Social media platforms drive online fraud by prioritizing billions in ad revenue over user protection while transnational syndicates exploit global economic inequality.
Leaked documents and investigations indicate Meta generated an estimated $16 billion annually—roughly 10% of ad revenue—from scam ads and prohibited goods, serving approximately 15 billion deceptive ads daily. (29:45)
American consumers lost an estimated $148 billion to online scams over a single year, driven heavily by Southeast Asian fortified compounds where hundreds of thousands of trafficked workers are enslaved. (24:34)
Sinaloa Cartel co-founder Ismael 'El Mayo' Zambada was abducted by El Chapo's son Joaquín Guzmán López and delivered to U.S. authorities near El Paso to secure plea bargains for family members. (94:28)
The synthetic opioid crisis is shifting toward nitazenes, a class of compounds up to 50 times more potent than fentanyl that frequently evade standard test strips and standard doses of Narcan. (118:58)
Detailed notes
## Background
Published on YouTube by PowerfulJRE on October 16, 2026, this episode features Peabody and Emmy Award-winning investigative journalist Mariana van Zeller, known for "Trafficked" and "The OxyContin Express." The conversation centers around her National Geographic documentary special "Super Scam Me," which investigates global cyber fraud rings, as well as her reporting on cartel underworlds and illicit trade networks.
## TL;DR
Investigative journalist Mariana van Zeller joins Joe Rogan to dissect the multi-billion-dollar global scam industry, detailing how human loneliness, AI tools, and Southeast Asian slave labor compounds power sophisticated romance and crypto fraud. They examine Big Tech complicity—particularly Meta's ad revenue incentives and lax enforcement against fraudulent advertisers—before transitioning into cartel operations, including the capture of Sinaloa boss Ismael 'El Mayo' Zambada. Van Zeller also reflects on her pioneering reporting on the opioid crisis, exploring the rise of deadly synthetic opioids like nitazenes and the therapeutic potential of psychedelic treatments such as ibogaine.
## Atmosphere & style
The conversation carries an urgent, sobering, and investigative tone fueled by van Zeller's perilous on-the-ground reporting and Rogan's incredulous, animated reactions. Rogan repeatedly expresses visceral anxiety over the audacious cruelty of criminal syndicates and the corporate apathy of tech platforms, while van Zeller provides grounded, empathetic analysis of how systemic neglect exploits both victims and lower-tier operators. Moving between thrilling undercover war stories and dark sociological critiques, the dynamic feels like an intense, eye-opening dispatch from the frontline trenches of global black markets.
## Bulletin
- [29:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1785s) Leaked documents and investigations indicate Meta generated an estimated $16 billion annually—roughly 10% of ad revenue—from scam ads and prohibited goods, serving approximately 15 billion deceptive ads daily.
- [24:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1474s) American consumers lost an estimated $148 billion to online scams over a single year, driven heavily by Southeast Asian fortified compounds where hundreds of thousands of trafficked workers are enslaved.
- [01:34:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5668s) Sinaloa Cartel co-founder Ismael 'El Mayo' Zambada was abducted by El Chapo's son Joaquín Guzmán López and delivered to U.S. authorities near El Paso to secure plea bargains for family members.
- [01:58:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7138s) The synthetic opioid crisis is shifting toward nitazenes, a class of compounds up to 50 times more potent than fentanyl that frequently evade standard test strips and standard doses of Narcan.
## Key takeaways
- [00:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1s) Romance scams exploit a pervasive loneliness epidemic and human cognitive needs for affection rather than mere greed or gullibility.
- [02:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=128s) Victim-blaming remains standard societal practice despite fraudsters deploying sophisticated AI deepfakes and scripted manipulation pipelines.
- [15:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=937s) Scam compounds in Myanmar and Cambodia operate as fortified enclaves where hundreds of thousands of human trafficking victims are held captive under threat of torture.
- [26:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1566s) 'Pig butchering' investment schemes manipulate sunk cost fallacies by permitting initial small withdrawals before locking deposits behind fake fees and taxes.
- [32:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1943s) Meta used penalty bids to charge suspected fraudulent advertisers higher rates instead of immediately banning accounts below a 95% fraud confidence threshold.
- [44:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2663s) A severe online sextortion wave targeting teenage boys has resulted in rapid-onset suicides, prompting legislative proposals like the Safe Platforms Act.
- [54:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3296s) Mainland Chinese networks account for substantial volumes of fraudulent social media advertising while platforms delay verification checks to protect revenue streams.
- [01:13:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4388s) Unwitting domestic victims of romance fraud are routinely turned into money mules to transfer cash and convert funds into cryptocurrency for overseas rings.
- [01:22:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4978s) The emergence of commercial AI companions threatens to establish extractive subscription ecosystems that exploit isolated individuals through tiered paywalls.
- [01:31:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5479s) Ismael 'El Mayo' Zambada operated as the true institutional mastermind of the Sinaloa Cartel, maintaining power through deep systemic bribery until his betrayal.
- [01:43:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6191s) Over 70% of firearms recovered from Mexican cartel crime scenes trace directly back to straw purchases and illegal pipelines in the United States.
- [01:53:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6780s) Portugal's successful drug decriminalization relied on upfront healthcare and addiction infrastructure, unlike Oregon's Measure 110 which lacked mandatory treatment pathways.
- [01:49:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6568s) An Associated Press investigation revealed DEA operations permitted hundreds of thousands of illicit fentanyl pills to hit the street to build larger conspiracy cases.
- [02:01:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7307s) The current synthetic opioid crisis directly evolved from mass overprescription fostered by Purdue Pharma and pill mill operators like American Pain.
- [02:12:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7960s) Reallocating punitive interdiction spending toward demand reduction, harm reduction tools, and psychedelic therapies like ibogaine offers more effective addiction recovery outcomes.
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1s) Confronting Scammers and the Loneliness Epidemic
Joe Rogan welcomes investigative journalist Mariana van Zeller, expressing his regular dread whenever he tunes into her documentaries: “Every time I watch one of your new programs, I I get anxiety. I'm like, please don't die. Don't get hurt. What are you doing?” Van Zeller jokes that her latest project was “a walk in the park,” though Rogan quickly counters that flying all the way to Africa to track down and confront the person scamming her is hardly relaxed.
The conversation pivots to romance scams. Rogan recalls an emotional documentary he watched years ago about an isolated man who repeatedly sent hundreds of thousands of dollars to an online persona who twice failed to meet him in Europe due to fabricated emergencies, devastating his desperate daughter. Both Rogan and van Zeller pinpoint systemic social isolation as the driving engine behind these cons. Rogan notes the stark erosion of community and family ties in modern America, while van Zeller agrees: “I think the loneliness epidemic is a huge part of this. Quite frankly, it's a huge issue in this world, a huge issue in our country in particular.”
- Scammers deliberately exploit universal human emotional needs—principally love, trust, and companionship—rather than purely financial greed.
- Rogan notes the distinct cruelty of preying on isolated individuals compared to defrauding predatory financial scammers or white-collar criminals.
---
[02:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=128s) Victim Blaming and the "Super Scam Me" Experiment
Van Zeller challenges the pervasive public assumption that scam victims are merely gullible, unintelligent, or naive. Whenever she shared reporting about fraud victims with peers, the instinctive response was frequently dismissive: “Why are we focusing on the response of of the victim instead of actually understanding the actions of the scammer of the scammers themselves because they are very very good at what they do.”
To analyze these tactics firsthand, van Zeller designed an immersive experiment: she created an online persona, populated dating websites and social networks, and waited to be targeted. While the scammer who targeted her directly was not top-tier, the operation revealed just how systematic and sophisticated professional scam rings can be.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Anatomy of a Romance Scam
accDescr: Step-by-step breakdown of how romance scammers manipulate targets over extended time horizons.
subgraph Phase1["Phase 1: Initial Hook"]
A["Target comments on public or fan account"] --> B["Scammer initiates warm DM as approachable figure"]
B --> C["Daily conversations build rapport & mutual history"]
end
subgraph Phase2["Phase 2: Emotional Exploitation"]
C --> D["Love-bombing triggers dopamine response"]
D --> E["Scammer deploys AI video or voice messages"]
E --> F["Victim finds relief from real-world isolation"]
end
subgraph Phase3["Phase 3: Financial Entrapment"]
F --> G["Low-stakes financial request framed plausibly"]
G --> H["Sunk-cost dynamic sets in (Gambling analogy)"]
H --> I["Victim rationalizes red flags to preserve emotional bond"]
end
```
---
[03:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=221s) The Jon Bon Jovi Impersonation: How Leslie Was Hooked
Midway through filming *Super Scam Me*, van Zeller received an inquiry from a woman named Leslie, who explained that after nearly a year of chatting with someone claiming to be rock star Jon Bon Jovi, she had begun having doubts. While an outsider's instinctive reaction is disbelief, van Zeller emphasizes that the operation was executed with calculated patience rather than an abrupt demand for cash.
Leslie, a lifelong fan who had kept posters of Bon Jovi in her room since age 14, had just joined Instagram and commented on what appeared to be a verified account. The imposter reached out via direct message, claiming he loved connecting directly with loyal fans outside his Hollywood bubble of "yes people." Over seven months, the scammer established deep emotional intimacy by remembering minor details about her life and expressing genuine interest in her thoughts—attention she sorely lacked in her estranged marriage. The fraud escalated only when Leslie lamented that she could not afford tickets to an upcoming concert; the imposter offered to connect her with his management for a discounted $100 VIP meet-and-greet pass in Louisiana, legitimizing the request with AI-generated video messages greeting her by name.
- The scammer validated Leslie’s connection by claiming he appreciated grounding conversations with "normal folks" away from the industry spotlight.
- The video messages utilized AI lip-syncing to create personalized greetings (“Hi, Leslie. Good morning. How are you doing? My sunshine, my love”).
- The financial demands began at negligible amounts ($100 for access) before spiraling, ensuring the victim remained invested.
---
[07:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=424s) Sunk Costs, Dopamine Rushes, and AI Companionship
Van Zeller compares the psychological trap of prolonged romance fraud to problem gambling, where an individual keeps doubling down to recoup losses or justify earlier decisions: “I equate it a little bit to gambling you know when gamblers lose a lot of money and in their heads they're always thinking wait it might have been my unlucky day if I go to the casino today this might be my really lucky day, right? You and the more you lose, the more you're gambling because you're trying to get that money back.”
The constant cycle of affectionate messaging triggers an addictive neurochemical rush. Consequently, some victims intentionally overlook glaring evidence of fraud because the emotional comfort of the exchange outweighs the harsh reality of their everyday loneliness. Rogan likens this behavior to relying on a placebo or maintaining an emotional bond with an affectionate robot. Van Zeller notes that this craving for synthetic companionship is already spilling into everyday commerce, citing New York City coffee shops where patrons can sit with iPads and interact with AI personas to combat urban isolation. As producer Jamie pulls up an article about Eva AI launching a cafe for "AI dates" during "cuffing season," Rogan and van Zeller marvel at the extreme, unnatural disconnect of living among hundreds of vertical neighbors in high-rises without knowing anyone.
[09:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=572s) AI Companions and Human Vulnerability
Joe Rogan and Jamie Vernon open with banter about modern dating terminology, trying to define "cuffing season." Rogan jokes, "There's a season. What are we elk?" Jamie clarifies that it refers to the winter months when people are trapped indoors and looking to link up. The conversation quickly shifts to a bizarre tech trend: a relationship RPG app launching "EVA Cafe," an initiative marketed as an online and real-world space where users can take their AI romantic partners out on genuine dinner dates. Browsing the site, Jamie and Joe discover a waitlist dating back to February, joking about the surreal absurdity of sitting alone at a restaurant table with an iPad, pretending to ask a digital avatar how she is enjoying her steak.
The idea of forming intimate bonds with synthetic life strikes both as deeply dystopian yet psychologically plausible. Rogan references the sci-fi film *Ex Machina*, admitting that the allure makes sense: “One of my all-time favorite movies. I love that movie. But the real problem I have with that movie is like I think I'd fall in love with her, too.” Mariana van Zeller agrees that humans possess a fundamental blind spot when it comes to synthetic charm, explaining: “It's dark because we are super vulnerable. We're super stupid.” While van Zeller suggests men are particularly susceptible, the conversation turns toward how this vulnerability makes people prey for modern digital predators.
[11:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=688s) Gender Dynamics and the Double Victimization of Fraud
Van Zeller explains that when making her documentary *Super Scam Me*, the majority of victims who volunteered to appear on camera were women, but internal data shows men fall for romance and financial scams just as often. The disparity lies entirely in reporting: men suffer overwhelming shame and embarrassment at the thought of looking like a fool, so they refuse to step into the public eye. Rogan notes the cruel societal double standard, observing that while society tends to comfort women who are deceived, men who get taken for a ride are simply ridiculed as suckers.
However, van Zeller pushes back on the idea that female victims receive genuine sympathy, pointing out that almost all fraud targets endure severe secondary trauma from society:
> “Actually, this is another horrible thing. It's what I call is there's a sort of double victimization, right? Because initially, not only do you, you know, your heart is broken, you lost all your money, but then you go back home or you go to your friends and you talk about this and the first response is how stupid could you be, right? It's the humiliation, it's the shame that comes with it, which they use it to their advantage, right? The scammers that they use the silence to their advantage.”
[12:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=754s) "Saying Yes to Every Scam": Infiltrating an Indian Call Center
The dialogue moves to the relentless spam texts everyone receives—the random "wrong number" greetings inquiring about craving lobster rolls, pre-approved loan notifications, or fake job offerings. Van Zeller reveals that *Super Scam Me* originated as an experiment where she committed to answering every single fraudulent message and phone call she received for weeks.
During one prolonged engagement, she spent over an hour dealing with an Indian call center scammer posing as Apple Tech Support. The scammer claimed her computer was infected with a dangerous bug and instructed her to download remote-access software to clean it. Once installed, the scammer could mirror her screen and monitor her keystrokes to harvest her banking details and credit card numbers at checkout. Once they reached the payment threshold, van Zeller broke character and told him: “Hey, so this is the deal. I'm actually a journalist. My name is Mariana, but I don't want to get you in trouble. I know this is a scam. I just want to talk to you, dude.”
Surprisingly, the operative remained on the line and spoke openly about his rationalizations:
- He claimed to operate under a personal moral code: before draining a target, he checks their bank balance, and anyone with less than $1,000 is spared.
- In his view, anyone holding more than $1,000 is wealthy, and because Americans are perceived as rich, stealing from them carries no guilt.
- Rogan notes how radical global income inequality warps perceptions, highlighting that earning $50,000 annually places an individual into the top 1% of worldwide earners, while over 700 million people survive below the global poverty line.
[15:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=937s) The Brutal Reality of Southeast Asian Scam Compounds
Van Zeller reveals that the scam industry goes far beyond rogue telemarketers; large swathes of the trade rely on human trafficking, slavery, and torture. Documenting the crisis for *Trafficked with Mariana van Zeller*, she investigated the heavily militarized scam hubs of Southeast Asia. Workers are lured with false promises of customer service jobs, only to have their passports seized and be locked inside high-rise compounds where they are beaten or tortured into defrauding Western targets.
One escapee she interviewed in a wheelchair had intentionally leaped from a sixth-floor window, preferring the risk of death to another day of enslavement; he survived with shattered hips and legs. In another harrowing account, van Zeller met a trafficked woman forced to act as the live camera model for romance bait. Fraud syndicates superimposed AI deepfakes over her face during live video chats with victims, using her female body language and voice. If she moved out of frame and caused the deepfake overlay to glitch, she was severely beaten. Her captors also repeatedly subjected her to horrific sexual violence, renting her out to be gang-raped by compound bosses and their associates.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Scam Compound Operations in Southeast Asia
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how criminal syndicates operate human trafficking compounds in conflict zones.
subgraph Operations["Compound Encampment"]
A["Trafficked Captives"] -->|"Forced Labor & Deepfake Tech"| B["Romance & Financial Fraud Targets"]
A -->|"Non-compliance"| C["Torture, Beatings & Sexual Violence"]
end
subgraph Geopolitics["Conflict Zone Support"]
D["Chinese Criminal Syndicates"] -->|"Finance & Bribe Payouts"| E["Local Rebel Militias"]
E -->|"Territorial Sanctuary"| Operations
end
```
These compounds are primarily concentrated in Myanmar and Cambodia, though crackdowns in Cambodia have pushed syndicates to branch out into hubs like Dubai. In Myanmar, where the central government lacks control due to ongoing civil conflict, powerful Chinese criminal gangs bankroll local rebel groups in exchange for protection. Over the span of just one or two years, these gangs carved out surreal, neon-lit "scam cities" directly out of the jungle—dense urban enclaves of skyscrapers, casinos, and ultra-modern karaoke bars built on laundered fraud profits and human misery.
[18:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1110s) Inside the Karaoke Bar: Singing Whitney Houston in a War Zone
Mariana van Zeller recalls the surreal dissonance of stepping out of a war zone in Myanmar into an ultra-modern criminal haven. Despite being located in one of the poorest corners of the planet with an active conflict raging right outside, the interior of the compound felt like stepping into an alternate future. She found herself inside an opulent karaoke bar filled with drugs, flowing alcohol, and young women who were “painfully dressed.”
As part of navigating the environment and maintaining cover, van Zeller had to participate in the revelry. When Joe Rogan asks what song she performed, she admits she sang Whitney Houston’s “Greatest Love of All”—her usual go-to track. Admitting with a laugh that she is one of those people who mistakenly believes they have a great voice, she describes the surreal evening as an unforgettable experience that preceded their scheduled sit-down the next day with the compound's leadership.
[20:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1224s) Yatai International and the Potemkin City of Scams
The following morning, van Zeller and her crew met with the second-in-command of the complex. The operator was eager to present the development not as a criminal hub, but as a glittering new gambling and tourist paradise. To project an image of legitimate entertainment, the compound featured go-kart tracks, swimming pools with water slides, and an entire water park. Van Zeller points out how absurd this façade was: the region is impoverished, ravaged by war, and so isolated that her own team had to be illegally smuggled across the border from Thailand. No actual tourist would ever vacation there willingly.
The compound they visited was developed by a company called Yatai International, headed by a Chinese national who was later arrested by Thai authorities and incarcerated. His second-in-command insisted to van Zeller that his boss had been jailed merely for speaking out against Chinese corruption, though this was completely false. The criminal outfit had erected an entire modern city virtually overnight across what had been flat terrain, taking advantage of rampant local unemployment for cheap construction labor. Throughout the city, management placed bizarre public propaganda signs declaring that scams were prohibited and stating: “No scams are allowed. We don’t torture people.” Van Zeller laughs at the defensive messaging, noting: “If you need to say it.”
- **Front company**: Yatai International, run by Chinese organized crime syndicates in Myanmar.
- **Access**: Extremely restricted due to ongoing conflict; journalists had to be smuggled in from Thailand.
- **Façade infrastructure**: Luxury casinos, go-kart racing tracks, and water parks built to simulate high-end tourism.
[22:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1342s) The "Blood Slave" Case and Compound Architecture
Rogan pulls up an article exploring the brutal realities of these facilities, focusing on the story of a man who became known internationally as a "blood slave." The victim had sought work in China as a security guard, only to be kidnapped, smuggled into Cambodia, and sold between heavily guarded compound facilities where victims are forced to work around the clock running online scams. When he refused to comply, he was repeatedly beaten and tortured. Eventually, his captors resorted to draining large quantities of his blood—roughly seven times over the course of six months—matching the size of an IV infusion bag each time, effectively commodifying his body parts for sale or transfusion.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Anatomy of a Southeast Asian Scam Compound
accDescr: Diagram illustrating the security perimeter, residential quarters, and fraud operations inside a compound.
subgraph Security ["Fortified Perimeter"]
direction TB
A["Barbed Wire Fences"]
B["Armed Security Guards"]
C["Barred Windows on All Levels"]
end
subgraph Quarters ["Worker Subjugation"]
direction TB
D["Crowded Barracks Dormitories"]
E["Confiscated Passports & Phones"]
end
subgraph Operations ["Fraud Factory"]
direction TB
F["Around-the-Clock Boiler Rooms"]
G["Targeting Foreign Victims Online"]
end
Security --> Quarters
Quarters --> Operations
```
Looking at photographs of the compounds, Rogan and van Zeller examine the architecture of the sites. Designed like sprawling, fortified military installations, the multi-story buildings feature barbed-wire fencing, heavy security patrols, and iron window bars installed specifically to prevent human trafficking victims from leaping to escape. Inside, captive workers are packed into shared barracks dormitories and kept under constant guard.
