get here. They really-- It was all a pretense and a false argument, but I guess what I don't feel connected to my Republican colleagues is that those lives don't matter at all, and we can just blow them up, and against all justice and against all laws of war, all laws of just war, we never have blown up people who were shipwrecked. It's against the military code of justice to do that, and we're doing it, and everybody just says, "Oh, well, they're drug dealers."

    6. JR

      Why do you think they were attacking those people? 'Cause I've heard a bunch of different theories, and one of the big theories was they were trying to get the cartel upset at Maduro in order to get him out of office.

    7. SP

      It's all been a pretense for ele- uh, arresting Maduro. So we have to set up the predicate, we gotta show you we care about drugs, and but the weird thing about it is they really care about drugs, except for the former president of Honduras, Hernández, who was given a 40-year sentence, was tried, was found guilty, he was given 40 years in a US jail, and he's let go at the same time we're arresting Maduro because we're-- he's w- attacking the United States with drugs. And then I get this stuff. I had this on air from a, a respectable journalist the other day. She said, "Well, don't you care about the kids in our country dying from fentanyl?" I said, "Of course I do, but you know, no fentanyl comes from Venezuela. Not a little bit, zero."

    8. JR

      Yeah, if we were really interested, we'd be attacking Mexico.

    9. SP

      Well, they wanna do that next.

    10. JR

      They'd attack the cartels.

    11. SP

      They want to bomb Mexico.

    12. JR

      Well, do you think that this is-

    13. SP

      [chuckles]

    14. JR

      ... like, sort of a predicate, like we're-- they're trying to set that up?

    15. SP

      I hope not. That's why I've opposed it, because, look, I have no love lost for Maduro. I wrote another book called The Case Against Socialism. I think that socialism, historically, there's been a link between socialism and state-sponsored violence, and so I- in the book, we talk about a 16-year-old girl who has a gang, and her gang's turf or territory are the dumpsters outside of restaurants to scavenge for food. That's what, uh, Maduro and Chávez did, did to Venezuela, and so I'm glad he's gone. I'm glad s- you know, I hope they choose wiser, but at the same time, if the predicate is we're going to snatch people, why don't we snatch da Silva from Brazil? Some people say Bolsonaro is unfairly in prison, may be true, and they say da Silva cheated in the election. May also be true, but should the President of the United States, no matter who or she, he or she is, have the ability, without a vote of Congress, the people's representatives, just go snatch people out of jails in Brazil and put a new government in? One, it doesn't usually work. Yeah, I'm hoping it's successful here, but, you know, we've tried it in other places. Uh, it's one of the things I liked about Donald Trump. He was against regime change in Iraq.

    16. JR

      Right.

    17. SP

      He was against regime change in Libya, and it didn't work real well in Iraq or Libya.

    18. JR

      So what do you think changed? Why do you, why do you think they're so interested in Venezuela?

    19. SP

      Influence.

    20. JR

      Do you think it's just because of the oil?

    21. SP

      Influence, and I've, I've jokingly said that there ought to be a-

    22. JR

      ... Uh, reoccurring issue that we thought was resolved with the software. We're back? Okay. All right, we're good. Um-

    23. SP

      Sorry, folks, the program was interrupted by the NSA. [laughing] Uh, you know, they are spying on the show to see if-

    24. JR

      So, so here's the question: Uh, the Biden administration had a $20 million... Was it $20 or $22 million bounty on Maduro?

    25. SP

      Right.

    26. JR

      Like, they've wanted Maduro out forever. Why was that?

    27. SP

      Um, because, uh, you know, they d- they've, they don't have free elections.

    28. JR

      Right.

    29. SP

      It's an authoritarian government. The people are suffering, so it's this idea that that's wrong and government should... A- and, and I think that's a noble concept, to want better government, more freedom for people, but I could probably list for you a dozen different countries that have autocratic rulers right now, and we could go in, and we could arrest them all and put people in place, but it sometimes backfires. For example, I think one of the things... I think there's a good feeling towards America from a lot of Venezuelans right now that are happy that Maduro is gone. But ask them again in six months if we're still controlling their oil and we're doling out a little bit of money, but the money's not going to the people, it's going to the socialist government. So you realize we've traded one socialist for another.

    30. JR

      Right.