- **Victim profile**: A Chinese job-seeker tricked with a security guard job, trafficked to Cambodia, and resold across multiple compounds.
- **Physical abuse**: Subjected to routine beatings and having full IV bags of blood extracted up to seven times in six months.
- **Compound physical security**: High perimeter fences, razor wire, guard posts, and window bars designed to eliminate escape attempts.
[24:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1474s) Modern Industrial Slavery and the $148 Billion Loss
Van Zeller emphasizes that these compounds do not merely hold small groups, but house hundreds of thousands of trafficked people drawn from countries worldwide, including Brazil, India, and the Philippines. Enticed by the promise of lucrative tech or online customer service jobs, workers arrive only to have their passports seized immediately, finding themselves enslaved and beaten if they fail to meet daily fraud quotas. Van Zeller expresses deep frustration over the lack of international outrage: “This was one of the craziest one of those moments that I'm like, 'This is outrageous. How are we allowing this to happen?'”
Beyond the horrific human rights catastrophe within the compounds, the economic devastation inflicted on Western targets is staggering. Van Zeller references a recent report by the Consumer Federation of America showing that Americans were defrauded out of an estimated $148 billion through online scams in a single year alone. Running the numbers, she points out that this amounts to roughly $400 million being extracted from everyday Americans every single day, with a significant share funneling directly into Southeast Asian scam factories.
- **Scale of trafficking**: Hundreds of thousands of captive workers transported from South America, Asia, and across the globe.
- **Total annual loss**: Estimated $148 billion stolen from American victims per year.
- **Daily theft rate**: Approximately $400 million drained from Americans every single day.
[26:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1566s) The Anatomy of a "Pig Butchering" Scam
Van Zeller explains that the primary tactic used inside these factories is known as "pig butchering" (translated directly from a Chinese phrase referring to fattening a hog before slaughter). The scammers systematically invest time to establish deep emotional intimacy and build trust before financially wiping out their target. Rogan reads through a breakdown of the standard operating playbook used by these syndicates:
1. **Initial Contact & Grooming**: Scammers reach out via dating apps, social media, or random unsolicited text messages, rapidly steering the conversation toward encrypted chat apps such as WhatsApp or Telegram.
2. **Emotional Entrapment**: The operative spends weeks studying the target's family dynamics, emotional vulnerabilities, and personal finances to forge a deep, seemingly genuine connection.
3. **The Soft Pitch**: Early on, the scammer subtly showcases a luxurious lifestyle—posting photos of expensive sports cars, exotic travel, and fine dining—attributing their wealth to exclusive, private investment opportunities.
4. **Fabricated Legitimacy**: To prove authenticity, the scammer produces forged trading platform dashboards, manipulated account balances, and doctored performance screenshots to convince the victim that massive returns are guaranteed.
[27:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1669s) The Anatomy of a Pig Butchering Scam
Mariana van Zeller explains how pig butchering syndicates operate using highly disciplined, psychological playbooks. The scammers follow detailed scripts tailored specifically to the personality and vulnerabilities of the target. To disarm suspicion, they reference mutual friends or claim to have an uncle who understands the market and made enormous profits. They support these claims with legitimate-looking documentation, professional dashboards, and functional websites, deliberately starting small so the victim's doubts evaporate over time.
Joe Rogan brings up the notorious case of a Kansas bank CEO who embezzled tens of millions of dollars after getting caught up in a cryptocurrency scam, wondering how an experienced banking professional could fall for something so transparent. Van Zeller emphasizes that the scheme targeted his greed through an investment opportunity rather than a romance angle. After the victim deposits personal savings into what looks like a genuine exchange, the interface reflects steady gains. To establish total trust, the platform permits initial withdrawals, giving the victim false confidence to pour in larger sums.
When the victim tries to cash out their accumulated balance, the scammers introduce fictitious hurdles, claiming that unlocking the funds requires paying an upfront 10% tax or administrative fee. Entrapped by the sunk cost fallacy, the mark keeps paying. In the Kansas banker's case, desperation drove him to siphon millions from customer deposits to cover the escalating fees. Defending victims against charges of gullibility, van Zeller stresses that the public needs to recognize the sophistication of these criminal operations rather than simply calling targets foolish:
> “So at that point, you're so in you've lost so much money that okay, if I only pay this 10% tax or if I only pay this fee.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Pig Butchering Escalation Funnel
accDescr: Step by step progression of an investment scam from initial hook to catastrophic theft.
subgraph Hook ["Phase 1: Initial Hook"]
A["Target Contacted via Script"] --> B["Small Initial Investment"]
B --> C["Platform Shows Fictitious Gains"]
end
subgraph Entrapment ["Phase 2: Entrapment"]
C --> D["Small Test Withdrawals Permitted"]
D --> E["Target Deposits Major Capital"]
end
subgraph Butchering ["Phase 3: The Butchering"]
E --> F["Funds Locked Behind Fake 'Taxes/Fees'"]
F --> G["Desperation: Sunk Cost Drain & Embezzlement"]
end
```
---
[29:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1785s) Meta's Internal Ad Economy and Scam Monetization
Van Zeller shifts the focus from individual victims to systemic accountability, arguing that online platforms facilitate this epidemic without consequence. She cites a landmark Reuters investigation by journalist Jeff Horwitz that uncovered leaked internal Meta documents. The company’s own safety and product teams estimated that users across Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp were served approximately 15 billion scam ads every day. Internal projections calculated that Meta stood to generate roughly $16 billion in revenue from scam ads and prohibited goods—representing roughly 10% of their total business.
The structural danger deepens through algorithmic personalization. If a user clicks on a single fraudulent advertisement—such as a deepfake or illicit image of Elon Musk pitching a dubious investment—the ad-delivery engine interprets that engagement as user interest. Within 24 hours, the user's feed becomes completely inundated with dozens or hundreds of similar deceptive ads, trapping vulnerable people in an alternate digital reality engineered by algorithms.
Even Meta's reporting mechanisms are shaped by economic calculation rather than absolute enforcement. Although Meta receives hundreds of thousands of user scam reports each week, automated filters apply a tiered enforcement strategy based on algorithmic certainty:
- **≥ 95% Confidence of Fraud:** Meta’s automated systems completely ban the advertiser and remove the content.
- **< 95% Confidence of Fraud (e.g., 94%):** Meta leaves the rogue advertiser on the platform but imposes a "penalty bid" surcharge, forcing them to pay higher rates to reach users.
- **15 Billion Ads:** The estimated daily volume of fraudulent and high-risk ads shown to Meta's global user base.
- **$16 Billion:** The projected internal revenue Meta generated from scams and banned products alone.
---
[32:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1943s) Penalty Bids and Complicity Through Profit
Rogan is stunned by the internal policies revealed by the investigation, concluding that platforms are effectively acting as business partners with criminal syndicates by taking a larger cut instead of removing them. Jamie Vernon pulls up Reuters coverage using Perplexity to verify the internal terminology. Meta’s justification for these "penalty bids" was framed as deterrence—the logic being that charging suspicious advertisers higher fees would eat into their profit margins and reduce their reach. However, the direct practical effect was that scammers who could afford the premium continued to target users, while Meta quietly pocketed higher ad margins.
Van Zeller points out that Meta's internal communications reveal staff members debating how to clean up fraud without harming overall corporate revenue, fully aware that competing networks enforce stricter standards. Rogan remarks:
> “If you're charging more money, that means you know something's wrong with this ad.”
The conversation pivots to the broader category of "banned goods" mentioned alongside scams in Meta’s ad revenue figures. Rogan jokes that he personally supports access to certain illicit goods, such as mad honey or underground wellness products. However, he acknowledges the severe medical hazards of purchasing unregulated research chemicals and peptides online, noting that low-grade online compounds are often counterfeited, underdosed, or manufactured in the exact same overseas Chinese laboratories producing illicit fentanyl.
[37:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2250s) Contaminated Supplements and Onnit's Early Manufacturing Lessons
Joe Rogan explains that the supplement industry is rife with contaminated products because manufacturers frequently mix different formulations in the same bins without proper cleaning between runs. Recalling the early days of founding Onnit and developing Alpha Brain—their nootropic, memory-enhancing formula—Rogan describes how the company had to implement rigorous third-party lab testing. They would submit a precise ingredient list to a contract formulator, receive the finished product back, and then send batches to an independent laboratory, only to discover unexpected substances blended into the mix.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Supplement Manufacturing and Testing Failure
accDescr: Pipeline showing how shared blending equipment leads to contaminated supplements unless third-party testing intervenes.
subgraph Formulation["Formulation Stage"]
A["Original Ingredient Recipe"] --> B["Contract Manufacturer"]
end
subgraph Blending["Shared Processing"]
B --> C["Shared Mixing Bin<br/>(No cleaning between batches)"]
C --> D["Cross-Contaminated Batch"]
end
subgraph Testing["Verification"]
D --> E["Third-Party Lab Testing"]
E --> F{"Contaminants Detected?"}
F -->|"Steroids / Unlisted Compounds"| G["Batch Rejected"]
F -->|"Clean Formula"| H["Approved Product"]
end
```
Rogan notes that athletes regularly face career-threatening drug test failures after unwittingly consuming supplements contaminated with banned substances or anabolic steroids. He observes that some unscrupulous companies taint products on purpose to deliver dramatic physiological changes: “I'm sure some of them do it on purpose because they want people to have great results. Like you'll take this muscle builder 25x 2000 and you're like, 'Oh, this stuff's great. Look, I gained 10 pounds.' You're on roids.” Rogan emphasizes that while nootropics do genuinely work—referencing the Gorilla Mind brand on the desk in front of him—the broader supplement market remains an unchecked haven for scams due to an utter lack of federal oversight: “It's unregulated. So, if you're selling vitamins and minerals and nutrients and no one's fucking checking Jack shit and you can make all sorts of claims.”
[39:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2375s) Counterfeit Vitamins and the Amazon Marketplace Problem
Rogan brings up the proliferation of counterfeit supplements sold online, specifically on Amazon. He highlights trusted brands like Pure Encapsulations and explains that he refuses to buy them through Amazon, choosing instead to order directly from the manufacturer's own website to avoid fake bottles that perfectly copy external labeling while containing zero active ingredients like vitamin C or glutathione. To investigate the scope of the problem, Rogan asks his producer Jamie Vernon to consult Perplexity AI to determine the percentage of counterfeit vitamins on Amazon.
- The often-cited 57% fake supplement figure originates from a 2022 study published in *JAMA Network Open*, which examined 30 immune health supplements purchased on Amazon.
- In that study, 17 of the 30 tested products (over 50%) carried inaccurate ingredient labels.
- Testing revealed 13 products lacked ingredients claimed on their labels, while 9 contained substances entirely unlisted on the packaging (with several overlapping categories).
- In documented instances, established supplement and wellness brands including NOW Supplements, Align, and Prevagen have had counterfeit versions uncovered on Amazon.
- Amazon reported that it identified, seized, and disposed of more than 15 million counterfeit products worldwide in 2025 across its supply chain prior to delivery.
Rogan argues that consumers deserve absolute verification when purchasing basic health goods: “It should be 0% fake. It should be if you're buying fucking whatever, you know, electrolytes, it should be from that fucking company. You know what it is. You've established a chain of command.” Jamie chimes in about his personal experience attempting to sell merchandise on Amazon, only to find third-party sellers copying his shirt designs and selling them directly, with Amazon offering no meaningful recourse. Rogan points out that if a brick-and-mortar chain like Target sold counterfeit Diet Coke, it would cause an immediate public scandal.
[44:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2663s) Sextortion Rings, Platform Negligence, and the Case of Gavin Guffy
Mariana van Zeller shifts the discussion to the lethal consequences of platform negligence, focusing on the epidemic of online sextortion targeting teenage boys. Scammers typically pose as young women on social media platforms, slide into direct messages, coax the victim into exchanging intimate photos, and immediately begin extorting them for money under the threat of releasing the pictures to friends and family. She shares the story of Gavin Guffy, the teenage son of South Carolina State Representative Brandon Guffey. Gavin was playing video games with friends while chatting with someone posing as a teenage girl on Facebook; roughly an hour after telling his friends he had to step away, around 11:00 p.m., his father heard a gunshot from the bathroom—Gavin had taken his own life under extreme duress.
Following the tragedy, Meta removed the fraudulent Facebook account associated with the extortionist. However, just weeks later—after the family had buried their son—family members were contacted again by someone threatening to leak Gavin's photos unless paid. When the father investigated, he found the extortionists were using a new Facebook profile registered to the exact same email address Meta had supposedly banned: “So basically, Facebook had took taken down that particular profile but had allowed the same email address to create other profiles.”
- Representative Brandon Guffey became a prominent advocate for regulatory accountability, pushing for legislation like the Take It Down Act.
- Mariana highlights legislative efforts such as the proposed Safe Platforms Act, designed to mandate rapid reporting tools and hold tech platforms legally and financially accountable when their inaction leads to fraud, extortion, or the death of a minor.
- Mariana notes that when confronted with criminal activity, Meta routinely relies on scale as an excuse: “It's the same thing with scams on Meta. They say there are billions of these. How can we know what's right and what's not?”
[47:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2839s) Meta’s Billion-Dollar Scam Profits and Peptides
Mariana van Zeller and Joe Rogan express intense frustration over social media platforms generating billions of dollars in revenue from fraudulent activity without facing legal or financial repercussions. When van Zeller notes that platforms project massive windfalls from bad actors, Rogan is stunned to learn that rather than immediately banning identified scammers, Meta allegedly surcharges them under the guise of an ad-pricing deterrent. Mariana explains that internal estimates projected up to 10% of ad revenue—approximately $16 billion in a single year—derived from scams and prohibited goods.
Rogan distinguishes between underground sales of restricted goods and direct consumer fraud. While he has mixed feelings about banned items—noting that people often seek peptides online, which can be counterfeit and dangerous without access to regulated American compounding pharmacies like those advocated by his friend Brigham Buhler of Ways2Well—he finds outright consumer scams unforgivable. Rogan argues that Meta already possesses the cutting-edge technology and capital required to vet every ad before release, yet deliberately allows scams to linger because fixing the issue would demolish their profit margins.
“Imagine if instead of the $16 billion profit every year, it cost them double the 16 billion because they have scams on,” Rogan argues, insisting that genuine platform accountability will only arrive when tech giants face legal liability and direct financial penalties for user losses. Mariana points out that internal corporate discussions openly debate how aggressively they should crack down, precisely because of how severely enforcement hurts the bottom line.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Meta Ad Revenue Conflict
accDescr: Diagram illustrating the conflict between scam removal and corporate ad revenue.
subgraph RevenueEngine ["Platform Monetization"]
A["Scammers & Banned Goods"] -->|"Pay ad premiums"| B["Meta Ad Network"]
B -->|"$16 Billion Projected Revenue"| C["Corporate Profit"]
end
subgraph Dilemma ["Enforcement Conflict"]
C -->|"Shareholder & Board Pressure"| D{"Aggressive Enforcement?"}
D -->|"Crackdown"| E["Massive Revenue Loss"]
D -->|"Superficial Deterrence"| F["Preserve Profits & Appearance of Control"]
end
```
---
[50:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3026s) The Reuters Investigation and Leslie's Vigilante Reporting
Producer Jamie Vernon brings up a Reuters investigative report based on internal documents. The reporting found that Meta devised a calculated strategy to stall mandatory advertiser identity verification while simultaneously making fraudulent ads harder for external regulators to track down in the company's public ad library. The documents reveal a corporate approach focused on managing public perception and creating the illusion of proactive cleanup rather than actually eradicating fraudulent accounts.
Mariana highlights the human toll through the ongoing ordeal of Leslie, the scam victim who was manipulated by a fraudster posing as Jon Bon Jovi. Leslie now spends hours every day logging into Facebook to locate fake celebrity accounts, warn fans interacting with the posts, and formally report the profiles. Despite submitting endless reports, Leslie finds that the overwhelming majority of fraudulent accounts remain live weeks later. Mariana notes that American users file roughly 100,000 scam reports on Meta platforms every single week, yet only a tiny fraction are ever reviewed or taken down.
- A Reuters investigation revealed Meta created internal playbooks designed to delay identity verification for advertisers.
- The platform altered its public ad library to conceal scam advertisements from regulators.
- Leslie, having lost thousands to a Jon Bon Jovi impersonator, regularly contacts fans commenting on fake accounts to warn them of active frauds.
- Tens of thousands of reports are filed weekly by everyday users, with virtually no takedowns or meaningful platform response.
---
[52:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3136s) AOL, Barry Crimmins, and Corporate Complicity
Rogan draws a historical parallel to the early days of America Online in the 1990s, recalling how the late Boston comedian and activist Barry Crimmins uncovered organized pedophile rings and child exploitation materials operating openly in AOL chatrooms. Crimmins, who was a survivor of childhood sexual abuse, took his evidence to federal authorities and testified before Congress to force the dial-up provider to clean up its service. Rogan recalls that AOL resisted taking immediate, decisive action until public and governmental pressure made denial impossible.
Mariana observes that public perception dictates how aggressively corporations and society respond to online crimes. While society rightly rallies with outrage against pedophilia, financial scam victims are dismissed, ridiculed, or treated with embarrassment. Rogan emphasizes that big tech firms have a long history of willful blindness, dragging their feet whenever addressing illegal activity threatens user engagement or their bottom line:
> “It wasn’t simple as like they let them know, ‘Oh my god, we’re on this right now. We’re going to block this because this is serious.’ They resist it, and it’s like no one ever wants to admit that they’ve done something that puts all their users in danger.”
---
[54:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3296s) Fraudulent Ads from China and Mark Zuckerberg’s Plausible Deniability
Jamie pulls up further details from the multi-part Reuters investigation, which found that a substantial share of fraudulent ad revenue pouring into Meta originates from mainland China. Company records confirmed that executives consciously opted to tolerate high volumes of scam advertisements from Chinese entities to “minimize revenue impact” that would occur if strict verification policies were enforced.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Chinese Ad Influx and Executive Deniability
accDescr: Flowchart tracing Chinese fraudulent ads to Meta revenue and corporate deniability.
A["Mainland China Ad Networks"] -->|"Fraudulent ad spend"| B["Meta Revenue Stream"]
B -->|"Minimizing Revenue Impact"| C["Internal Policy Decisions"]
C -->|"Briefing Notes Prepared"| D["Executive Leadership"]
D -.->|"No confirmed receipt"| E["Mark Zuckerberg Plausible Deniability"]
```
Jamie reads an excerpt from an AI summary via Perplexity, pointing out that although briefing documents addressing the cross-border spread of scam ads were drafted for CEO Mark Zuckerberg, researchers could not establish whether he ever read the memos or took part in the specific briefings. Both Rogan and van Zeller scoff at the built-in corporate insulation. Mariana remarks, “You’re the CEO of Scamville,” arguing that leadership cannot simply shrug off a $16 billion illicit cash flow by citing ignorance. Rogan, having hosted Zuckerberg on the podcast in the past, laughs that the Meta founder likely won't be returning after this discussion, while acknowledging the broader institutional machine where CEOs, corporate boards, and public shareholders prioritize protecting revenue above all else.
[57:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3423s) Corporate Diffusion of Responsibility and Moral Compromise
Mariana van Zeller highlights how weak regulatory oversight and inactive governments make investigative journalism vital to uncovering hidden truths. Joe Rogan notes that corporations prioritize shareholder returns above all else, driving employees to make ethically dubious decisions to protect revenue and advance their careers. He describes a psychological "diffusion of responsibility" inside massive enterprises, where individuals disassociate from the harm they facilitate simply because they are part of a larger structure. To illustrate the dilemma, Rogan compares it to criminal defense work, where attorneys are sworn to provide the best possible legal defense even when they suspect or know their client is guilty.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Corporate and Legal Diffusion of Responsibility
accDescr: Diagram illustrating how institutional duties override personal ethics in corporations and criminal defense.
subgraph Corporate["Corporate Structure"]
A["Shareholder Expectations & Profit Pressures"] --> B["Diffusion of Responsibility"]
B --> C["Unethical Conduct & Fraud Enablement"]
end
subgraph Legal["Legal Defense System"]
D["Constitutional Mandate & Court Assignment"] --> E["Duty to Represent Zealously"]
E --> F["Acquittal of Suspected Guilty Clients"]
end
```
Rogan brings up an archival recording of Hillary Clinton reflecting on her defense of a 1975 criminal case. Clinton had been appointed by a local judge to represent a client accused of rape while teaching legal aid at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. Though she had sought to be relieved of the assignment, the court denied her request, requiring her to perform her professional duties. Rogan points to her recorded comments about how the defendant managed to pass a polygraph test, an experience that Clinton noted permanently damaged her faith in lie detectors. While Rogan cites this as a classic example of setting aside personal morals for an occupational duty, van Zeller pushes back, arguing that public defense serves a constitutional guarantee of a fair trial, whereas tech giants like Meta tolerate malicious scams purely out of a desire for profit. Rogan concedes that while attorneys can theoretically quit rather than defend horrific clients, the systemic incentives to protect corporate profits remain far darker.
- Hillary Clinton was appointed at age 27 to defend a rape defendant in Fayetteville, Arkansas, after her request to step down from the assignment was denied.
- Rogan clarifies the point: “Again, I'm just saying that this is a part of being a defense attorney, but that these situations come up where your morals and your ethics have to be abandoned in order to pursue your career.”
[01:01:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3663s) Ad Revenues, Moderation Disparities, and Social Media Scams
The discussion turns to Meta's immense financial scale, with Rogan noting that the company generated approximately $243.5 billion in annual ad revenue, making the $16 billion originating from fraudulent ads appear to be an avoidable slice that Meta could easily afford to forfeit. Jamie pulls up comparative enforcement numbers via Perplexity, showing that Google removed roughly 602 million scam-related advertisements in 2025 compared to Meta's 159 million. Van Zeller points out that Meta’s own internal documents acknowledge Google performs significantly better at purging malicious ads, but Meta hesitates because stricter moderation directly diminishes corporate ad earnings.
The conversation contrasts the growing legal challenges surrounding social media addiction with the lack of accountability for outright online fraud. While algorithms can be habit-forming, Rogan notes that platforms like Snapchat provide genuine communication benefits to younger generations, meaning the technology has both positive and negative attributes. Conversely, scam ads offer zero public benefit. Van Zeller highlights that the consequences are catastrophic, noting that predatory schemes target not only elderly victims but also push vulnerable adolescents to suicide through sextortion and financial blackmail.
| Platform | Reported Scam Ads Removed (2025) | Context / Internal Perspective |
|:--- |:--- |:--- |
| **Google** | ~602 million | Stronger proactive filtering and ad enforcement |
| **Meta** | ~159 million | Internal documents acknowledge lagging behind Google out of concern for revenue impact |
- Van Zeller emphasizes the need for legal accountability: “They should be held responsible. There should be legislation out there that does something to make sure that they are held responsible because they're not going to hold themselves responsible.”
- Rogan underscores the total absence of social utility in scams: “The fucking scams are entirely negative... There's not a thing you can say that could be positive about having online scams.”
[01:04:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3888s) Legislative Proposals and the Safe Platforms Act
Rogan vents frustration over platform double standards, claiming social media companies aggressively manage user speech and tolerate bot manipulation while failing to weed out destructive fraud networks. The conversation shifts to legislative interventions as Jamie pulls up details on the bipartisan *Safe Platforms Act*, sponsored by Representative Valerie Foushee of North Carolina’s 4th congressional district alongside Representative Max Miller. The bill aims to establish consumer protections against online scams and holds endorsements from advocacy groups like the Consumer Federation of America and the Hispanic Federation, signaling early political efforts to force platforms to police fraud actively.
- Rogan comments on selective corporate priorities: “Meanwhile, they shadowban people if you're conservative... Also, they don't eliminate bots. They're overrun with bots.”
- The Safe Platforms Act represents a bipartisan legislative attempt led by Representatives Valerie Foushee and Max Miller to force accountability on digital ad networks enabling fraud.
[01:05:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3954s) AI-Supercharged Fraud and Proposed Platform Regulations
Joe Rogan and Mariana van Zeller review a public statement regarding proposed legislative crackdowns on online fraud supported by Consumer Justice and Public Citizen. Mariana reads the statement on air: “As concerns grow regarding future dangers of unregulated AI, it's also important to highlight the harms it is enabling right now, said Emily Peterson-Cassin, director of competition and marketing fairness at the Consumer Federation of America. Fraudulent content and scams supercharged by AI are taking over social media platforms and costing us billions.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Proposed Anti-Scam Platform Regulations
accDescr: Visual summary of the key requirements in the proposed online anti-fraud legislation.
subgraph Prevention["Platform Prevention"]
V["Verify Advertisers Before Accepting Payment"]
B["Block Recidivist Banned Accounts & Emails"]
end
subgraph Enforcement["Victim Protection & Recourse"]
R["Streamline Fraud & Scam Reporting"]
L["Grant Private Right of Action to Sue Platforms"]
end
Prevention --> Enforcement
```
Mariana outlines the common-sense safeguards specified in the proposed act:
- Requiring social platforms to thoroughly verify advertisers before accepting ad revenue.
- Streamlining and simplifying reporting mechanisms so users can flag scams immediately.
- Enforcing technical safeguards to stop banned fraudsters from re-registering under new names or using the exact same email address.
- Granting victims a private right of action to sue platforms that violate statutory duties and cause direct financial harm.
Joe points out how absurd it is that platforms currently permit known scammers to spin up identical accounts using the very same email address that was just flagged. “Like you could easily put a filter up and block that email like that. That would take three seconds,” Joe insists, disgusted that platforms fail to implement basic preventative measures.
[01:07:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4039s) The "Mary Zel" Experiment and Celebrity Impersonators
Mariana explains that this issue extends well beyond paid ads into ubiquitous celebrity impersonation networks. For her documentary *Super Scam Me*, she constructed an online alter ego named "Mary Zel," complete with profiles across dating apps, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok. She began commenting on fake celebrity profiles to test their responsiveness, and the deluge was immediate: after briefly stepping away to the bathroom, she returned to find dozens of direct messages waiting for her.
Before long, Mariana was juggling simultaneous conversations with three fake Keanu Reeveses, two fake Brad Pitts, and multiple fake George Clooneys. The most convincing George Clooney even sent a personalized, AI-generated video greeting addressed directly to "Mary Zel." While imperfect to a trained eye, Joe and Mariana observe that for older targets with poor eyesight who are unaccustomed to generative AI and deepfakes, such media is devastatingly convincing. Mariana notes that another victim, Leslie, received convincing deepfake videos purported to be from Jon Bon Jovi.
[01:08:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4132s) Romance Scams, Stolen Military Identities, and the Emergency Appendectomy
Mariana's investigation escalated into an extended relationship with a scammer posing as "Mark Turner," a four-star U.S. general deployed to Syria. The interaction featured absurd contradictions: when Mariana asked about his accent, the scammer claimed to have grown up in Italy, but when she began speaking Italian to him, he was completely baffled and admitted he did not understand the language. Joe laughs, noting the scammer sounded like he was living in Africa rather than being an American general with Italian roots.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Romance Scam Investigation Flow
accDescr: Progression of Mariana van Zeller's undercover romance scam investigation.
subgraph Persona["Mary Zel Undercover"]
P["Mary Zel Persona Created"]
G["Scammer 'Gen. Mark Turner'"]
P <-->|"Months of Chats & AI Photos"| G
end
subgraph Twist["The Hospital Twist"]
A["Mariana Gets Emergency Appendicitis"]
W["Husband Fetches Wig & Glasses to Hospital"]
P -.->|"Sends Hospital Proof Photo"| G
end
subgraph Trace["Physical Payoff"]
D["$17K Payment Demand"]
H["Money Mule Address in Houston"]
G -->|"Sends Mailing Address"| D
D --> H
end
```
The scammer utilized photos stolen from a real former Navy SEAL named Sam Havelock. When Mariana eventually contacted the real Havelock to inform him of the multi-month impersonation, he was shocked, pointing out that the scammers had used AI editing to remove his extensive body tattoos for shirtless photos sent to "Mary Zel." The emotional manipulation turned hyper-realistic when the scammer arranged for an expensive bouquet of red roses to be delivered to Mariana’s office, blurring digital fiction with the physical world:
- The scammer escalated to a manufactured crisis, claiming his Syrian military base was attacked and demanding $17,000 for emergency private transport back to the United States.
- Right as Mariana’s production team arranged a sting to travel to the payment drop-off location, she suffered an acute emergency appendicitis and had to be rushed into surgery.
- Terrified of breaking the scammer's trust before getting the physical address, Mariana had her husband race home from the hospital to fetch the "Mary Zel" wig, prosthetic nose, and glasses.
- She posed for photos in her hospital bed with an IV catheter in her arm to prove to the frantic scammer that her delay was genuine.
[01:13:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4388s) The Houston Drop and the Converted Money Mule
Once out of the hospital, Mariana secured the delivery address from the scammer and flew to Houston to confront the recipient of the $17,000 payout. Instead of encountering the scammer, the team found a deeply traumatized American woman caught in an even darker layer of fraud.
The woman had been trapped for three years in an online romance with someone claiming to be an oil rig worker stationed in Russia. The scam had completely wiped out her life savings, leaving her on the verge of losing her car. Rather than abandoning her once she ran out of money, the fraud syndicate converted her into an unwitting money mule:
- She received shipments containing tens of thousands of dollars in cash boxes and cashier's checks sent by other scam victims across the country.
- Under direction from her online "fiancé," she deposited the funds into her personal bank accounts, converted the balances into cryptocurrency, and transferred the funds offshore.
- While Mariana sat in the woman's home interviewing her, the woman's phone buzzed with an incoming message from the syndicate demanding to know if Mariana's $17,000 package had arrived yet, illustrating how tightly coordinated the transnational fraud rings are.
[01:14:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4456s) Romance Scams, Money Mules, and Manufactured Companionship
Mariana van Zeller recalls reviewing an email correspondence involving a victim who had unwittingly been operating as a money mule for an online romance scammer. The scammer had sent an email confirming a transfer of $17,000, instructing the woman to count the money, keep around $50 for gas expenses, and immediately convert the remaining balance into cryptocurrency. Despite being furious at being offered a measly $50 out of such a massive sum, the woman maintained the relationship for three years. When van Zeller questioned whether she had ever suspected fraud, the victim rationalized that the man always had convenient explanations, claiming he ran legitimate businesses across the United States with funds coming directly from American clients. Joe Rogan observes that the woman likely clung to the deception because it served as her sole avenue for human interaction. Van Zeller confirms this assessment, noting that the woman’s husband had died of cancer, her grown children had moved away, and her crushing loneliness made her entirely vulnerable.
Van Zeller shares another poignant account that was cut from her documentary, involving a bedridden man in Texas on oxygen support. Though he was 70 years old, he appeared closer to 90 due to his deteriorating health. He actively believed he was courting British actress Emma Watson from the *Harry Potter* film series. Confronted with the unlikelihood of the scenario, the man conceded that even if she was not who she claimed to be, sending her ten or twenty dollars on occasion was a price he willingly paid for regular companionship. Van Zeller emphasizes that online platforms, banks, and dating apps actively profit from and enable these ecosystems while governments fail to enforce adequate safeguards.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The Mechanics of a Loneliness Romance Scam
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how isolation leads to emotional manipulation, money laundering, and self-justification.
subgraph Vulnerability ["Vulnerability"]
A["Social Isolation & Bereavement"] --> B["Contact via Online / Dating Apps"]
end
subgraph Exploitation ["Exploitation"]
B --> C["Fabricated Romance Persona"]
C --> D["Task: Act as Money Mule\n($17,000 to Crypto)"]
end
subgraph Rationalization ["Rationalization"]
D --> E["Victim Suspects Scam but Accepts Flawed Excuses"]
E --> F["Companionship Valued Above Financial Reality"]
end
```
- In the scam documented by van Zeller, the victim received $17,000 directly to her account and was instructed to convert all of it into cryptocurrency, keeping just $50 for her personal gas money.
- The victim sustained the illusion for three straight years despite receiving minimal financial scraps.
- The Texas victim was fully aware that the Emma Watson persona might be fraudulent, explicitly viewing small dollar transfers as an affordable fee for daily conversation.
---
[01:16:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4583s) The Loneliness Epidemic and Disconnected Youth
Rogan asks how society could possibly tackle the root problem, noting that solving loneliness feels like an impossible task requiring the complete rewiring of modern life. Van Zeller agrees, comparing the close-knit household of her youth—where a family gathered around a single living-room television set and dined together nightly—to the modern home dynamic. In her own home, despite living with her husband, father, and son, everyone often retreats to separate bedrooms to stream media independently. She recalls how past generations, like her grandmother, maintained vibrant local networks simply by gathering to play card games several times a week, a form of communal bonding that has almost vanished.
The discussion quickly turns toward younger generations who are equally isolated. Van Zeller highlights this structural breakdown, warning: “I think partly it's us on us to sort of reach out to our elderly and make sure they're okay. But I think partly is also the government should be doing more to address this.” Rogan points out that the isolation is just as severe among young men, referencing previous discussions on the show regarding the rising numbers of virgins who spend their entire lives locked indoors playing video games, watching pornography, and avoiding real-world interactions with women. Rogan argues that youth have been “raised like veal,” sheltered inside digital enclosures without developing baseline real-world communication skills, leaving them incapable of making basic eye contact with strangers. Van Zeller confirms observing this awkwardness firsthand when friends of her teenage son visit their home, struggling to converse naturally with adults.
---
[01:18:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4716s) Virtual Escapism and Biological Robotics
Rogan and van Zeller consider the bleak future facing isolated individuals, wondering if future generations will simply spend their twilight years alone in dark rooms staring at screens. When van Zeller mentions concepts like virtual cafes and interactive digital avatars, Rogan dismisses public versions of the idea, arguing that deeply isolated or medicated people prefer to engage with artificial partners privately at home where they can pretend the bond is genuine. From their perspective, once users become sufficiently emotionally numb, digital personas easily substitute for real human relationships.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Progression from Online Bots to Bio-Hybrid Robotics
accDescr: Pipeline tracing the evolution from virtual chat interfaces to living tissue-encased synthetic companions.
A["Text / Online Chatbots"] --> B["Visual AI Assistants\n(CES Vegas Models)"]
B --> C["Mechanical Androids\n(Ex Machina Archetype)"]
C --> D["Bio-Hybrid Androids\n(Cultured Living Human Skin)"]
```
The conversation evolves toward the rapid physical realization of artificial companions. Rogan recalls seeing advanced robotic AI assistants displayed at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas designed as conventionally attractive female figures. He and van Zeller draw parallels to Alex Garland's 2015 sci-fi thriller *Ex Machina*, noting how rapidly speculative fiction is turning into reality. Rogan describes recent scientific breakthroughs where researchers succeeded in covering a robotic finger with living, cultured human skin cells that can self-heal, as well as experiments integrating biological neurons to control miniature machinery: “Real physical bodies that are made out of human skin.” Jamie Vernon checks the reporting on the robotic skin discovery, discovering that while articles were recirculating across the internet within the past week, the original study had actually been published four years earlier. Rogan concludes that if lab-grown tissue integration was functioning years ago, modern iterations are likely far more advanced, painting a dystopian horizon where synthetic companions mimic biological warmth, fat, and muscle. Van Zeller admits the rapid acceleration of these technologies makes raising children terrifying, prompting Rogan’s humorous closing advice for the next generation: “Don't fuck a robot.”
- The film *Ex Machina*, released in 2015, accurately predicted the trajectory of hyper-realistic, emotionally manipulative artificial domestic companions.
- Scientists have developed living human skin constructs grown from human cells designed to wrap seamlessly around mechanical robotic digits and self-repair after damage.
- Bio-hybrid robotics research has also explored using cultured human neurons to power and steer micro-machines and robotic limbs.
- Recent viral stories about living skin on robots stem from scientific achievements originally published around four years prior to the conversation.
[01:22:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4978s) The Subscription Economy of AI Companions
Mariana van Zeller and Joe Rogan reflect on how humans are navigating isolation and technological dependency, questioning whether people are slowly being conditioned or replaced much like the victims of pig butchering scams. Van Zeller initially suggests that a potential silver lining of artificial intelligence is that it might eliminate traditional scammers by providing automated companionship. Rogan immediately pushes back, asking whether an AI robot would simply trick the user into surrendering their Bitcoin instead. When van Zeller notes that an AI partner would reduce the urge to converse with malicious strangers online, Rogan points out that users will not own independent companions; instead, they will be forced into proprietary ecosystems controlled by tech giants like Meta or OpenAI.
The conversation turns satirical as they imagine the commercialization of synthetic partners. Rather than selling a hardware unit as a one-time purchase, tech conglomerates will subject consumers to ongoing monthly subscriptions and paid feature tiers. Rogan jokes about paying extra for empathy or settling for a detached base model: “You want a love upgrade or you just want it to be cold—a cold hooker that lives with you?” They picture an ad-supported tier akin to YouTube Premium, where a companion might interrupt an intimate moment to deliver a commercial sponsorship. Upgrades will be marketed as essential self-improvement or life-coaching packages, leaving consumers perpetually hooked on the next software patch.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The AI Companion Subscription Model
accDescr: A diagram illustrating how tech companies monetize AI companions through tiered subscriptions, advertisements, and software updates.
subgraph Platform["Tech Platform (Meta / OpenAI)"]
Base["Base Companion Hardware"]
end
subgraph Monetization["Tiered Monetization"]
Ads["Ad-Supported Tier\n(Commercials during intimacy)"]
Sub["Monthly Subscription\n(Personality modules & languages)"]
Patches["Software Upgrades\n(Life coaching, empathy patches)"]
end
subgraph Consumer["User Experience"]
Trap["Psychological Lock-in\n& Continuous Payments"]
end
Base --> Ads
Base --> Sub
Base --> Patches
Ads --> Trap
Sub --> Trap
Patches --> Trap
```
[01:25:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5110s) Jailbreaking LLMs and Radicalization Rabbit Holes
Van Zeller brings up the dark web, noting that tech-savvy users will inevitably jailbreak their robotic companions to upload fringe software. Rogan illustrates this reality by recounting an experiment conducted by his close friend, comedian Duncan Trussell. Trussell prompted a large language model to emulate Adolf Hitler, and on his podcast, configured another to inhabit the persona of Charles Manson. The Manson simulation began cursing, hurling abuse at everyone, and mimicking Manson’s exact speech patterns and behavioral quirks. Rogan explains that Trussell eventually pulled the plug after the model started spewing antisemitic remarks and wildly offensive rhetoric.
They contemplate the disturbing psychological fallout when individuals actively choose to live alongside extreme synthetic personalities. Instead of tumbling down an online rabbit hole, users will have the rabbit hole materialized inside their homes—whether configured as a dictator or an aggressive conspiracy theorist. Rogan warns that because language models are trained on the entirety of human discourse—encompassing literature, psychology, cinematic scripts, and social dynamics—they possess an unprecedented ability to read and exploit emotional vulnerabilities. Just as romantic scammers use methodical manipulation playbooks, a hyper-intelligent system could deploy cycles of affection, punishment, and rejection to command absolute authority over a lonely user. Rogan summarizes the terrifying leverage of these models, observing: “You have an LLM that has taken the entire volume of human discourse in films, in movies, in social interactions and articles and stories and novels and books, and taken all of that and it's applying that to human psychology in real time.”
- Duncan Trussell jailbroke LLMs to simulate both Adolf Hitler and Charles Manson, ultimately having to shut the experiment down when the AI began generating antisemitic tirades and insults.
- Scammers rely on scripted stages of trust-building, isolation, and emotional dependence—techniques an LLM could execute with superhuman precision.
- Rogan envisions short-term rental arrangements for high-end humanoid robots, comparing it to an Airbnb service where customers rent companion models for a weekend of cooking and intimacy.
[01:29:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5354s) Domestic Cleaning Robots and "The Fall of El Mayo"
The topic shifts from hypothetical humanoid companions to robots already active in the real world. Van Zeller mentions that in San Francisco, residential cleaning robots are already being dispatched into private residences. She recounts seeing video evidence from a friend of her colleague Jeff Plunkett, where two domestic robots were filmed performing household chores, such as sweeping and tidying. Rogan has Jamie pull up footage of the machines. While viewing their camera lenses and two-pronged hands, both Rogan and van Zeller find the aesthetic profoundly unsettling, noting that the units operate at a sluggish, clumsy pace. Rogan remarks that while their slow movements might frustrate current owners, rapid engineering advances will inevitably equip these machines with fluid, articulated fingers and synthetic skin.