  12. 1:30:251:59:37

    Work, welfare, and AI: meaning, incentives, and the ‘Penny Plan’ for debt

    1. SP

      I think the first thing to acknowledge is both parties are equally guilty. The debt is the v- problem of both parties, and the spending is both parties. And there is a compromise. I tell people it's a dirty little deal that's going on right in front of your nose. The, the right, Lindsey Graham and the war hawks, want more military money.... the left, Chris Murphy and, uh, Booker, they, they want more welfare. What's the compromise? You scratch my back, I'll scratch you. I'll let you have your military money if you let me have the welfare money. So the compromise of the last fifty years is they've both grown enormously. But the budget we vote on is only one-third of the spending. Two-thirds of the spending is mandatory spending that's just on autopilot. We never vote on it. The one-third that we vote on is about $2 trillion. That's what the deficit is. So when I vote for spending, and I vote against most of it, almost all of that is borrowed. What would be the compromise that would fix it? The reverse. I would go to, um, you know, the left, my buddy Ron Wyden, who I am good friends with, and I would say, "Look, we're out of money. The interest is killing us. It's crowding everything out. What if we spend 1% less next year on welfare? And I'll tell my party they have to spend 1% less on military." If you do that across the board, you'd have to include the mandatory programs, you can balance your budget gradually over a five-year period, and I've called this the Penny Plan. And I think it's a compromise because instead of... What conservatives have typically done is they've said, "It's Sesame Street. If we can get rid of public TV and Sesame Street, we'll, we'll show those liberals and we'll balance the budget." Well, it's not enough money, and I'm not against doing it.

    2. JR

      Yeah.

    3. SP

      I voted to reduce the money, but there are some people on the left who live and die by public TV, and they think it's the greatest thing, and it's an offense to them. So rather than cut 100% of it, let's cut the- and you can balance the budget right now if you cut 6% of the military, 6% of Sesame Street, 6% of everything everybody wants, and I think you could actually do it. And I try this message out sometime. Everybody that comes to Washington wants money, and there are usually things that you can have sympathy for. So one week they come, and they wear the purple ribbons, and it's for Alzheimer's disease. Well, I have family members who have Alzheimer's. I have a great deal of sympathy, but we're $2 trillion short. So what I usually say to them is, "We're a rich country, and we should be able to spend some of our money on Alzheimer's research. But you got $100 million last year." I'm making up the number. "But let's say you got $100 million last year, and because we're short of money, everybody has to get less this year. Would it be okay if I only vote for $94 million for you next year?" And when you put it that way, and they're usually in there with tears running down their face, talking about their mom and their grandmother and Alzheimer's, and they're worried they're gonna get it. To a person, you look around the table, and they say, "Well, that sounds kind of fair. Everybody has to take a hit, right? Ninety-four percent." Almost, uh, almost everything that is like... For example, food stamps. People say, "Well, the people are gonna starve without food stamps." Well, why don't we just get rid of Coca-Cola and Pepsi? No sugar dr- uh, no sugar drinks on food stamps. That's, uh, 10% of food stamps. That'd be a 10% cut. We'll do- we'll- we're gonna spend 10% less. No one's gonna starve.

    4. JR

      Would you spend... Hold on, but would you spend less, or would you just limit the purchasing to non-

    5. SP

      We'll probably be lucky just to limit the purchase, but I would spend less.

    6. JR

      But you couldn't spend- but how could you spend less? You would have to give them less, and you say, "Hey, not only can you not buy sugary drinks, but now you'll have less money to buy healthy food, which is more expensive."

    7. SP

      Well, well, what, what, what you would do is-

    8. JR

      But you know what I'm saying?

    9. SP

      Well, maybe. If you had a budget, let's say it's $100 million, and next year the food stamp budget is gonna be $94 million, and you say you can't buy Coca-Cola and Pepsi and sugared drinks, they would still have to make their decisions with a little bit less, but they, on average, are spending 6% or... Yeah, I think it's about- no, I think it's about 10% of the dollars are going towards these sugared drinks. They would have to make decisions to do it, but I think even something like food stamps, they don't- there's a strong argument, "Oh, people will be hungry." Hunger is not a problem in our country. It really isn't. Our problem is too much food. It, it frankly is. There is no one starving in our country. There is food everywhere.

    10. JR

      Right, but it's not too much food. It's non-nutritious food. I mean, it's not even-

    11. SP

      Too much bad food.

    12. JR

      It's not even food.

    13. SP

      Well, you're right. [chuckles]

    14. JR

      It's things you eat that have no nutrition in it at all-

    15. SP

      Exactly

    16. JR

      ... like Coca-Cola.

    17. SP

      Yes, exactly.