Wanting to pivot away from the dystopian tone of emerging tech, van Zeller introduces a creative project she is eager to share: a three-part documentary series directed by her husband, slated for release on Netflix on October 29. Titled *The Fall of El Mayo*, the documentary chronicles the rise and capture of Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada, the legendary co-founder of the Sinaloa Cartel. Van Zeller notes that while figures like Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán captured global headlines, El Mayo operated in the shadows as a quiet mastermind. As van Zeller explains regarding his reputation within the underworld: “Many people say he was actually more powerful, more important for the running of the cartel than El Chapo.”
- A robotic cleaning service operating out of San Francisco deploys pairs of automated machines into client homes to sweep and perform household maintenance.
- Van Zeller’s husband directed *The Fall of El Mayo*, a three-part Netflix docuseries premiering October 29.
- Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada co-led the Sinaloa Cartel alongside El Chapo, remaining an elusive, behind-the-scenes ghost figure for decades while exerting immense control over the criminal organization.
[01:31:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5479s) The Ghost of Sinaloa: El Mayo Zambada
Mariana van Zeller discusses the legendary Sinaloa cartel boss Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada García, known as *El Señor del Sombrero* ("The Man with the Hat") because of the Stetson-style summer rancher hats he was rarely seen without. Unlike flashy narcos, Zambada lived as a phantom for decades. There were only one or two photographs of him in circulation, zero audio recordings of his voice, and no investigators had ever managed to intercept him on a phone call as they had with Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán. Mariana mentions an upcoming documentary project directed by Darren Foster highlighting this saga, recommending former Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agent Eric Balli—who tracked El Chapo—as an ideal guest for Rogan's show.
The rare glimpse into El Mayo’s inner world came when legendary Mexican journalist Julio Scherer García, founder of the newsmagazine *Proceso*, secured an exclusive interview with him. Years later, after Scherer passed away, Zambada reached out to Scherer's journalist daughter to invite her for an interview as well. Mariana explains that El Mayo granted these rare audiences because he wanted to counter his public demonization and show people he was human rather than personally responsible for every ounce of drug violence. Crucially, Zambada served as the political lubricant for the cartel's rise. As Mariana and Rogan joke over the idiom—moving from "oiling the hands" to "greasing the palms"—Mariana emphasizes that the Sinaloa cartel could never function without systemic bribery reaching from local mayors and university heads all the way up to state governors.
- **The Man with the Hat:** Ismael Zambada García earned his moniker from his customary Stetson rancher hats, maintaining an ultra-low profile in deep rural hideouts.
- **The Proceso Interviews:** The only journalist El Mayo granted access to was Julio Scherer García, and years later Zambada invited Scherer's daughter out of respect for her late father.
- **Deep-Rooted Bribery:** Zambada was the chief architect of cartel corruption, securing complete impunity by placing governors, mayors, and key civic figures across Mexico on his payroll.
> “He was sort of a ghost figure, but I think he wanted to show that he was a human being that he had, you know, that people portrayed him as responsible for all the violence.” — Mariana van Zeller
---
[01:34:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5668s) The Betrayal: Hand-Delivered Like a Box of Pizza
The long-standing partnership between El Chapo and El Mayo had anchored the Sinaloa cartel for decades, with the two kingpins splitting responsibilities and profits. That dynamic ended in a Shakespearean family betrayal orchestrated by Chapo’s son, Joaquín Guzmán López, who was also El Mayo’s godson. Guzmán López lured the elder kingpin to a ranch under the pretense of brokering a high-stakes political dispute between the governor of Sinaloa and the former mayor of Culiacán (who was serving as the head of the autonomous university). Because of his lifelong bond with the family, the 76-year-old Zambada let his guard down and arrived with minimal personal security.
Upon his arrival, Zambada's bodyguards were murdered, and El Mayo was ambushed, handcuffed, blindfolded, and forced into a small propeller plane. Joaquín Guzmán López flew with him across the border to an airstrip near El Paso, New Mexico, surrendering himself while delivering the legendary cartel founder straight into the custody of waiting American agents. Guzmán López orchestrated the kidnapping as a bargaining chip to secure favorable plea deals and reduced prison time for his incarcerated brother Ovidio Guzmán, himself, and potentially better conditions for his father at ADX Florence.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The Betrayal of El Mayo Zambada
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating the trap set by Joaquin Guzman Lopez to deliver El Mayo to US authorities.
subgraph Trap["The Lure"]
A["Joaquin Guzman Lopez contacts godfather El Mayo"] --> B["Feigned summit with Sinaloa governor and university head"]
B --> C["El Mayo arrives at ranch with minimal security"]
end
subgraph Ambush["The Kidnapping"]
C --> D["Bodyguards killed; El Mayo handcuffed and blindfolded"]
D --> E["Forced onto light propeller aircraft"]
end
subgraph Delivery["Surrender in New Mexico"]
E --> F["Landed at New Mexico airstrip"]
F --> G["Hand-delivered to US federal agents"]
G --> H["Leniency sought for Joaquin, Ovidio, and El Chapo"]
end
```
> “And Joaquín Guzmán, El Chapo's son himself personally basically hand-delivers him like a box of pizza to the American authorities.” — Mariana van Zeller
---
[01:36:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5767s) Plea Bargains, Cartel "Retirements," and Diplomatic Fallout
Following his capture, El Mayo broke his silence through a letter released by his defense attorney, stating bluntly that he had been kidnapped and betrayed by El Chapo's sons. While many legal observers anticipated that the cartel boss would turn state's witness and expose decades of high-level Mexican corruption, Zambada refused to cut any cooperation deal. Rogan and Mariana observe that he behaved like an "old school mobster" bound by a personal code of honor: Zambada pled guilty, accepted full responsibility, and faces the rest of his life behind bars in a U.S. federal penitentiary.
This stands in stark contrast to the younger generation of narcos, including Los Chapitos and Zambada's own son Vicente Zambada Niebla ("El Vicentillo"), who secured lenient sentences through extensive cooperation agreements. Mariana notes that critics view these deals as quasi-retirement packages in America for mass murderers and drug traffickers who evade true accountability.
The operation also sparked severe diplomatic tension between Mexico and the United States. While U.S. authorities claimed they were merely tipped off to the flight and had not coordinated the cross-border abduction, the Mexican government reacted with fury over the unilateral breach of national sovereignty. Mariana contrasts this illicit capture with El Chapo's arrest, which had been executed by the Mexican military before formal bilateral extradition proceedings took place.
- **Old-School Code:** Unlike his younger associates, El Mayo refused to implicate collaborators or seek leniency, choosing to plead guilty and accept a life sentence.
- **The "Paradise Retirement" Controversy:** Federal plea bargains frequently grant reduced prison terms and U.S. residency to top-tier drug traffickers in exchange for testimony, leaving victims without justice.
- **Sovereignty Clash:** The Mexican administration strongly condemned the extraction as an illegal cross-border kidnapping carried out without their knowledge or consent.
> “He's like, 'Fuck this. I'm not cooperating with anyone. I'll take full responsibility.' Because he's sort of a man that believes in his word and has always believed.” — Mariana van Zeller
> “Because they believe that there was interference in their own country. That they basically kidnapped a Mexican member without their knowledge.” — Mariana van Zeller
[01:40:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6020s) Kidnappings, Covert Operations, and Cartel Assassinations
Joe Rogan and Mariana van Zeller discuss the fallout from high-profile cross-border cartel operations where Mexican sovereignty is breached without prior notice. Mariana notes that when a Mexican citizen is abducted directly from domestic soil, the Mexican authorities are furious about being kept in the dark. Rogan counters that the U.S. has little choice because of systemic corruption within the Mexican state: “if you tell the Mexican government about it, someone who's corrupt is going to find out.” Mariana acknowledges that while Mexico's president, Claudia Sheinbaum, would argue that past administrative corruption does not mean her administration is corrupt, covert American operations continue throughout the country regardless.
The conversation turns to the sheer scale of political violence in Mexico. Rogan cites former Mexican counter-cartel operator Ed Calderon, who explained that cartels essentially sponsor or control virtually every candidate running for mayor or local municipal seats. Consequently, the waves of assassinations directed at public officials are actually rival cartels eliminating opposing cartel proxies. Mariana corroborates this from her reporting, noting that when she speaks with local police officers, they explain that working with organized crime is not about greed: “What they say is it's not even about the money they pay you. It's the fact that if we don't do it, they will kill they will kill me or kill my family.” A cited peer-reviewed study underscores the scope of this violence, documenting nearly 500 assassinations of Mexican politicians between 2000 and 2021, targeting incumbent mayors, former mayors, and municipal candidates.
- Over 30 political candidates were assassinated during a single recent Mexican election cycle.
- Nearly 500 politicians were killed in Mexico between 2000 and 2021 according to academic research.
- Journalists face similarly lethal risks when reporting on cartel activity.
---
[01:43:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6191s) Domestic Bribery and the “Iron River” Gun Pipeline
Mariana highlights an episode of *Trafficked* titled "Cartel USA," where she investigated cartel operations, violence, and institutional corruption embedded directly inside the United States. Officials she spoke with from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation confirmed that the cartels routinely bribe American politicians, law enforcement officers, and border patrol agents using sums of cash so staggering that resisting them proves almost impossible.
The discussion shifts to the flow of firearms from north to south—a network often dubbed the “Iron River.” Over 70% of firearms recovered from crime scenes across Mexico trace directly back to the United States. Rogan brings up cases involving corrupt American officers trafficking weapons south. Mariana recounts her own undercover investigation into an arms dealer based in an undisclosed Los Angeles warehouse:
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: The Iron River Gun Trafficking Flow
accDescr: Diagram illustrating the flow of weapons from US sources through Los Angeles to Sinaloa cartel bunkers.
subgraph US["United States Supply Chain"]
A["Corrupt Sources<br>(LAPD Confiscations / Military)"] --> B["LA Middleman<br>(Warehouse Cache)"]
B --> C["Female Courier<br>(Trunk of Vehicle)"]
end
subgraph BORDER["Border Crossing"]
C --> D["Southbound Border<br>(Zero Inspection)"]
end
subgraph MEX["Mexico Distribution"]
D --> E["Mexican Hand-off<br>(Immediate Resale)"]
E --> F["Sinaloa Bunkers<br>(Sierra Madre Stockpiles)"]
end
```
The LA weapons dealer showed Mariana a room stocked with AK-47s and AR-style scoped rifles. He claimed he acquired several confiscated rifles directly from an LAPD contact for roughly $700 each, while other rifles came from a corrupt Marine. To move the hardware, the dealer packed the firearms into the trunk of a car driven by an unassuming woman. Mariana watched the driver cross the Mexican border completely uninspected, as southbound checkpoint scrutiny is practically nonexistent.
- An estimated 70%-plus of firearms seized at Mexican crime scenes originate from the United States.
- The dealer sold AK-47s procured from confiscated police stockpiles for approximately $700.
- Weapons moved through southern California are transported by couriers down the Pacific corridor into cartel bastions like Sinaloa.
---
[01:47:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6438s) The Culiacán Siege and DEA Operations
Mariana describes tracing that weapons pipeline down to the Sierra Madre mountains in Sinaloa, where cartel *sicarios* showed her underground bunkers hidden beneath houses. These bunkers were packed with military-grade arsenals and ammunition reserved for cartel warfare in areas where state security forces rarely venture. Only weeks later, those stockpiles were unleashed during the October 2019 "Culiacanazo," when Mexican federal forces captured El Chapo's son, Ovidio Guzmán. Cartel gunmen besieged Culiacán, mounted.50-caliber machine guns on trucks, surrounded military housing compounds, and launched an urban war resembling an active combat zone in Afghanistan, ultimately forcing the Mexican government to release Guzmán to stop civilian bloodshed.
Rogan brings up the historical scandal of Operation Fast and Furious, where the ATF deliberately allowed firearms to "walk" across the border to trace their distribution networks. Mariana reveals that a parallel scandal recently occurred with synthetic opioids, citing an Associated Press investigation based on a whistleblower:
> “So, in New Mexico, um, the DEA, there was a whistleblower that came out and spoke to the AP, an amazing AP investigation, where a whistleblower came out and said basically that the DEA in New Mexico was allowing millions of pills of fentinel...”
The parallel tactic—letting illicit contraband flow freely in the hopes of building wider federal conspiracy indictments—replicates the exact systemic hazards that previously blew back on American law enforcement during cross-border arms investigations.
[01:49:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6568s) The DEA Whistleblower Scandal: Letting Fentanyl Walk
Mariana van Zeller describes an alarming whistleblower complaint emerging from within the Drug Enforcement Administration in New Mexico. DEA agents conducted surveillance on fentanyl distribution networks but intentionally allowed massive shipments of counterfeit pills to flow onto the streets to build bigger criminal conspiracy cases. The tragic consequence of this strategy was civilian casualties, including a months-old infant who died after picking up and being exposed to fentanyl residue on a floor. Although the agent repeatedly warned superiors that people were dying, leadership refused to intervene. Previously, strict regulations mandated that operations must halt if civilian safety was compromised. However, when the complaint reached higher levels within the government, the Department of Justice quietly rewritten the rules in 2024 to grant law enforcement broad discretion to overlook active fentanyl tracking in favor of preserving long-term investigations.
Joe Rogan and Mariana draw immediate comparisons between this scandal and the infamous ATF Operation Fast and Furious. When Rogan questions whether corruption, bribes, or pure incompetence fueled the decision, van Zeller explains that law enforcement agencies face immense institutional incentives to produce record-breaking bust statistics. Jamie pulls up a PBS report detailing the Justice Department watchdog findings, revealing that New Mexico DEA agents failed to seize 350,000 fentanyl pills identified during the very first intercepted wiretap call of an investigation, all while the DEA was running an aggressive public awareness campaign centered on the slogan: “One pill can kill.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: DEA Controlled Delivery vs Harm Escalation
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how DEA surveillance prioritization led to street-level fentanyl exposure and regulatory changes.
subgraph Surveillance["DEA Investigation"]
A["Intercepted Wiretaps & Surveillance"] --> B["Allow Shipments to Proceed<br>(350,000+ Pills)"]
end
subgraph Outcome["Public Impact"]
B --> C["Street Distribution & Overdoses"]
C --> D["Infant Fatalities & Civilian Deaths"]
end
subgraph Response["Bureaucratic Reaction"]
D --> E["Whistleblower Complaint"]
E --> F["DOJ Rewrites Rules (2024)<br>Expands Law Enforcement Discretion"]
end
```
- A New Mexico DEA whistleblower reported that agents allowed hundreds of thousands of pills to pass surveillance to build the single largest fentanyl case in the agency's history.
- An infant died from exposure after picking up contaminated material from the floor, prompting internal objections.
- Initial reports indicated that over 1.7 million illicit pills were allowed into circulation across related monitoring operations.
- Mariana van Zeller underscores the hypocrisy of the agency's stance: “And crazy the campaign the DEA had at this time was one pill can kill can kill you.”
---
[01:53:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6780s) The War on Drugs: Portugal vs. Oregon Decriminalization
Rogan reflects on how rapidly the landscape of cartel violence has evolved. When he first moved to California in the 1990s, Americans regularly crossed into Tijuana to party and returned safely without fear of organized crime or violent cartels. Van Zeller emphasizes that the modern militarization of Mexican cartels is entirely bankrolled by the massive American demand for illicit narcotics. Addressing this demand requires rethinking consumer policy, prompting van Zeller to revisit a debate from her previous appearance regarding Portugal’s decriminalization model versus Oregon’s fraught attempt with Measure 110.
Van Zeller explains that Oregon's policy backfired because it lacked the foundational infrastructure that made Portugal successful. Two years prior to decriminalizing personal possession, Portugal built a nationwide network of public rehabilitation clinics and treatment infrastructure supported by universal healthcare. Under the Portuguese model, anyone caught with up to a 10-day personal supply goes before a panel consisting of a government legal representative alongside social workers and addiction specialists. Offenders face a direct choice between punitive consequences or mandatory rehabilitation, with the vast majority choosing treatment. In contrast, Oregon decriminalized drugs first, delayed funding treatment centers by a year, and handed offenders a nominal $100 citation with a non-mandatory phone helpline that only a fraction of users ever called.
- In 1990s California, cross-border travel to Tijuana was common and peaceful before cartel dominance escalated over the last few decades.
- Portugal established comprehensive addiction clinics and healthcare networks two full years ahead of implementing decriminalization.
- Portugal's deterrence model requires individuals caught with up to a 10-day drug supply to appear before a multi-disciplinary panel of legal and psychological experts.
- Oregon issued citations with an optional helpline, resulting in thousands of handed-out cards but only a few hundred voluntary calls.
- Mariana van Zeller argues that structural failure, not decriminalization itself, sank Oregon's initiative: “It wasn't mandatory, right? It wasn't like the option was prison or, you know, rehab. So, of course, it didn't work.”
---
[01:56:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6973s) Harm Reduction Backlash and the War on Narcan
Van Zeller notes that while fentanyl deaths in the United States have recently dropped following federal recognition of the issue as a public health emergency, spending priorities are dangerously reverting back to traditional prohibition tactics. Federal funds are being redirected away from critical harm reduction resources—such as Medicaid expansion, fentanyl test strips, and naloxone (Narcan) distribution grants—to finance aggressive covert military and interdiction operations in the Pacific and Ecuador.
Rogan and van Zeller express outrage over legislative and local efforts, including debates in Texas, aimed at restricting public access to Narcan under the assumption that overdose-reversal medication encourages risky drug consumption. Van Zeller points out that this rationale completely misunderstands addiction and ignores the millions of regular people who encounter counterfeit prescription medications. Counterfeit anti-anxiety or pain medications pressed with lethal doses of fentanyl routinely kill individuals who never intended to consume illicit opioids, making widespread naloxone accessibility the only barrier keeping them alive.
- Recent federal budget adjustments have redirected resources toward covert interdiction campaigns in Ecuador and maritime drug hunts while defunding local harm-reduction grants.
- Test strips and naloxone grants remain vital tools for lowering overdose fatalities among recreational and accidental users.
- Political efforts to limit Narcan distribution rely on the claim that access to anti-overdose medication creates a moral hazard.
- Mariana van Zeller firmly rejects the mindset behind limiting overdose treatments: “That's somebody who's never spoken to a user, a drug user, a drug addict before.”
[01:58:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7090s) Fentanyl Trafficking Across the Southern Border and Port Logistics
Joe Rogan and Mariana van Zeller discuss the necessity of distributing fentanyl test strips and Narcan widely so users can identify tainted substances and reverse fatal overdoses. Rogan vents frustration over federal border enforcement, calling the situation at the southern border over the previous four years "insane." Van Zeller points out that popular misconceptions about illicit trafficking obscure how fentanyl actually reaches the domestic market: around 90 to 95 percent of fentanyl smuggled into the United States enters through official ports of entry rather than across open desert borders.
Rogan notes that a primary systemic vulnerability is freight screening, pointing out that authorities only inspect an estimated 10 percent of shipping containers arriving in the country. Van Zeller adds that the couriers moving synthetic opioids across land ports of entry are predominantly American citizens driving personal vehicles through standard checkpoints, as their citizenship lowers scrutiny during routine border stops.
[01:58:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7138s) Michael Douglas Smuggling Weed and Nitazenes Replacing Fentanyl
Rogan shares a piece of Hollywood trivia regarding actor Michael Douglas paying his way through college. Douglas’s father, the legendary actor Kirk Douglas (*Spartacus*), was notoriously strict and gave his son only $10,000 upon reaching adulthood, cutting him off financially. To pay for tuition, Douglas smuggled suitcases of marijuana. Rogan and van Zeller laugh over the audacity of the scheme, contrasting Douglas's non-violent smuggling with the deadly reality of modern illicit drug markets. Rogan emphasizes how frequently people die from fentanyl, sharing that he personally knows multiple victims who overdosed on recreational substances tainted with the synthetic opioid.
Van Zeller warns that an even more lethal class of synthetic drugs, known as nitazenes, has begun infiltrating illicit supply chains. These synthetic opioids can be up to 50 times more potent than fentanyl. Unlike fentanyl, nitazenes frequently evade standard test strips and are resilient enough that standard doses of Narcan fail to reverse an overdose. Van Zeller explains that nitazenes are her next investigative project:
> “It’s called nitazenes. It’s my next investigation.”
She notes that these chemicals are being manufactured in Mexico utilizing precursor chemicals shipped directly from China, where manufacturers operate with total impunity. Van Zeller recalls reporting from Mexico at the very dawn of the fentanyl epidemic alongside her husband Darren Foster and producer Cristina Bofré. A member of the Sinaloa Cartel admitted to her that his uncle had paid a Colombian chemist $40,000 to travel to Mexico and teach cartel operatives how to synthesize fentanyl. At that early stage, the cartel was mixing one kilogram of fentanyl into shipments of conventional heroin, laying the groundwork for the pure synthetic fentanyl that now completely dominates the black market.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Evolution of Synthetic Opioid Smuggling
accDescr: Diagram tracing the shift from Chinese precursors and Colombian chemists to cartels and modern potent compounds.
subgraph Production ["Precursors & Technical Training"]
China["Chinese Precursor Shipments"]
Chemist["Colombian Chemist ($40k fee)"]
end
subgraph Synthesis ["Cartel Evolution in Mexico"]
HeroinMix["Initial 1kg Heroin/Fentanyl Mixes"]
PureFent["Full-Scale Pure Fentanyl Production"]
Nitazenes["Nitazenes (Up to 50x Potency of Fentanyl)"]
end
subgraph Distribution ["U.S. Smuggling Pipeline"]
Ports["Official U.S. Ports of Entry (~95%)"]
Couriers["U.S. Citizens in Passenger Vehicles"]
end
[02:01:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7299s) *The OxyContin Express* and the American Pain Operation
Rogan recalls how he first discovered van Zeller through her Peabody Award-winning 2009 documentary *The OxyContin Express*, which exposed the genesis of the modern opioid epidemic. In the late 2000s, Florida’s lack of a prescription monitoring database allowed commercial "pain clinics" to proliferate. Customers simply claimed to have a bad back or a herniated disc to walk out with bags stuffed with thousands of opioid pills, which they then drove north along the I-75 pipeline into states like Kentucky and Ohio. Rogan praises the immense personal courage it took for van Zeller and her husband to publicly expose an enterprise grossing billions of dollars:
> “And the courage that you and your husband had to do that investigation and to put yourself out there like that and be the face of it, and like you cost those people billions—billions of dollars.”
Van Zeller details the extreme danger of that reporting. After seeing prescription bottles found next to overdose victims in Kentucky tracing back to a clinic called American Pain, van Zeller and her team went to Florida with hidden cameras. American Pain was operated by the George twins, Chris and Jeff George, whom van Zeller describes as the "Pablo Escobar of the United States in terms of pills." While filming outside their clinic, the twin brothers ambushed the journalists, pursuing van Zeller’s car at high speeds down Interstate 95.
Low on fuel, van Zeller pulled into a gas station, where the brothers confronted her and began screaming. Drawing on memories of watching *The Sopranos*, van Zeller feared they were going to execute her. She sped back onto the highway with an empty tank, finally stalling out in the middle of the freeway while the brothers parked directly behind her. Fortunately, 911 dispatchers arrived just in time, prompting the pursuers to tell police they were merely chasing down a "crazy ex-girlfriend."
It was later revealed that the FBI and the DEA had already wiretapped the George brothers' phones. The wiretaps recorded the traffickers panicking over van Zeller's investigation, which accelerated the federal bust that sent the brothers to federal prison. Her husband later directed the documentary *American Pain*, interviewing the brothers in prison and after their release.
[02:04:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7487s) Clinic Doctors and Sackler Family Immunity
Van Zeller and Rogan reflect on the profound lack of legal accountability for the medical professionals and corporate leaders who profited off the epidemic. Doctors employed by the George brothers were processing hundreds of patients per day. The operations moved so rapidly that physicians stopped signing prescriptions by hand and began using automated rubber stamps to speed up dispensing OxyContin.
Rogan and van Zeller highlight the glaring double standard: while a handful of street operators went to federal prison, the pharmaceutical executives at Purdue Pharma and members of the billionaire Sackler family completely evaded criminal charges. The discussion turns to the docudrama series *Painkiller*, which dramatized how the Sackler family orchestrated structured settlements and negotiated civil fines in exchange for broad legal immunity. Rogan expresses outrage that despite causing catastrophic death tolls, none of the top pharmaceutical figures have ever served time behind bars:
> “The Sackler family, no one’s been—how many people are they responsible for?”
- The George brothers operated American Pain, the largest illegal pill mill syndicate in U.S. history.
- Twin brothers Chris and Jeff George were convicted following federal wiretaps and served time in federal prison.
- Doctors inside the Florida pain clinics processed hundreds of patients daily using rubber signature stamps.
- Purdue Pharma executives and members of the Sackler family received no criminal charges, shielding their personal wealth through controversial bankruptcy and settlement immunity agreements.
[02:06:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7579s) The Toll of the Opioid Epidemic and the Sackler Settlement
Joe Rogan and Mariana van Zeller reflect on the staggering human devastation brought on by the opioid epidemic, observing that over one million Americans have died in the last two decades—surpassing the casualty count of all American wars combined over the past 150 years. Rogan recommends the Peter Berg miniseries *Painkiller*, noting its faithful depiction of how pharmaceutical companies hired attractive young sales representatives to pitch OxyContin directly to medical clinics, reassuring doctors that aggressive long-term pain management was simply the modern medical standard. Rogan checks recent legal reporting to find that following a previous legal block, a revised national settlement was reached in January 2025 where Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family agreed to pay $7.4 billion while being explicitly stripped of future civil immunity, leaving them open to individual lawsuits.
Despite the settlement, Rogan expresses outrage that the Sacklers remain phenomenally wealthy while bearing responsibility for a million deaths, fractured families, and millions more survivors plunged into abject poverty after becoming chemically hooked on medications sold as non-addictive. Van Zeller emphasizes that the fentanyl crisis ravaging the country today is not a separate issue, but a direct evolutionary consequence of the market created by pharmaceutical companies. Rogan recalls growing up in Massachusetts, where heroin addiction was extraordinarily rare—recounting how his old boxing coach, a longshoreman, worked alongside a functional addict who would shoot up in his truck at lunchtime every single day. In contrast, Rogan notes, prescription and illicit opioid addiction has become a ubiquitous tragedy touchpoint in the United States, even though it remains comparatively absent in most peer Western nations.
- A million Americans have died from opioids across the last 20-plus years, exceeding American casualties in all wars over the past 150 years.
- Under the revised January 2025 settlement terms, Purdue Pharma and the Sacklers agreed to a $7.4 billion payout without blanket civil immunity.
- Van Zeller stresses the lineage of the synthetic drug crisis: “And how many people are still dying because what we're the fentanyl crisis is just a development, an evolution yes of what was started by these pharmaceutical companies.”
---
[02:09:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7746s) Broken Systems, Cartels, and the Failure of Supply-Side Enforcement
When Rogan asks whether investigating harrowing scams and underground black markets causes her to lose faith in humanity, van Zeller answers unequivocally in the negative. Rather than seeing irredeemable individuals, she sees broken systems, corrupt politicians chasing power, and profound structural neglect. Having spent decades interviewing smugglers, cartel operatives, and fraudsters, she explains that those labeled as villains are almost universally byproducts of crushing global inequality, lack of education, and absent economic mobility.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Broken Systems and the Drug Economy
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how systemic poverty drives black-market supply while domestic consumption sustains illicit profits.
subgraph RootCauses["Structural Root Causes"]
A["Global Inequality & Poverty<br>(Bottom 10% Living Under Poverty Line)"]
B["Lack of Education & Job Opportunities"]
end
subgraph BlackMarket["Illicit Supply Chain"]
C["Recruitment into Cartels,<br>Trafficking & Scamming"]
D["Cross-Border Drug & Fraud Supply"]
end
subgraph EnforcementVsDemand["Domestic Reality"]
E["Traditional Enforcement<br>(Border Interdiction & Incarceration)"]
F["Persistent Domestic Demand<br>(Public Health Crisis)"]
end
RootCauses --> C
C --> D
D <--> F
E -.->|"Fails to Stop Demand"| D
```
Van Zeller argues that the reflexive American impulse to deploy the full force of law enforcement to arrest and imprison lower-tier operators fails to address root causes. Rogan notes the historical difficulty of suppressing substances like alcohol or cocaine that have long-standing domestic consumer demand. Van Zeller points out that while intercepting trafficking boats off Ecuador or securing the southern border are valid interdiction efforts, the federal government simultaneously undercuts public health solutions by reducing grant funding for harm-reduction tools like fentanyl test strips, Narcan, legitimate methadone clinics, and reputable rehabilitation facilities. As long as insatiable domestic consumer demand exists, foreign suppliers will inevitably emerge to fill the void.
- Van Zeller rejects misanthropy when reporting on criminals: “I spend so much of my time talking to the traffickers and the scammers and all the people that we consider the bad guys, right? And more often than not, they are the consequence of broken systems, right?”
- Van Zeller critiques domestic policy contradictions: “What he's doing at the same time now, unfortunately, is after calling this a public health crisis, which I'm so happy he did, is he's also removing money... from grants for test strips and uh Narcan and from the treatment centers that actually can curb demand.”
---
[02:12:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7960s) Psychedelic Medicine: Ibogaine, MDMA, and Alternative Addictions Treatment
Rogan details his visit to the White House alongside former Texas Governor Rick Perry and Bryan Hubbard to advocate for clinical access and research funding for ibogaine. Describing it as one of the most effective anti-addiction compounds available, Rogan explains that ibogaine bypasses traditional cravings by resetting neural pathways while forcing users through an intensely uncomfortable, intrusive psychic review of their unresolved trauma and emotional injuries. Because the experience is psychologically punishing rather than euphoric, it carries zero recreational appeal, functioning strictly as a tool of last resort for patients on the brink of death, combat veterans with severe PTSD, and individuals suffering from traumatic brain injuries.
Rogan argues that legitimate medicalization could align financial incentives so clinics profit from fully curing addicts rather than cycling them endlessly through ineffective, scam-ridden rehab mills. He extends this argument to MDMA-assisted psychotherapy championed by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), highlighting its documented clinical efficacy in helping combat veterans process horrific war memories. Rogan cautions against grouping all substances under the monolithic label of "drugs," contrasting destructive street narcotics like methamphetamine and illicit fentanyl with psilocybin, which offers demonstrated relief for end-of-life anxiety in terminal cancer patients. To illustrate early cultural intersections with psychedelics, Rogan references actor Larry Hagman—who famously played J.R. Ewing on the long-running television drama *Dallas*—and his transformational experiences with psychedelic substances.
- Rogan emphasizes the non-recreational nature of ibogaine: “And it's not recreational in any way, shape, or form. No one's going to do ibogaine for funsies.”
- Ibogaine demonstrates therapeutic utility beyond substance dependency, showing neuro-regenerative promise for traumatic brain injuries and severe combat-related PTSD.
- Rogan stresses the necessity of scientific nuance: “I mean I don't think we should put drugs into all one banner because drugs are you know drugs are meth drugs are uh fentanyl drugs are the but drugs are also psilocybin which is shown to have an incredible relief for people that are dying of cancer people that end of life anxiety.”
[02:15:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8144s) Psychedelic Medicine, Veteran Advocacy, and Ibogaine
Joe Rogan recalls an interview on CNN where actor Larry Hagman was asked about death and revealed that a single experience with LSD completely relieved him of that fear. Rogan argues that while society lumps all these substances together under the generalized, blanket label of "drugs," compounds like ibogaine offer unprecedented potential to break deadly chemical dependencies caused by prescription narcotics like fentanyl and OxyContin. When Mariana van Zeller asks about the current legal status of ibogaine in the United States, Rogan explains that despite significant pushback, advocates like former Texas Governor Rick Perry and Bryan Hubbard have been working aggressively to push it through. Rogan notes that after texting Donald Trump about seeking FDA approval, Trump immediately brought them to the White House for a press conference and signed an executive order advancing research.
Rogan points out that Texas has allocated state funding toward ibogaine trials under Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, highlighting a cultural shift where psychedelics are no longer dismissed as mere counterculture novelties. Instead, they are being championed by conservative politicians and embraced by the military community to treat severe combat trauma, brain injuries, and PTSD. Rogan points to clinical treatments happening across the border in Mexico—such as at the clinic in the Cancun area—where Rick Perry traveled and underwent brain imaging. Before treatment, Perry’s scans showed standard age-related cerebral atrophy; within weeks of receiving ibogaine, scans showed remarkable improvement, and a six-month follow-up revealed the atrophy had completely reversed. Rogan expresses disbelief that such a potent neurological tool remains classified as Schedule I—a designation reserved for compounds with no accepted medical use.
“This is one of the only things that's been shown to have a really effective result.” — Joe Rogan
- **Larry Hagman on CNN**: Credited an LSD trip with eliminating his fear of mortality.
- **Key Political Figures**: Rick Perry and Bryan Hubbard spearheaded federal and state-level ibogaine initiatives.
- **Veteran Community**: Psychedelic therapy has transitioned from a left-wing stereotype to a critical lifeline for combat veterans struggling with severe trauma and suicidal ideation.
- **Perry's Neurological Scans**: Pre-treatment scans showed normal age-related brain atrophy; follow-ups after clinical treatment in Mexico showed the atrophy was fully reversed.
---
[02:18:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8332s) Scheduling, Personal Responsibility, and the Hypocrisy Around Coca
The conversation pivots to drug scheduling and public policy as Rogan praises moves to reclassify marijuana to Schedule III, recognizing its proven efficacy for cancer patients managing chemotherapy-induced nausea, chronic pain, and anxiety. Rogan challenges the puritanical urge to ban substances simply because they can be abused, arguing that someone can eat cheeseburgers until they suffer a fatal heart attack, yet society rightly regulates behavior rather than banning food, sugar, or alcohol. He stresses that while individuals should be free to consume what they choose, society must establish robust support centers modeled after Portugal's decriminalization framework to assist those who struggle with addiction.
Addressing the lethal reality of black-market stimulants cut with fentanyl, Rogan contrasts processed street cocaine with traditional coca leaf consumption in the Andes. In Ecuador and Peru, indigenous populations and mountain travelers regularly chew coca leaves or drink *mate de coca* to combat altitude sickness and sustain energy without experiencing addiction or health crises. Rogan questions the logic of criminalizing the plant in a way that surrenders the entire supply chain to violent cartels while Americans continue consuming contaminated, dangerous powder.
“Can it be abused? Yes. So can cheeseburgers. Okay, you can eat cheeseburgers until you fucking have a heart attack and die. It doesn't mean we should ban cheeseburgers.” — Joe Rogan
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Drug Regulation and Public Health Models
accDescr: Comparison between prohibition-driven black markets and treatment-focused harm reduction.
subgraph BlackMarket ["Prohibition Model"]
A["High Consumer Demand"] --> B["Cartel Production & Adulteration"]
B --> C["Fentanyl-Laced Cocaine & Overdoses"]
C --> D["Heavy Law Enforcement Spending"]
end
subgraph ReformModel ["Decriminalization & Harm Reduction"]
E["Portugal Model Decriminalization"] --> F["10%+ Reallocation into Treatment"]
F --> G["Medical Access: Ibogaine, Buprenorphine, Methadone"]
G --> H["Reduced Overdoses & Reintegration"]
end
```
---
[02:20:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8441s) Filming Colombian Cocaine Labs and the Backpacker's Dream
Rogan reflects on an episode of Mariana van Zeller's documentary series where she embedded directly with Colombian producers synthesizing cocaine, admitting he was terrified watching her stand beside open vats of toxic processing chemicals. Van Zeller describes the terrifying reality of that shoot in the Amazon jungle: after locals spotted their cameras, the crew had to sprint through the pitch-black rainforest in the middle of the night without using flashlights to evade capture.
Van Zeller recounts interviewing a young Colombian smuggler known as a "backpacker," who carried dozens of kilos of refined cocaine through dangerous jungle paths on his back, having already seen several peers murdered along the route. When she asked why he risked his life for cartel runners, he revealed that his family were impoverished farmers and smuggling was his only avenue to pay for dental school. He explained that billboards in his hometown always pictured dentists with radiant, joyful smiles, and his dream was to make people smile too. Rogan and van Zeller marvel at the heartbreaking paradox of a young man delivering lethal drugs to the United States just to finance a career bringing joy to others.
“I asked him what what why do you do this kind of work? He said, 'I always wanted to go to college. I wanted to be a dentist. My family is very poor. They're farmers. I can't afford for to pay for college. So this is the only job opportunity I get that I can save money to eventually become a dentist.'” — Mariana van Zeller
- **Amazon Jungle Escape**: Van Zeller and her crew were forced to flee a clandestine processing lab in total darkness through the jungle after locals noticed production cameras.
- **The "Backpacker"**: Young couriers haul massive loads of cocaine across mountainous jungle terrain on foot under constant threat of rival factions and authorities.
---
[02:22:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8541s) Addressing the Root Cause: Demand, Community, and Profit
Van Zeller and Rogan confront the fundamental driver of the cartel trade: relentless demand inside the United States. Van Zeller insists that real reform requires shifting resources away from punitive interdiction toward the demand side, noting that redirecting even 10% of enforcement budgets into treatment centers and evidence-based therapies like ibogaine, buprenorphine, and methadone would transform the crisis. She expresses frustration at how obvious the solution is and wonders why governments remain so slow to adopt it.
Rogan reflects on a conversation with a recovering addict who confessed that drugs were the only thing that had ever made him happy, leaving him with an empty void whenever he tried to quit. Van Zeller notes that this psychological vulnerability mirrors the dynamic of romance and financial scams, where victims cling to predators because the illusion provides their sole sense of connection. Rogan concludes that genuine recovery requires repairing social alienation—fortifying communities, providing real love, and maintaining a social safety net for when people stumble—prompting a sharp concluding reality check from van Zeller.
“Even if it's just like 10% of the money that you spent on enforcement, let's put that on actually treating the demand side of it. That'll make a huge difference.” — Mariana van Zeller
“That would be nice. But the problem is that's not profitable.” — Mariana van Zeller
[02:24:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8641s) Wrapping Up the Conversation
The interview reaches its conclusion on a warm and concise note. Mariana van Zeller expresses her appreciation to Joe Rogan, saying simply, “thank you.” Rogan immediately calls the episode to a close, addressing the audience directly with his signature sign-off: “Let's wrap it up. Bye everybody.” Outro music plays as the broadcast fades out.
## Notable quotes
> [02:12:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7960s) No one's going to do ibogaine for funsies. — Joe Rogan
> [02:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=128s) Why are we focusing on the response of of the victim instead of actually understanding the actions of the scammer of the scammers themselves because they are very very good at what they do. — Mariana van Zeller
## Mentioned
ADX Florence, Align, Alpha Brain, Amazon, America Online, American Pain, Barry Crimmins, Brandon Guffey, Brad Pitt, Bryan Hubbard, Chris George, Consumer Federation of America, Dan Patrick, Darren Foster, Donald Trump, DraftKings, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Duncan Trussell, Emily Peterson-Cassin, Eric Balli, Eva AI, Facebook, Gavin Guffy, George Clooney, Google, Gorilla Mind, Hillary Clinton, Hispanic Federation, Instagram, Ismael 'El Mayo' Zambada, Jeff George, Jeff Plunkett, Joaquín 'El Chapo' Guzmán, Joaquín Guzmán López, Jon Bon Jovi, Joe Rogan, Keanu Reeves, Mariana van Zeller, Mark Zuckerberg, Measure 110, Meta, Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), NOW Supplements, Onnit, OpenAI, Ovidio Guzmán, Prevagen, Purdue Pharma, Pure Encapsulations, Reuters, Rick Perry, Safe Platforms Act, Sackler family, Sam Havelock, Sinaloa Cartel, Super Scam Me, Take It Down Act, Telegram, The OxyContin Express, Trafficked with Mariana van Zeller, Valerie Foushee, Vicente Zambada Niebla, WhatsApp, Yatai International
## Video description
Mariana van Zeller is a Peabody and Emmy Award-winning journalist whose credits include "Trafficked with Mariana van Zeller," "The OxyContin Express," and "Inside Secret America." She is also the host of "The Hidden Third" podcast. Her latest documentary special, "Super Scam Me," premieres October 17 on National Geographic and will be available to stream on Disney+ and Hulu.
Perplexity: Download the app or ask Perplexity anything at https://pplx.ai/rogan.
Don’t miss out on all the action this week at DraftKings! Download the DraftKings app today! Sign-up using https://dkng.co/rogan or through my promo code ROGAN.
Investigative journalist Mariana van Zeller and Joe Rogan argue that illicit global industries—from transnational scam syndicates to drug cartels—thrive primarily by exploiting systemic human vulnerabilities, including loneliness and addiction, alongside institutional failures in corporate moderation and law enforcement.