    18. JR

      Like candy and cookies and all the shit that you can buy with food stamps.

    19. SP

      And I've been talking- you can get candies. You know, you can get a bag of candy on your food stamps.

    20. JR

      Right.

    21. SP

      There's no... That should- And so I've been talking about this for years, and so I had a Democrat senator who I can talk to, we're friends. We're walking down the hall, and I tell him about it. He says, "Well, that sounds reasonable, but I don't want to reduce the dollar." So what you're saying is the compromise is probably Democrats are never gonna vote to reduce the dollars. We should, but we won't get it. But even when we got- push came to shove, his staff piped up, and they said, "Oh, I thought you were a libertarian. I thought you were for choice." And I said, "I am, with your money. [chuckles] I mean, the taxpayer money. We don't let you buy alcohol."

    22. JR

      Right.

    23. SP

      I think it's arguable that sugar drinks are as bad as buying alcohol.

    24. JR

      It's close.

    25. SP

      Yeah.

    26. JR

      I mean, certainly in terms of health consequences.

    27. SP

      Yeah.

    28. JR

      You know, diabetes and obesity and all the other comorbidities that come along with more obesity. But the thing is, it's like if you're asking them to buy healthy food, healthy bo- food is definitely more expensive.

    29. SP

      Sometimes. If you want to go to Whole-

    30. JR

      Sometimes?

  13. 1:59:372:16:10

    Minnesota welfare fraud, cash leaving MSP airport, and auditing the system

    1. JR

      Uh, one of the things I wanna talk to you about is, uh, what's going on in this country right now. Um, w- well, one of the big ones, one of the big things that's in the news is this whole Minnesota thing. Um, particularly, well, there a lot of things to cover, but particularly fraud, and that they're uncovering a lot of fraud, that it seems like not only was there a lot of fraud, but a lot of these people that were getting a lot of money from this fraud were donating to politicians. There's, uh-

    2. SP

      Yeah

    3. JR

      ... I believe, $35 million by daycares was donated to Democrats in Minnesota last year. Is that an accurate, is that an accurate number? Let's find out.

    4. SP

      It's extraordinary.

    5. JR

      That's one of the best things for AI.

    6. SP

      No, it's extraordinary.

    7. JR

      AI will give you-

    8. SP

      I saw a good-

    9. JR

      ... good information.

    10. SP

      I saw a good cartoon yesterday. It was an iceberg, and the top of the iceberg was Minnesota fraud, but the iceberg beneath the surface was California.

    11. JR

      Yes.

    12. SP

      And can you imagine, just be- ship size-

    13. JR

      Well, they're looking into California fraud now because of Minnesota fraud, and it's... Look, just the homeless thing alone, just the fact that California spent $24 billion on the homeless, can't account for-

    14. SP

      Right

    15. JR

      ... where the money went, and the problem just got worse.

    16. SP

      Well, there, there's a couple things about the refugee thing. I don't think refugees should get welfare, and I have a bill to say they shouldn't get it. If you come to this country, and your church sponsors somebody to come to it, you support them. You sign up, you sponsor them, you support them. Uh, the taxpayers shouldn't support them. The other thing is, is we did a lot of the- a lot of these people came on special visas. They weren't part of the normal. It was part of this refugee program, but they got special visas. The Somalis came because there was perpetual war in their country and famine. Um-

    17. JR

      ... No evidence Minnesota daycares gave millions-

    18. SP

      [laughing]

    19. JR

      -to political campaigns. What is this, Yahoo News?

    20. SP

      [laughing]

    21. JR

      You know, who's-- I don't believe that. I, I- oh- So I don't believe they haven't given any money. This is where I got it from. Okay, the figure appears to come from a viral social media post, widely shared video alleging that the daycares... So there's- here's a problem with this: if this fraud is as widespread as it is, you're gonna get a lot of people that are covering their tracks right now.

    22. SP

      Right.

    23. JR

      And so one of the ways to cover their tracks is to debunk things and to post stories, and-

    24. SP

      The-

    25. JR

      I don't think we really know how much money is missing.

    26. SP

      I think part of the reform is we just shouldn't give out welfare.

    27. JR

      I think-

    28. SP

      And this doesn't mean we shouldn't help people.

    29. JR

      Right.

    30. SP

      But if you're coming to this country, and you wanna experience the greatness of this country, and someone sponsors you, they should take care of you. But what happens is, most of these charities that work on bringing refugees in, they have a big heart, they're bringing them in, but the first paperwork they fill out is signing up for welfare.