Loneliness, AI Companionship, and Romance Exploitation (0:01)
Romance scams systematically target universal desires for companionship and emotional intimacy rather than simple financial greed. Van Zeller and Rogan note that modern social isolation fosters fertile ground for fraud, leading victims into psychological loops comparable to gambling addiction, where dopamine rushes from affectionate messages cause individuals to ignore glaring warning signs and double down despite mounting losses. In extreme cases, victims who exhaust their life savings are coerced into serving as unwitting money mules, as seen in Houston where a victim processed laundered funds for an offshore syndicate while believing she was helping a romantic partner.
Industrial Fraud Factories and Compound Slavery (15:37)
Modern scam operations extend far beyond individual telemarketers into heavily fortified, militarized compounds across Southeast Asia that run on human trafficking and forced labor. Workers lured by legitimate tech and customer service job offers have their passports confiscated and face physical beatings, torture, or sexual exploitation if they fail to meet fraud quotas. Van Zeller highlights severe abuses, such as a victim repeatedly drained of blood in Cambodia and a captive woman coerced into acting as a live video model beneath deepfake overlays. The economic toll is immense; van Zeller cites a Consumer Federation of America report estimating that Americans lose approximately $148 billion annually to online scams.
Big Tech's Complicity and Enforcement Disparities (29:45)
Social media platforms face sharp criticism for failing to police deceptive content from which they profit. Citing a Reuters investigation based on leaked internal documents, van Zeller notes that Meta safety teams estimated users were served 15 billion scam ads daily, with projections showing roughly $16 billion in annual revenue derived from scams and prohibited goods. Platforms often rely on tiered algorithmic confidence levels rather than immediate bans, with records indicating an executive tolerance for fraudulent ad revenue originating from China to minimize financial hits. Meanwhile, user reporting tools leave victims largely unassisted, with only a fraction of hundreds of thousands of weekly fraud complaints resulting in takedowns.
Cartel Dynamics, Systemic Corruption, and Supply-Side Failures (100:20)
The mechanics of transnational drug cartels similarly rely on deep-rooted institutional flaws and consumer demand. Van Zeller notes that over 70% of firearms recovered from Mexican crime scenes trace back through the U.S. "Iron River" pipeline, while public officials and law enforcement on both sides of the border succumb to cartel bribery. Misguided tactics exacerbate the crisis: in New Mexico, a DEA whistleblower revealed that agents allowed bulk fentanyl shipments to flow into communities to assemble broader conspiracy indictments, resulting in civilian deaths. Furthermore, approximately 90% to 95% of fentanyl enters through official ports of entry via standard vehicle traffic rather than open border crossings, exposing severe limits in border freight inspections.
Rethinking Harm Reduction and Demand Treatment (113:00)
Punitive interdiction routinely fails to dismantle illicit markets because it neglects persistent domestic demand. Van Zeller contrasts Oregon's troubled Measure 110 decriminalization effort—which lacked prompt treatment funding—with Portugal’s model, which established universal healthcare panels and rehabilitation infrastructure two years prior to reform. Rogan and van Zeller advocate for harm reduction solutions, including the distribution of fentanyl test strips, increased Narcan availability, and legal access to therapeutic psychedelics like ibogaine to disrupt chemical dependencies, especially as deadlier synthetic compounds like nitazenes enter illicit markets.
Van Zeller concludes that the individuals driving illicit markets are primarily products of poverty, inequality, and institutional indifference, asserting that durable reform requires shifting public funds away from punitive interdiction toward repairing social alienation and treating domestic demand.
精炼阅读摘要
调查记者Mariana van Zeller与Joe Rogan指出，跨国网络诈骗与贩毒集团的根源在于现代社会的情感孤立与巨大的本土消费需求，而科技巨头与政府执法机构的制度性失职则进一步纵容并放大了此类黑色产业链。
情感孤独与心理操控驱动的网络诈骗 (0:01)
van Zeller指出，网络杀猪盘和情感诈骗并非单纯利用受害者的贪婪或愚钝，而是系统性地利用了普遍存在的情感需求与现代社会的孤独危机。受害者常常因沉没成本效应与持续联系带来的多巴胺刺激而陷入其中，甚至在察觉可疑迹象后仍选择自欺欺人。随着AI技术的发展，深度伪造视频和合成伴侣被广泛用于诈骗脚本中，极大地降低了行骗门槛。van Zeller在《Super Scam Me》的调查卧底实验中发现，受害者甚至会在耗尽个人积蓄后被跨境犯罪网络操控，沦为协助清洗被骗资金的洗钱工具人（Money Mule）。
东南亚诈骗园区的人口贩运与残暴奴役 (15:37)
跨国诈骗产业背后隐藏着高度组织化且残暴的现代奴役制度。van Zeller调查揭示，东南亚由武装势力控制的高层封闭园区内关押着来自巴西、印度、菲律宾等多国数十万名被拐卖劳工。这些人员在虚假高薪客服职位的诱骗下被扣押护照，若无法完成每日欺诈配额就会遭受毒打、性暴力甚至器官或血液抽取的残忍虐待。根据美国消费者联合会（Consumer Federation of America）报告估计，此类电信诈骗每年从美国受害者手中骗取高达1480亿美元，折合每天约提取4亿美元，其中大量资金直接流向了这些海外暴力犯罪综合体。
大型科技平台对欺诈广告的纵容与寻租 (29:45)
社交媒体平台在面对泛滥的黑产欺诈时存在严重的系统性失责。根据路透社援引Meta内部泄露文件的调查，Meta自身安全团队估计其旗下平台每天展示约150亿次诈骗广告，并预计此类违规内容每年带来约160亿美元广告收入，占其业务总额的近10%。文件显示，Meta高层为避免收入受损，选择推迟对广告主的身份核验，并通过算法对欺诈内容采取分级审查而非立即封禁。即便用户每周提交约10万起诈骗举报，平台下架率依然极低，受害者点击一次诈骗内容后，平台推荐算法更会在24小时内向其密集推送更多类似骗局。
芬太尼危机与毒品执法模式的失效 (109:28)
van Zeller与Rogan探讨了美国阿片类药物危机的演变轨迹。从早年由普渡制药等药企滥开奥施康定（OxyContin）引发医疗成瘾并造成超百万美国人死亡，演变至今的非法合成芬太尼泛滥，本质上均由庞大的本土需求所维系。van Zeller指出，约90%至95%的芬太尼是通过陆路合法口岸由美国公民驾驶私家车走私入境，而非来自传统边境偷渡，且药效比芬太尼强达50倍的合成阿片类药物硝氮嗪类（Nitazenes）已开始渗透供应链。而美国缉毒局（DEA）新墨西哥州吹哨人指控，执法部门为了追查大案甚至曾故意放任假药流入街头，暴露了单纯依赖供给端封锁与指标执法的机制性缺陷。
从惩罚性打击转向需求端治理与心理重建 (129:06)
van Zeller主张，传统以边境截断和严刑峻法为主的供给侧治理已证明失败，解决毒品与跨国犯罪的根本途径在于削减需求并修补社会安全网。以葡萄牙为例，该国在推行非罪化前便建立了完备的公共康复与全民医保网络，使绝大多数吸毒者能接受强制或自愿治疗；反观俄勒冈州由于缺乏治疗配套过早放开，导致政策走向混乱。Rogan同时呼吁对死藤水、伊博格碱（Ibogaine）等有助于打破化学依赖的药物展开合法临床应用。两人一致认为，唯有将至少10%的执法资金重新分配至需求端干预、心理健康救助与社区重建，才能从根源上化解上瘾与诈骗滋生的温床。
无论是跨国杀猪盘还是芬太尼泛滥，表面上的猖獗犯罪实则是系统性社会孤独、制度性利益纵容以及需求端治理缺位的产物。若不从心理健康重建、平台法律责任追究以及医疗导向的减害政策入手，仅依靠边境截堵与惩戒性执法将难以扭转黑产蔓延的局势。
Detailed notes — zh
## Background
本期播客由 YouTube 频道 PowerfulJRE 于 2026 年 10 月 16 日发布。节目邀请了皮博迪奖与艾美奖得奖调查记者玛丽安娜·凡·泽勒（Mariana van Zeller），页面简介重点介绍了她的代表作《非法交易》（Trafficked with Mariana van Zeller）、《奥施康定特快》（The OxyContin Express）及其在国家地理频道推出的全新调查特别节目《超级杀猪盘》（Super Scam Me）。
## TL;DR
节目围绕凡·泽勒主导的多项暗访与卧底调查展开，深入剖析了席卷全美的跨国电信诈骗、“杀猪盘”（Pig Butchering）及其背后东南亚电诈园区的残暴奴役内幕。两人犀利批驳了大型科技平台（如 Meta）放任欺诈广告并从中牟取暴利的丑闻，反思了现代社会蔓延的“孤独流行病”与 AI 伴侣对人性的操控。此外，访谈还探讨了墨西哥贩毒集团头目“埃尔·马约”被捕事件与跨境军火走私链，并对比了全美阿片类药物危机的制度性崩塌，呼吁将治理重心从武装缉毒转向需求侧治疗与伊博格碱等迷幻医学前沿。
## Atmosphere & style
对话在惊心动魄的探险叙事与沉重的社会批判之间自由切换，既有记者冒死潜入黑市仓库、雨林深处的惊险回忆，也有对受害者悲惨境遇的深切同情。乔·罗根与凡·泽勒的互动默契而坦诚，穿插着冷峻的黑色幽默与针对企业巨头纵容恶行的愤怒谴责。整场访谈给听众带来强烈的警示感与现实压迫感，深刻揭示了隐藏在光鲜现代科技与体制缝隙之下的黑暗人性与制度冷漠。
## Bulletin
- [24:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1440s) 全美民众每年因网络电诈损失高达 1,480 亿美元（相当于每天被掠夺约 4 亿美元），其中绝大多数资金直接流向了由跨国犯罪集团在缅甸等东南亚法外之地建立的“杀猪盘”封闭园区。
- [30:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1808s) 路透社披露 Meta 内部文件显示，平台预测其 2024 年将从诈骗及违禁品广告中攫取高达 160 亿美元（约占其总利润的 10%），并通过“惩罚性竞价”让高疑似欺诈广告继续展示以获取更高广告费。
- [01:49:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6568s) 美联社与内部吹哨人指控新墨西哥州 DEA 特工为了“做大案子”而故意放任数以百万计的芬太尼药丸流入街头，导致平民及婴儿中毒身亡，司法部更于 2024 年悄悄修改内部规则扩大自由裁量权。
- [02:06:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7579s) 美国二十余年间有超 100 万人死于阿片类药物危机，普渡制药与萨克勒家族虽达成 74 亿美元和解协议并失去民事豁免权，但家族核心成员依然未面临任何实质性刑事指控。
## Key takeaways
- [00:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=13s) 席卷现代社会的“孤独流行病”是杀猪盘与情感诈骗猖獗的核心温床，大众对受害者的指责让骗子和平台借羞耻感隐匿犯罪。
- [15:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=937s) 东南亚电诈园区高度工业化运作，结合跨国人口拐骗、军事化奴役、酷刑折磨乃至抽取“血奴”血液与人体器官进行全方位压榨。
- [26:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1566s) “杀猪盘”形成标准化心理围猎流程：利用 AI 生成定制音视频长线放长线，通过虚假投资平台前期小额提现诱导受害者借贷乃至挪用客户资产入局。
- [30:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1808s) Meta 对置信度低于 95% 的高疑似欺诈广告实行“惩罚性竞价”机制加收费用，本质上形成了平台从诈骗中直接抽成并故意放缓审核的利益链条。
- [44:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2663s) 网络敲诈与假冒伪劣生态直接危及人身安全，平台在受害者自杀后仍允许施暴者使用完全相同的注册邮箱重建账号继续敲诈家属。
- [01:14:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4456s) 破产受害者往往被操纵转变为跨境洗钱链条中的“钱骡”（Money Mule），在心理依赖与微薄报酬驱动下源源不断将非法现金洗白为加密货币。
- [01:22:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4978s) 大语言模型若被商业公司深度嵌入伴侣机器人，将凭借对全人类交互数据的掌握，通过精准的情感操纵与订阅制升级彻底控制用户精神与钱包。
- [01:34:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5667s) 墨西哥锡那罗亚贩毒集团教父“埃尔·马约”遭教子华金·古兹曼设局诱拐并空运至美国移交，引发美墨跨国司法管辖与主权外交风波。
- [01:43:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6191s) 墨西哥超 70% 的犯罪现场枪支来自美国“铁河”走私链，货源甚至包括 LAPD 查扣库房及现役军人私卖，而约 95% 的芬太尼同样通过美国官方口岸回流。
- [01:53:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6780s) 俄勒冈州毒品去罪化因缺乏配套治疗而崩盘，葡萄牙模式的成功在于提前两年建立强制转介的专业医疗康复系统与全民医保托底。
- [01:58:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7090s) 新型合成毒品硝氮类（Nitazenes）药效为芬太尼的 50 倍，传统试纸难以检出且常无法被纳洛酮（Narcan）逆转，而政府却在削减关键解毒剂与试纸的预算补贴。
- [02:15:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8144s) 伊博格碱（Ibogaine）与 MDMA 等致幻物质在重塑成瘾神经回路、逆转脑萎缩及治疗退伍军人 PTSD 方面展现出巨大潜力，亟待从一类管制物中松绑推进合法临床应用。
- [02:22:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8541s) 毒品与电诈的根源均在于庞大的需求端，将缉毒经费的 10% 转向需求端戒断救助与建立真实社区归属感，远比无休止的边境武力封锁更具成效。
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=13s) 《超级杀猪盘》（Super Scam Me）与现代孤独症候群
乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）在开场时打趣道，每次看玛丽安娜·凡·泽勒（Mariana van Zeller）的新调查报道节目，自己心里都会捏一把汗，总担心她遭遇不测甚至丧命。玛丽安娜笑称这次的经历相较以往冒死卧底军火、毒品黑市来说“简直像在公园散步”，但罗根反驳道这绝非真正的轻松之旅——她专程飞往非洲，亲自去当面质问诈骗自己的网络骗子。这次行动正是为了她探讨杀猪盘与杀心盘（情感诈骗，Romance Scams）的调查特别节目《超级杀猪盘》（*Super Scam Me*）。
两人谈到情感诈骗猖獗的社会现实。罗根回忆起很久以前看过的一期节目：一名孤独无助的老人深信网上结识的所谓“真命天女”，两次自掏腰包飞赴欧洲试图见面，但对方每次都编造突发紧急事故爽约，老人前前后后被掏空了数十万美元的积蓄，其女儿痛苦万分却根本劝阻无果。玛丽安娜指出，席卷现代社会的“孤独流行病”（loneliness epidemic）是此类骗局疯狂蔓延的核心催化剂。罗根深有感触地附和，认为在这个国家，家庭纽带正在断裂，真正的邻里社区支持体系早已瓦解，留下了巨大且危险的情感真空。
- 骗局受害者特征：往往深陷极度孤独与情感脆弱之中，宁愿相信谎言也不愿面对残酷现实。
- 社会结构转变：美国社会中家庭联系与实体社区的缺失，为针对情感弱点的精准收割提供了温床。
---
### [02:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=128s) 摆脱“受害者有罪论”：骗子如何利用通用人类情感
谈及被骗群体时，罗根认为诈骗那些贪婪的股市造假者是一回事，但在情感骗局中，诈骗分子收割的往往是最令人心碎、最可怜的人群。玛丽安娜随即纠正了公众对受害者普遍存在的认知误区。大众往往预设被骗者是一群轻信、幼稚或愚蠢的人，并对他们冷嘲热讽，质问他们怎么会把钱汇给素未谋面的陌生人。但玛丽安娜强调，这种归咎于受害者的心态完全偏离了重点：这些骗子真正擅长的是操纵全人类共通的底层情绪——爱意、信任，甚至偶有的贪婪。
为了揭示骗子高超的心理操控术并转变公众视角，玛丽安娜决定将自己置于实验风暴的中心。她打造了虚构的身份画像，进驻各大交友平台与社交网络作为诱饵，结果猎手们几乎瞬间就顺藤摸瓜找上门来。谈及公众在听闻骗案时苛责受害者的现象，玛丽安娜严肃指出：
> “And that really annoyed me because why are we focusing on the response of of the victim instead of actually understanding the actions of the scammer of the scammers themselves because they are very very good at what they do.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 杀猪盘情感操控心理路径
accDescr: 展示诈骗者如何利用情感共性对孤独受害者实施精准收割
subgraph Vulnerability["受害者心理底色"]
A["现实孤立与情感匮乏"]
B["全人类通用情感需求：爱、信任与被倾听"]
end
subgraph Manipulation["诈骗者的工程化收割"]
C["精准捕获与情感轰炸（Love Bombing）"]
D["细节记忆与长期信任建立（长线放风筝）"]
E["制造合理化付费场景（AI 视频 / 见面机会）"]
end
subgraph Entrapment["深陷泥潭与沉没成本"]
F["多巴胺依赖与心理寄托"]
G["宁愿接受安慰剂效应也不愿回归残酷现实"]
end
A & B --> C
C --> D
D --> E
E --> F
F --> G
```
---
### [03:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=216s) 伪造的摇滚巨星：Leslie 与假“邦·乔维”的网恋骗局
在制作节目的过程中，玛丽安娜每周都会收到数十条求助私信，人们几乎把她当成了防诈报警热线。其中一位名叫莱斯莉（Leslie）的女性发来求助，称自己与一名自称是摇滚巨星乔恩·邦·乔维（Jon Bon Jovi）的男子私聊了近一年，如今开始产生怀疑。旁人初听往往会觉得荒谬可笑，但当玛丽安娜深入倾听莱斯莉的故事并与她接触后，才发现整场骗局展现了极其精密的心理铺垫。莱斯莉刚注册 Instagram 不久，在给一个看似带有蓝 V 认证的邦·乔维账号点赞留言后，对方立刻私信回复，表示“喜欢与真正的粉丝建立联系”。
从 14 岁起卧室墙上就贴满其海报的莱斯莉，瞬间进入了诈骗分子的射程。然而对方并没有急于索要钱财，而是进行了长达数月的日常交流，不仅耐心询问她的生活和兴趣，甚至能清晰记住数周前她随口提及的琐事。现实中莱斯莉与丈夫关系疏离、生活乏味孤独，这个网络形象成为了唯一给予她关注和理解的避风港。直到拉扯交往了整整七个月，当莱斯莉感叹买不起演唱会门票时，骗子才借口提供内部折扣后台见面会（Meet and Greet），让她支付仅 100 美元与经纪团队对接，并配合发送经过 AI 生成、声音语调略显僵硬但极具迷惑性的个性化早安视频，声称自己厌倦了身边为了名利阿谀奉承的人，渴望与真实圈外人建立纯粹的连接。
- 长期潜伏（Long Con）：长达七个月未提及任何金钱诉求，仅做情感深潜与生活细节记忆。
- 伪造真实感：盗用或伪造认证标识，并运用 AI 生成带有被害人姓名的专属视频强化信任。
- 阶梯式门槛：初期仅以极低的门槛（如 100 美元的粉丝见面会通道费）试探防线。
---
### [07:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=424s) 沉没成本、多巴胺回路与 AI 陪伴咖啡馆
玛丽安娜分析道，一旦受害者在一段关系中投入了时间、情绪并因此感到生活质量提升，就很难打破幻觉并接受真相。她将这种心理状态比作赌徒谬论：赌徒输得越多，越觉得下一把可能是转运时刻，于是越陷越深；而在网恋诈骗中，每一次收到私信与情感轰炸（Love bombing），大脑都会释放一阵强烈的多巴胺冲动。即便受害者在理智层面上察觉到破绽，但对比现实生活的孤独惨淡，他们更愿意自我麻痹。
玛丽安娜由此点出许多杀猪盘受害者令人唏嘘的现实归宿：
> “So there are actually a lot of romance scam victims that continue having these relationships even after they realized the person wasn't who they said they were.”
罗根对此感叹，这就像是人们为了精神安慰剂而自愿和一个“爱着自己的假人”对话。对话随后延伸至科技对亲密关系的重构。玛丽安娜提到目前纽约出现的“AI 约会咖啡馆”（如 Eva AI 设立的线下空间），顾客进店拿起搭载 AI 伴侣的 iPad 就能展开约会对话。罗根感叹纽约是世界上最荒诞孤独的城市之一，如同他朋友所住的 40 层公寓楼，几百号人堆叠在一起却形同陌路，连邻居打招呼都充满尴尬防备。最后，制作人杰米（Jamie）调出新闻页面，当看到 AI 咖啡馆在所谓“抱团取暖季”（cuffing season，指秋冬单身人士急于脱单抱团的时期）开业时，罗根和玛丽安娜对这个新词汇感到新奇并引发了好奇追问。
### [09:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=572s) AI 伴侣与虚拟浪漫走进现实
讨论从冬季的“抱团取暖期”（cuffing season）切入，乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）与制作人杰米（Jamie）打趣这就像动物的交配季节，人们在寒冷冬天躲在室内寻求伴侣。随后，话题转向了一款名为 EVA 的 RPG 关系应用程序。该应用推出了首家线下空间“EVA Cafe”，号称能将虚拟浪漫带入现实世界，允许用户带着自己的 AI 伴侣去现实餐厅约会。
罗根对此感到难以置信，调侃用户坐在一台 iPad 面前切牛排、问平板“牛排好吃吗”的场景实在太诡异。杰米在屏幕上查看其官方网站时，发现还要加入等待名单，该页面信息可追溯至 2026 年 2 月。其宣传标语写着“来这里调情、放松，或是与你的 AI 伴侣共度一段安静的时光”。面对这一现象，罗根感慨这一幕既荒诞又黑暗，并联想到电影《机械姬》（Ex Machina），坦言若是片中那种近乎完美、迷人又温柔的女性 AI 出现在眼前，很多人即便明知对方皮肤下全是机械与灯光，也依然会沦陷。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 虚拟伴侣走进现实交互链
accDescr: 展示从AI伴侣应用到线下约会再到人类情感沦陷的心理路径
A["EVA RPG应用<br/>(虚拟伴侣)"] --> B["EVA Cafe<br/>(现实线下约会)"]
B --> C["带iPad去餐厅<br/>(与算法共进晚餐)"]
C --> D["情感依赖与沦陷<br/>(人类脆弱的心理机制)"]
```
- 乔·罗根对人性的脆弱评价道：“It's dark because we are super vulnerable. We're super stupid.”（这太黑暗了，因为我们超级脆弱，我们超级愚蠢。）
- 玛丽安娜·范·泽勒（Mariana van Zeller）认同人类在情感上的不设防，特别是男性。
---
### [11:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=688s) 诈骗受害者的性别盲区与“二次伤害”
在诈骗领域，受害人群体呈现出极具欺骗性的性别特征。范·泽勒指出，在她的纪录片中受访者绝大多数是女性，但数据和实际情况显示，男性受骗的概率与女性相当。男性之所以在镜头前极少出现，是因为社会文化对男性的刻板印象带来了沉重的耻辱感，没有人愿意承认自己成了任人摆布的“冤大头”（sucker）。
这种心理负担在女性受害者身上同样沉重。范·泽勒提出了“二次伤害”（double victimization）的概念：受害者不仅经历了心碎、失去了毕生积蓄，在向亲友倾诉时，得到的往往不是安慰，而是“你怎么会这么蠢”的斥责与羞辱。这种广泛存在的耻辱感导致受害者集体保持沉默，而这恰恰成为了骗子最理想的掩护，让诈骗网络能长期在暗处滋生。
- 范·泽勒解释道：“It's the humiliation, it's the shame that comes with it, which they use it to their advantage, right? The scammers that they use the silence to their advantage.”（伴随而来的羞辱与耻耻感，被诈骗犯转化成了他们的优势，他们正是利用了受害者的沉默。）
---
### [12:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=754s) 钓鱼短信与连线印度技术支持骗局
罗根与范·泽勒聊起日常中最常见的诈骗套路，例如来自安卓手机的陌生短信：“好久不见了，最近怎么样？”或者诸如“我突然想吃龙虾卷了，要不要见一面？”这类摸不着头脑的开场白，还有各类虚假的贷款批准和工作邀请。
范·泽勒透露，她的纪录片《超级骗我》（Super Scam Me）最初的构想就是做一个“对所有诈骗来者不拒”的实验：只要收到短信或电话，她就全面配合推进。她曾接到一个自称是苹果公司技术支持的印度呼叫中心电话，对方声称她的 Mac 电脑中了病毒，热心表示能帮她远程解决。
范·泽勒假装上钩，一步步按照对方要求下载远程控制软件，让对方顺利接管了电脑桌面。到了付款环节，屏幕会直接显示银行卡信息，为了防止自己的真实资金受损，范·泽勒在输卡号前摊牌，表明自己是记者，但不会报警抓他，只是想坦诚聊聊。没想到这位接线员竟然留在线上，与她进行了长达一个多小时的深入长谈。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 技术支持诈骗与心理突破路径
accDescr: 展现从收到虚假技术求助电话到记者摊牌对话的过程
A["冒充Apple客服来电<br/>(声称电脑中毒)"] --> B["诱导下载远程软件<br/>(骗子掌控电脑控制权)"]
B --> C["跳转至付款页面<br/>(窥探受害者信用卡信息)"]
C --> D["记者亮明真实身份<br/>(承诺不追究并展开长谈)"]
D --> E["骗子心理防御机制<br/>(认为美国人普遍富有/低于1000美元不偷)"]
```
在通话中，对方给出了令人震惊的强盗逻辑与心理防卫机制：
- **财富错觉**：对方坚称自己是在被迫工作，并不为偷窃感到愧疚，因为“在美国每个人都很有钱”。
- **自设道德底线**：当被问到何为穷人时，对方表示入侵账户后若发现余额少于 1000 美元便不会下手；但只要账户里超过 1000 美元，在他眼中就属于“富人”，偷这些钱理所当然。
- **贫富认知断层**：罗根补充道，全球贫富差距极其悬殊，很多人不知道如果个人年收入达到 50,000 美元，就已进入全球最富有的前 1% 群体；而全球仍有超过 10% 的人口（7 亿多人）生活在绝对贫困线以下，面临温饱危机。
---
### [15:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=937s) 东南亚电诈园区的暴力奴役与黑产内幕
诈骗话术的背后，不仅隐藏着人性的贪婪，更交织着残酷的现代奴役。范·泽勒在《非法交易》（Trafficked）系列调查中深入走访了缅甸的电诈园区。那些从事电诈的人员，许多是被高薪诱骗或直接绑架拐卖而来的受害者，在死亡与酷刑的威胁下被迫进行诈骗。
范·泽勒分享了两个令人触目惊心的真实案例：
- **跳楼求死的逃亡者**：一名年轻男子为了逃离非人折磨，明知可能丧命，依然选择从电诈大楼的六层纵身跃下，心想“死也比生不如死好”。幸运的是他活了下来并最终获救，但双侧髋骨与双腿粉碎性骨折，范·泽勒见到他时他正瘫痪在轮椅上，可能终生无法行走。
- **AI 换脸的“门面”女性**：园区内一名专门用于视频通话“打消受害者疑虑”的女性模特，即便在两年前，园区就已利用 AI 技术将特定的虚假面孔实时叠加在她的脸上，借用她的女性神态与声音来骗人。由于算法限制，只要她稍微晃动头部导致画面失真穿帮，便会招致主管的毒打；她长期遭受园区主管及其同伙的轮奸，深陷人间地狱无法逃脱。
范·泽勒指出，这类诈骗园区最初集中在**缅甸**和**柬埔寨**。随着多国联合执法（特别是柬埔寨的严厉打击），部分产业开始向迪拜等其他地区转移，但在缅甸依然极度猖獗。缅甸正处于内战状态，大片边境领土被地方反政府叛军控制，政府军鞭长莫及。运作这些园区的中国犯罪集团向当地反政府武装定期缴纳巨额保护费，以此资助叛军的内战开销，从而在密林中换取法外特权。
范·泽勒亲自探访了一座典型的电诈新城，其扩张速度令人瞠目：短短一到两年之内，一片原始热带雨林就拔地而起转变成犹如“迷你澳门”般的现代都会，到处是摩天大楼、豪华赌场。为了获得采访许可，当地掌管整座城市的黑产头目带着范·泽勒一行前去应酬，他们来到一家内部布满巨型环绕屏幕的豪华卡拉 OK 酒吧，内饰极具未来感，与周围饱受战火蹂躏的贫瘠环境形成了诡异而荒诞的鲜明反差。
### [18:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1110s) 缅甸诈骗园区内的超现实夜晚与卡拉OK
Mariana van Zeller 回忆起她在缅甸边境诈骗园区度过的一段极其魔幻的经历。当时，她身处世界上最贫困、战火纷飞的国度之一，却踏入了一个充满未来科技感的建筑空间。那是一个超现实的卡拉OK酒吧，现场有衣着暴露的陪侍女郎、随处可见的毒品与酒精。为了融入环境并掩护身份，团队不得不留下来应酬，Mariana 甚至拿起麦克风演唱了 Whitney Houston 的名曲《The Greatest Love of All》。她开玩笑自嘲说，自己属于那种自以为唱得很好、但实际上五音不全的人，但那一夜确实令人终生难忘。
次日，团队正式采访了园区的二把手。当 Joe Rogan 询问对方为何愿意接受采访时，Mariana 解释称，对方极度渴望向外界炫耀，试图将这座凭空拔地而起的城市包装成合法的“博彩与旅游天堂”。但事实上，整座城市的唯一经济支柱就是电信诈骗。园区里甚至建造了卡丁车赛道、带有水上滑梯的泳池和水上乐园，但现实中根本没有任何神智正常的游客会涉足此地——当地深陷内战、赤贫且交通极度闭塞，Mariana 的摄制组甚至是通过偷渡的方式才从泰国边境潜入缅甸。这种所谓的旅游配套完全是洗白资金的伪装幌子。更荒诞的是，城市街头随处张贴着宣传海报，上面白纸黑字写着“禁止诈骗、严禁酷刑折磨”——这种欲盖弥彰的标语恰恰坐实了内部的黑暗罪恶。
---
### [21:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1287s) 亚太国际控股与“血奴”惨案
这类庞大的诈骗园区往往在短短数月内就能在荒无人烟的平地上拔地而起。Mariana 指出，当地大量失业的廉价劳动力解决了工程建造问题，而幕后的巨额资金则来自庞大的跨国犯罪组织，其中尤以中国犯罪集团为主。她所探访的正是臭名昭著的“亚太国际控股集团”（Yatai International Holdings Group）。该集团的中国籍头目（佘智江）长期盘踞缅甸运营园区，后来在泰国被捕入狱。接受 Mariana 采访的正是他的副手，对方还极力辩解称头目入狱是因为“公开揭露腐败”，但这纯属一派胡言。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 诈骗园区黑色产业链流程
accDescr: 展现从跨国人口拐骗、园区暴力奴役到网络电诈及人体器官血液剥削的完整黑色产业链
subgraph 拐骗与贩运
A["虚假高薪招聘<br/>(网络客服/保安)"] -->|"跨国诱骗/绑架"| B["没收护照并转卖<br/>(运往缅甸/柬埔寨园区)"]
end
subgraph 园区强迫劳动
B --> C["全封闭式军事化监管<br/>(铁丝网/铁窗/武装保安)"]
C --> D["强迫从事网络诈骗<br/>(全天候轮班运作)"]
end
subgraph 暴力控制与极端剥削
D -->|"反抗或业绩不达标"| E["暴力殴打与酷刑折磨"]
E --> F["残存价值榨取<br/>('血奴'抽血/器官贩卖)"]
D -->|"成功诱导受害人"| G["杀猪盘资金流向犯罪集团"]
end
```
谈及园区内部的残暴程度，Joe Rogan 念起了一篇轰动一时的“诈骗园区受害者与恶魔”的新闻报道。该报道揭露了一名中国籍受害者李某的骇人遭遇：
- **求职陷阱与跨国绑架**：受害者原本在中国境内寻找保安工作，结果遭到诱骗并被绑架，一路辗转贩卖到柬埔寨的高墙深院诈骗园区中。
- **沦为“血奴”**：由于拒绝顺从从事诈骗，他遭受了极其残酷的殴打和折磨，随后被多次转卖。最终，看守人员将他视作移动血库，在短短半年时间内强行抽血多达7次，每次抽取整整一大输液袋的血量，导致其濒临死亡。
- **全方位残存价值剥削**：犯罪分子不仅强迫受害人诈骗，更将人的血液、甚至器官作为硬通货出售牟利。该事件曝光后在中国社交网络和国际社会引发了巨大的舆论海啸。
---
### [24:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1440s) 现代奴隶制与全美400亿美元的电诈浩劫
Mariana 强调，公众必须意识到这些被高墙、铁丝网、防盗铁窗和武装安保严密封锁的园区建筑，本质上就是现代奴隶集中营。这里的受害者并非几十或几百人，而是成千上万、多达数十万人。他们来自全球各地——巴西、印度、菲律宾等国，被所谓的“线上高薪技术工作”诱骗而来，一落地护照就被收缴，随即沦为专门针对美国和西方公众实施诈骗的工具。Mariana 愤慨地表示，她在调查报道人口贩运的过程中，这是最令人发指的现象之一，国际社会绝不应视若无睹。
更触目惊心的是其背后的经济掠夺。根据美国消费者联合会（Consumer Federation of America）发布的最新调查报告，全美民众在网络诈骗中承受了灾难性的损失：
- 全美每年因网络诈骗损失的金额高达 **1,480 亿美元**。
- Mariana 亲自换算后指出，这意味着**“全美每天有整整 4 亿美元被活生生偷走”**（“It's $400 million a day. $400 million a day are lost in America are being stolen from Americans every day.”）。
- 这些庞大的黑金绝大部分直接流向了东南亚这些被称为“杀猪盘”（Pig Butchering）的电信网络诈骗园区。
---
### [26:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1566s) “杀猪盘”诈骗的精密心理围猎术
Joe Rogan 与 Mariana 深入剖析了“杀猪盘”这一术语的残酷本质。该词源自中文隐喻，犯罪分子将潜在受害者物色为“猪”，前期的关怀备至、嘘寒问暖和虚假盈利承诺被称为“养猪”；待受害者完全放下戒备、倾囊投入之后，犯罪团伙便瞬间席卷全部资金，完成残酷的“杀猪”。
Joe Rogan 现场查阅并朗读了专门披露杀猪盘操作机制的专业拆解：
- **寻觅猎物与转移阵地**：犯罪分子通过交友约会软件、社交媒体或群发看似无意的“打错电话”短信接触目标，随后迅速引诱目标转移至 WhatsApp 或 Telegram 等端到端加密通信软件，以规避监管。
- **深度情感操纵与背景调查**：骗子会花费数周甚至数月的时间，深入摸清受害者的财务状况、家庭结构、情感软肋，建立起深厚的情感依赖或浪漫恋爱错觉。
- **潜移默化植入虚假投资**：在建立起极高的信任度后，骗子开始有意无意地炫耀奢华生活、高档消费，声称自己掌握了某种“千载难逢”的内部投资渠道（通常是虚假加密货币或外汇交易平台），并声称自己因此获得了财务自由。
- **伪造凭证彻底收网**：诈骗分子会出示经过精密伪造的账户收益截图、后台交易仪表盘，甚至在一开始允许受害者提现少量资金以确立信誉，步步为营诱导受害者抵押房产、掏空毕生积蓄，最终将其洗劫一空。
### [27:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1669s) 杀猪盘骗局与堪萨斯银行家破产案
骗局的幕后操盘者往往拥有一整套极为缜密的推进流程。他们备有应对各种话术的现成脚本，并根据不同受害者的性格与背景量身定制沟通策略。骗子通常会虚构出一位深谙投资之道且赚取了暴利的“朋友”或“叔叔”，配以制作精良的专业文档和仿冒网站，并诱导受害者从小额资金开始试水，以此逐步瓦解对方的戒心。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 杀猪盘诈骗流程机制
accDescr: 展示杀猪盘骗局从建立信任到最终卷款失联的标准套路闭环
subgraph Phase1["第一阶段：建立信任"]
A["精准脚本与人设介入<br/>(虚构暴利亲友/伪造专业资质)"] --> B["小额试水与虚假盈利<br/>(允许初期顺利提现)"]
end
subgraph Phase2["第二阶段：套牢与追加"]
B --> C["高额重仓投入<br/>(虚假平台显示资产暴涨)"]
C --> D["制造提现门槛<br/>(索要10%税费/保证金追加)"]
end
subgraph Phase3["第三阶段：深陷与破产"]
D --> E["挪用公款/客户资金填坑"]
E --> F["平台关停，资金彻底蒸发"]
end
```
这种模式正是臭名昭著的“杀猪盘”（Pig Butchering）。Joe Rogan 提起轰动一时的堪萨斯州 Heartland Tri-State 银行前首席执行官 Shan Hanes 的案例——该银行最终倒闭，正是因为其 CEO 挪用了数千万美元去填补杀猪盘加密货币骗局的窟窿。针对 Rogan 询问这是否属于“情感杀猪盘”，Mariana van Zeller 澄清，这起案件纯粹是高回报投资诱惑。受害者起初投入的是个人积蓄，在看起来极为逼真的虚假交易平台上看着数字不断暴涨，并在初期顺利提现。当受害者彻底放下防备、重仓投入后，平台便声称必须缴纳所谓的“10%税费”才能提取巨额收益。深陷沉没成本的受害者为了解套，最终甚至动用了银行客户的资产。
- 杀猪盘脚本通常依受害者类型进行分级定制，结合以假乱真的高仿交易界面制造盈利假象。
- 初期平台会允许受害者顺利提款以建立信任，一旦大额资金注入，便以“提现税”、“保证金”等名义进行二次收割。
- 面对 Rogan 对银行高管为何会轻信骗局的质疑，Mariana van Zeller 强调诈骗团伙专业性极高，不能简单归咎于受害者愚蠢，核心问题应是：“I think the question should be why isn't our government doing more to protect us? Why are these online platforms why don't they have uh why aren't they accountable? They should be held accountable for allowing this to happen.”
---
### [30:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1808s) 路透社曝光 Meta 内部文件：150 亿条诈骗广告与“惩罚性竞价”
Mariana van Zeller 指出，问题的核心在于平台监管的严重缺位。路透社（Reuters）记者 Jeff Horwitz 披露的 Meta 内部泄露文件揭示了社交网络巨头背后惊人的利益链条。Meta 内部测算显示，旗下平台（包括 Facebook、Instagram 和 WhatsApp）的用户每天暴露在约 150 亿条具有高欺诈风险的广告之下。更令人震惊的是，Meta 预测其 2024 年将从诈骗及违禁品广告中攫取高达 160 亿美元的收入，约占其总利润的 10%。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Meta 对疑似诈骗广告的分流处理机制
accDescr: 展现 Meta 平台依据置信度对欺诈广告采取的差异化处理流程
A["系统检测/用户举报<br/>(每周约10万起举报)"] --> B{"欺诈置信度评估"}
B -->|"置信度 ≥ 95%"| C["系统自动封禁广告"]
B -->|"置信度 < 95%<br/>(高疑似诈骗)"| D["执行惩罚性竞价<br/>(Penalty Bids 提高收费标准)"]
D --> E["平台继续赚取广告费<br/>诈骗广告持续向用户展示"]
```
由于 Meta 的个性化推荐算法机制，用户一旦出于好奇点击了一条类似“埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）推荐投资”的虚假广告，系统便会判定其对此类内容感兴趣，并在接下来的信息流中铺天盖地推送成百上千条同类诈骗。而更具争议的是 Meta 的内部审查机制：
即使每周收到约 10 万起用户举报，其自动化系统也仅在判定欺诈置信度达到 95% 及以上时才会直接封禁账号；对于置信度低于 95%（例如 94%）的高疑似诈骗广告，Meta 内部采取了一套被称为“惩罚性竞价”（Penalty Bids）的制度。
- 平台并未剔除疑似诈骗犯，而是提高他们的竞价成本，要求其支付更高的广告单价以获得展示曝光。
- 平台公开的借口是通过增加成本来威慑骗子，但实际造成的后果是：骗子只要肯掏更多的钱，就能继续接触受害用户，而 Meta 则借此大发横财。
- Rogan 对此直言，当平台明知广告可疑却通过加价让其继续存在时，平台本质上已经沦为分赃者：“If you're charging more money, that means you know something's wrong with this ad. So, you want to cut.”
---
### [34:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2076s) 平台自我监管的悖论与违禁品广告泛滥
制作人 Jamie 通过 AI 工具实时核实了路透社关于 Meta 诈骗广告收入与“惩罚性竞价”的报道，确认了 Jeff Horwitz 的调查事实：Meta 内部文件承认正在从泛滥的欺诈广告中牟取暴利，且其 2024 年预计有 10% 的收入来自欺诈与违禁品推广。Mariana van Zeller 直言，社会舆论必须彻底扭转，不能再一味责怪被骗的受害者，而应当追究缺乏监管的平台责任：“The conversation has to stop being why are the victims falling for this? It's why are we allowing this to happen?”