  14. 2:16:102:41:59

    Border policy and ICE tactics: sanctuary cities, deportations, masks, and civil liberties

    1. JR

      So speaking of which, so if you... Like, what do you- what was your take on the border being wide open for the last four years? And not just wide open, but they were encouraging people to come to America, telling them how to do it, and even helping them get across-

    2. SP

      Right

    3. JR

      ... giving them EBT cards, giving them cell phones. What was your take on all that?

    4. SP

      I do believe that they understand that most of the people coming across will ultimately be voters, and that two out of three will vote Democrat, so it's all power politics. Um, they say it's about, um, you know, humanity and being humane and all that. It isn't that. It's all about voting demographics, and they want these people to come in because many of them are suffering, you know, through sex trafficking, all the other crap that went along with this mass migration. So I don't think it's necessarily the best place to be, but I'd say it's one of the most extraordinary accomplishments. You know, as you know, I occasionally am on the other side with Donald Trump. We don't always agree on everything, but on the border, I think he did a ma- a fabulous job by sheer force of personality. He fixed it before any money was allotted. He fixed it in the first three months, and it went from whatever the number was, down... He reduced it by 98% by sh- he relocated some people there, but by sheer force of personality, before any money was even spent, he, he fixed the problem on the border.

    5. JR

      Well, it seemed like the Democrats wanted the problem to exist.

    6. SP

      I think 'cause they want more voters. They don't vote immediately-

    7. JR

      Yeah, and they were moving people-

    8. SP

      Yeah

    9. JR

      ... to swing states, and the idea being that the census only counts human beings, it doesn't count citizens.

    10. SP

      Right.

    11. JR

      And so you get more congressional seats.

    12. SP

      So California probably has a couple of congressional seats that are based on illegal aliens, you know? So there's such a large population that I think you have about, what, it's about 750,000 people per congressional district, and there's got to be one or two congressional districts that they have that they probably don't, uh, they shouldn't be allotted.

    13. JR

      So then the pr- the problem becomes the people are here, and a lot of the people that came across the border are here il- illegally. Illegally. Even though they were encouraged to be here, they are here illegally. What do you do?

    14. SP

      Um, well, this is... gonna shock you. I'm a moderate on this. I actually think that most of the people that are here and working lawfully and can pack- pass a background check, I would give them no welfare, and I would, I'd give them no citizenship, no voting privileges, but you can work, and we won't arrest you.

    15. JR

      Okay, um, no citizenship, but a potential path to citizenship?

    16. SP

      I think it's better just to say the trade-off is this, that you came illegally. Right now, the law says you gotta go back, and you'll never get in, basically. So the compromise is, you came in illegally, you just don't get to be a citizen. Your kids will be. Now, the new ones, the 8 million that might have come in last year, some of them need to go back, and particularly any of them committing crimes. And I think people are very open, and I think the Trump administration has sent a lot of criminals back. I think that's good. Um-

    17. JR

      There's no question, they've sent a lot of criminals back. There's also no question they've arrested citizens-

    18. SP

      Right

    19. JR

      ... that they thought were, were illegal aliens. Uh, they've sent people back that were in this country most of their lives. They came over here as infants, and they don't have birth certificates, and-

    20. SP

      Right

    21. JR

      ... they don't have ID, they don't have citizenship.

    22. SP

      See, what- the compromise I'm offering is different than anybody's ever talked about. Everybody thinks the compromise has to include voting and citizenship. If in Texas, we gave amnesty and let, I don't know, a couple million people vote, immediately Texas becomes Democrat for the next 20 years. So that's what it's all about.

    23. JR

      Right.

    24. SP

      It's about voting. But-

    25. JR

      Is the problem the census?... because why are they counting people and giving congressional seats based on people that aren't citizens? W- if they changed that alone-

    26. SP

      We could, we could-

    27. JR

      -and made it so you're counting people-

    28. SP

      We could change-

    29. JR

      -but you're only giving congressional seats based on the amount of citizens.

    30. SP

      We could change the law, but changing the law is difficult. You know, I mean, you have to end up getting 60 votes, which means we need seven Democrats-

Episode duration: 2:43:37

Install uListen for AI-powered chat & search across the full episode — Get Full Transcript

Transcript of episode koSIQ-ASW8k

Get more out of YouTube videos.

High quality summaries for YouTube videos. Accurate transcripts to search & find moments. Powered by ChatGPT & Claude AI.