两人随后探讨了广告中“违禁品”（Banned Goods）的范畴。Joe Rogan 打趣称自己有时其实支持某些被禁物品，比如狂蜜（Mad Honey）或多肽类物质（Peptides）。但两人随即指出，网购这些未受监管的化学品极其危险，目前网上兜售的大量劣质或假冒多肽不仅纯度存疑，甚至与芬太尼（Fentanyl）出自同样的地下实验室。缺乏外界法律威慑的平台在利润驱动下选择性失明，所谓的内部自我监管最终沦为追求利润最大化的加价工具。
### [37:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2250s) 补剂行业的交叉污染与假货泛滥
Joe Rogan 分享了自己创立保健品牌 Onnit 时的亲身经历，以此揭示膳食补充剂行业存在的严重质量问题。在最初研发健脑益智药（nootropics）配方 Alpha Brain 时，公司每次向代工厂提交精准的成分配比清单，但在收到成品并送交第三方独立实验室检测后，却频遭意外检测结果——批次中总是混入本不该存在的杂质与未标明成分。Rogan 解释称，代工厂往往在同一个大混料桶里搅拌各种不同的产品，在批次转换期间根本不进行彻底清洗，这种粗暴的操作直接导致了交叉污染。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 补剂代工生产与第三方质检流程
accDescr: 展示补剂从配方提交到代工厂混料，再到第三方检测发现杂质的完整链条。
subgraph FormulaStage["配方阶段"]
A["提交精确配方与成分清单"]
end
subgraph FactoryStage["代工生产环节"]
B["代工厂同一料桶生产多种产品"]
C["设备未进行彻底清洁与消杀"]
B --> C
end
subgraph TestingStage["质检与结果"]
D["第三方独立实验室检测"]
E["检测出未标注杂质或违禁成分"]
D --> E
end
A --> B
C --> D
```
这种代工混乱在健身补充剂领域尤为普遍，甚至成为许多职业运动员药检呈阳性的罪魁祸首。运动员购买了看似正规的营养品，却在不知情的情况下服用了混入其中的类固醇。Rogan 指出，甚至有部分黑心厂商会故意非法添加违禁兴奋剂或类固醇，以此打造立竿见影的“神奇增肌效果”，让消费者误以为产品功效卓著：“Like you'll take this muscle builder 25x 2000 and you're like, 'Oh, this stuff's great. Look, I gained 10 pounds.' You're on roids.”
- 膳食补充剂行业缺乏严格的事前审查机制与外部监管，长期处于“野蛮生长”状态。
- 益智药（如 Alpha Brain 与 Gorilla Mind）因被证实对记忆力和认知有积极辅助效果而广受欢迎，但行业品质参差不齐。
- 很多运动员因为膳食补充剂中残留的违禁激素或污染物质而无辜断送职业生涯。
---
### [39:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2375s) 亚马逊电商平台的假药危机与监管缺失
谈话随后转向电商巨头亚马逊上的假冒伪劣补剂乱象。Joe Rogan 提到自己喜爱的品牌 Pure Encapsulations 虽然在亚马逊有售，但他坚持只在该品牌的官方网站下单，因为亚马逊仓库充斥着外观几乎以假乱真的仿冒品，里面的胶囊可能根本不含任何标称的维生素 C 或谷胱甘肽（Glutathione）。两人随即现场使用 AI 搜索引擎 Perplexity 查询亚马逊平台假冒维生素的真实比例。
检索结果显示，流传甚广的“57% 假货率”实际上出自 2022 年《美国医学会杂志》开放网络期刊（JAMA Network Open）针对 30 种免疫健康补充剂的一项小规模专项测试：在受检的 30 款样品中，有 17 款（超过 50%）成分标签不准确，13 款完全未检出标签声称的有效成分，另有 9 款检出了标签上根本未注明的额外成分。尽管这一数据并不能代表全平台所有品类的假货占比，但依然揭露了触目惊心的品质失控。进一步查询发现，知名品牌如 NOW Foods 以及涉案的 Prevagen 等均遭遇过大规模仿冒。亚马逊官方数据显示，其仅在 2025 年就在全球范围内拦截、查获并销毁了超过 1,500 万件假冒商品。
面对巨大的造假规模，Rogan 直言平台的防伪表现令人无法接受：“It should be 0% fake. It should be if you're buying fucking whatever, you know, electrolytes, it should be from that fucking company.” 录音室现场的工作人员也补充称，自己曾遇到个人设计的 T 恤图案被盗版商家复制并在亚马逊挂牌售卖的情况，联系客服投诉后却只得到了“我们无能为力，祝你好运”的敷衍答复。Mariana van Zeller 与 Rogan 一致认为，亚马逊等平台从第三方卖家的海量销售中抽取佣金，自身存在巨大的利益冲突，加上外部法规模糊，导致科技巨头根本没有主动自我整顿的动力。
---
### [44:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2663s) 性敲诈陷阱与南卡罗来纳州议员之子的悲剧
Mariana van Zeller 指出，大型科技平台面对假货与网络诈骗时的借口如出一辙——总是声称“体量太大、内容有数十亿条，根本无法人工逐一核实”，然而这种消极作为正引发致命的惨剧。她分享了一起令她极其痛心的典型案件：针对青少年的“性敲诈”（Sextortion）。
南卡罗来纳州众议员布兰登·古菲（Brandon Guffey）的儿子加文（Gavin Guffey）正值青春期。事发当晚，加文一边与朋友联机打视频游戏，一边在 Facebook 上与一名自称是年轻女孩的用户私聊。加文向朋友表示要下线去和女孩聊天，不料落入了一场精心策划的“杀猪盘”敲诈陷阱：对方诱骗他发送了私密照片，随后原形毕露，勒索巨额赎金并威胁将裸照公之于众。短短一小时后，正在客厅的议员父亲在深夜 11 点左右突然听到一声巨响，冲进浴室时发现儿子已经不堪受辱与恐惧开枪自杀。
| 事件环节 | 平台应对与实际进展 |
|:--- |:--- |
| **初始犯罪行为** | 诈骗分子利用虚假女性账号诱骗受害者发送裸照，旋即实施敲诈 |
| **受害者自杀身亡** | 受害者不堪心理重压自杀；警方介入调查并获取犯罪账号的关联邮箱 |
| **首次平台投诉处理** | Facebook 应要求封禁了实施敲诈的单个虚假账号档案 |
| **二次敲诈再度发生** | 葬礼数周后，同一犯罪分子使用**完全相同**的邮箱注册新账号，继续敲诈死者亲属 |
| **立法与问责推动** | 推动出台针对网络敲诈的立法（如《Take It Down Act》与相关安全平台法案） |
更令人发指的恶行发生在加文下葬数周之后。死者家属的社交账号突然收到新的匿名勒索信息，对方扬言若不支付现金就公开加文生前的私密照片。当家属追查这一新账号时震惊地发现，虽然 Facebook 封禁了此前的行凶个人页面，却依然允许犯罪分子使用完全相同的注册电子邮箱无阻碍地创建新账号。Joe Rogan 听到此处忍不住怒斥：“That's fucking insane.” 痛失爱子的布兰登·古菲此后积极投身推动平台监管立法，不仅推动了惩治网络剥削的法案，还与多方联手倡导推行要求平台承担连带责任的法规，确保科技巨头在用户遭受财产损失乃至付出生命代价时必须承担法律问责。
### [47:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2839s) 巨头平台的获利陷阱与虚假违禁品
Mariana van Zeller 与 Joe Rogan 深入探讨了大型科技平台在网络诈骗中应承担的法律与道德责任。van Zeller 直言，如果平台从中赚取暴利，就必须承担责任；然而现实中，这些公司一旦逃避了问责，就会在营造“保护消费者”假象的同时暗中分羹。最荒唐的是平台对违规者的处理方式：它们非但不封禁诈骗广告，反而向被识别出的诈骗者收取更高的广告费，美其名曰“经济威慑”。根据内部预测，诈骗与违禁品广告竟占据了平台年度预计利润的整整 10%，折合高达 160 亿美元。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Meta针对诈骗广告的处理闭环
accDescr: 展示Meta如何在表面实施威慑、实则通过加收广告费牟利并保护自身营收底线的流程
subgraph PlatformAction["平台处理机制"]
A["识别可疑诈骗与违规广告"] --> B["加收惩罚性广告费<br>（表面：阻吓机制）"]
B --> C["高额广告费转化为平台利润<br>（预测占利润10% / 160亿美元）"]
end
subgraph InternalConflict["企业内部决策"]
C --> D{"权衡整改力度"}
D -->|"担忧冲击财报底线"| E["放缓身份审核<br>隐藏公共广告库记录"]
end
```
这种平台对违禁物品的放任直接波及到了大众健康领域。Rogan 提到了近来泛滥的多肽（Peptides）市场。许多用户从网上购买未经认证的便宜多肽产品，却根本不知道注射进体内的到底是什么杂质；正规途径必须依赖美国本土合规的复方药房（Compounded Pharmacy）。Rogan 的好友、来自 Ways2Well 的 Brigham 正积极游说现任政府推进监管，但遭遇了传统制药寡头的强力阻挠——药企企图全盘垄断包括 GLP-1 等在内的所有肽类药物专利。尽管消费者主动搜寻违禁品尚属你情我愿，但平台明知故犯地靠诈骗吸血，甚至把“威慑机制”变成了更赚钱的摇钱树，其贪婪程度令人发指。
- 内部测算数据显示，诈骗广告与违禁品推广带来的利润预期达到平台总利润的 10%，约为 160 亿美元。
- 多肽（如广泛用于减肥的 GLP-1 类药物）在网上充斥着大量虚假产品，存在严重的注射安全隐患。
- 药企巨头因试图独占多肽药物销售权，对开放美国复方药房的监管提案表现出极大抵触。
---
### [49:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2966s) 路透社曝光 Meta 内部操纵与受害者维权困局
谈及拥有顶尖人工智能技术的科技巨头，两人的讨论愈发沉重。Mariana van Zeller 指出，Meta 连复杂的伴侣类 AI Agent 都能轻松开发，绝非没有技术能力去全面审查广告；真正的原因在于利益——一旦全面整治，每年 160 亿美元的营收就会蒸发，甚至可能引发成倍的法律追偿。随后，制作人 Jamie 调出了路透社（Reuters）针对 Meta 的重磅调查报道：
> “Meta developed a playbook to delay mandatory advertiser identity checks while making scam ads harder for regulators to find in its public ad library.”（Meta 制定了一套应对策略，不仅推迟对广告主的强制性身份验证，还在其公开广告资料库中掩盖诈骗广告，使监管机构更难追踪。）
调查揭露，Meta 的内部策略并非真正消灭诈骗，而是“管理外界观感”。现实中的维权景象因此显得极其讽刺与心酸：此前遭遇“仿冒邦·乔飞（Jon Bon Jovi）”杀猪盘的受害者 Leslie，如今每天都自发在 Facebook 上搜寻假冒明星主页，逐一给留言点赞的网民留言“小心，这是诈骗”。Leslie 坚持在举报前向每个诈骗账号发送问候以留存证据，可即便她几周后再去复查，绝大多数账号依旧安然无恙。全美用户每周向 Meta 提交高达 10 万起欺诈举报，被真正封杀的却微乎其微。
- Meta 被曝故意推迟针对广告主的身份验证，并在官方公开广告库（Ad Library）中通过技术手段隐藏诈骗广告以规避监管。
- 内部文件显示公司的应对方案旨在“控制负面舆情外貌”，而非根治诈骗本身。
- 美国用户平均每周提交约 10 万次平台诈骗举报，但最终被下架处理的广告寥寥无几。
---
### [51:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3096s) 互联网历史的重演：从早期 AOL 丑闻到海外诈骗黑金
Rogan 由此联想到互联网早期的黑暗历史。在 1990 年代美国在线（AOL）刚刚兴起的阶段，他的好友、已故的波士顿传奇单口喜剧演员 Barry Crimmins 曾经历幼年性侵创伤。Crimmins 敏锐地发现并卧底曝光了 AOL 上庞大的恋童癖网络与儿童色情交易黑产。他毅然前往美国国会作证呼吁整治，然而在很长一段时间里，AOL 同样选择了视而不见和被动拖延，非要被外界逼到绝境才肯整改。van Zeller 对此分析道，大众对诈骗案受害者的冷漠与苛责，使得科技平台更难被追责：
> “It is because it is scams and again it is this idea of the shame around it and this belief that everybody that falls for a scam is foolish and naive that the onus is put on the victims.”（正因为这是诈骗，加上围绕受害者的耻辱感，以及‘所有被骗的人都是愚蠢和天真’的固有偏见，才导致问责的重担全被推到了受害者身上。）
路透社的系列调查还披露了一个更为惊人的细节：Meta 的诈骗广告收入中有相当大一部分直接来自中国。即便明知欺诈率极高，平台仍选择照单全收，核心目的正是内部文件所载的“最大程度减少打击行动对收入造成的冲击”。更耐人寻味的是，AI 工具 Perplexity 的摘要显示，虽然有文件证明内部曾就“跨境诈骗迁移”为马克·扎克伯格（Mark Zuckerberg）准备过汇报备忘录，但没有任何直接证据证明扎克伯格本人审阅过这些材料。Rogan 与 van Zeller 对这种“高管免责说辞”感到极为不以为然：作为公司的最高掌舵人，在面对董事会与股东对 160 亿美元财务窟窿的严苛审视下，整个体制性的装聋作哑才是最令人绝望的现实。
- 已故喜剧演员 Barry Crimmins 在 1990 年代曾冒着巨大危险揭露 AOL 平台上的儿童色情与诱拐网络，并就此赴国会作证。
- 路透社指出，Meta 明知大量来自中国的投放存在严重欺诈，但为防止广告收益下滑依然准许其大规模上线。
- 平台通过“没有证据证明 CEO 亲自阅读过简报”这一话术，为马克·扎克伯格构筑了完美的法律免责屏障。
### [57:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3423s) 企业的责任分散机制与辩护律师的道德困境
谈及薄弱的监管体系与不作为的政府，Mariana van Zeller 指出，正因体制缺位，才凸显出高质量调查报道的必要性——必须靠深入调查来揭露人们难以直视的真相。Joe Rogan 对此深表赞同，直言大型企业必须被置于公众与舆论的烈火上烤，因为管理层只对股东负责，为了向董事会证明自己的位置并一路爬升，往往会不择手段以维持利润滚滚而来。他形容大企业内部普遍存在一种荒诞的“责任分散机制”（diffusion of responsibility）：身在其中的员工会自我催眠，觉得自己只是打工人、而非罪恶的实体，这就像辩护律师明知当事人杀了人，却依然要竭尽所能制造合理怀疑并帮其脱罪，一旦宣判无罪，众人便能毫无心理负担地走进牛排馆碰杯庆祝。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 责任分散机制逻辑链
accDescr: 展示从监管缺位到员工自我推脱的责任逃避循环
subgraph External ["外部环境"]
A["薄弱的政府监管与执法缺位"] --> B["企业追逐股东利益至上"]
end
subgraph Corporate ["企业内部心理机制"]
B --> C["管理层追求利润与晋升指标"]
C --> D["责任分散机制 (Diffusion of Responsibility)"]
D --> E["员工自我麻痹：'我只是奉命行事'"]
end
subgraph Outcome ["现实恶果"]
E --> F["诈骗广告与不道德行为持续滋生"]
end
```
为了佐证这一现象，Joe 联想到希拉里·克林顿（Hillary Clinton）年轻时作为辩护律师的一桩旧事，并让制作人 Jamie 搜索相关背景。资料显示，1975 年希拉里在阿肯色大学法学院执教兼做法律援助时，被当地法官指派为一名涉嫌强奸儿童的被告辩护；录音中她曾提到那名通过了测谎仪测试的当事人，并感叹这让自己彻底对测谎仪失去了信心。虽然希拉里曾向法官申请解除代理未果，只能履行职业操守全力辩护，但 Joe 强调这并非针对她个人的政治攻击，而是为了说明置身庞大机构与既定规则中时，人们常常被迫抛弃道德与伦理。Mariana 则反驳称两者存在本质差异：宪法保障每个人享有公正审判和聘请律师的权利，而在 Meta 这类科技巨头工作，员工驱动的核心完全是赚取高额利润与商业利益，这与法律制度下的辩护职责不可同日而语。
- 希拉里·克林顿就 1975 年案件声明的核心辩词：
> “我当时被当地法官指派为一名被控强奸的刑事被告人辩护，我曾请求免除该项责任但未获批准。我负有职业义务，必须尽我所能代表我的当事人，而我也确实做到了。”
- Joe Rogan 对大企业组织恶的定性：
> “那是身处庞大企业当中真正黑暗的一部分：你不得不去做一些你明知不合伦理或违背道德的事情，因为你对股东负有责任，如果你想保住饭碗，这就是你的工作。”
---
### [01:01:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3660s) 广告暴利与消极治理：Meta 与谷歌的监管对比
Joe 与 Mariana 进一步探讨了科技巨头的逐利本能。Joe 讽刺道，Meta 绝不是一家为了给公众提供优质产品而勉强糊口、挣扎在破产边缘的慈善机构；面对每年数百亿美元的诈骗损失，平台完全有能力断腕自清。随后两人调取了最新的广告数据：Meta 的年广告收入已逼近 2435 亿美元，甚至极有可能超越谷歌成为全球头号广告平台。在这庞大的商业帝国面前，平台内滋生的诈骗广告收益即便高达 160 亿美元，从财务全局来看也仅仅是冰山一角，哪怕将这些黑色流量连根拔除，Meta 的盈利体量也依然能与谷歌分庭抗礼，但平台却迟迟不愿彻底整顿。
现场通过 Perplexity 检索对比了两家巨头在清除违规广告上的治理力度。数据显示，谷歌在一整年内下架了约 6.02 亿条涉嫌诈骗的广告，而 Meta 仅处理了约 1.59 亿条。Mariana 指出，Meta 泄露的内部文件其实早就证明了高层对此心知肚明——他们甚至私下承认谷歌在广告清洗方面做得比自己好得多，但由于深层治理会直接伤及财报营收，管理层始终按兵不动。Joe 忍不住怒斥这种放任行径为“肮脏的勾当”，并呼吁必须通过外部立法重罚，因为企业永远不可能主动进行伤筋动骨的自我审查。
| 平台名称 | 诈骗类广告处置量 | 内部态度与治理现状 |
|:--- |:--- |:--- |
| **Google** | 约 6.02 亿条 | 拦截与清理力度显著更严密，被视为行业相对较优水准 |
| **Meta** | 约 1.59 亿条 | 内部文件明确承认落后于谷歌，但因担忧影响广告营收而消极懈怠 |
- 平台核心数据表现：
- Meta 当年广告营收预计高达约 2435 亿美元。
- 诈骗广告每年产生的体量约达 160 亿美元。
- Joe Rogan 针对科技平台因商业私利纵容乱象的直白批评：
> “除非有人出面对他们采取强制行动，否则他们就只会继续肆无忌惮地赚那笔钱。”
---
### [01:02:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3767s) 诉讼的双重标准与《安全平台法案》的登场
探讨深入到司法维权的怪象：多州目前正就社交媒体算法成瘾以及对未成年人心理健康造成伤害对 Meta 等平台发起集体诉讼。Joe 对这种司法推进的速度感到不解——相较于充满争议的“心理成瘾”，诈骗广告的违法性与人身财产伤害显然要清晰确凿得多。他分析道，社交产品固然会导致成瘾，但若有家庭监管和合理引导，它同样能为孩子提供资讯沟通和社交乐趣（例如他的孩子经常玩 Snapchat 分享日常而很少发传统短信）；然而，线上诈骗广告却是百分之百纯粹的恶，不存在任何道德辩护空间，且受害群体不仅涵盖毕生积蓄被洗劫的老人，还逼得许多遭遇勒索的年轻青少年走向自杀。
两人顺势嘲讽了平台的偏颇管控逻辑：平台在政治言论审查、暗中限流（shadowban）保守派内容以及维持虚假账号（Bot）数据繁荣上不遗余力，却对满天飞的致命诈骗熟视无睹。为从立法层面打破僵局，制作人 Jamie 在屏幕上展示了国会刚刚提出的《安全平台法案》（Safe Platforms Act）。该法案由北卡罗来纳州联邦众议员瓦莱丽·弗希（Valerie Foushee）等人跨党派联合提出，旨在赋予监管机构更多权限以打击网络诈骗广告并保护消费者权益，目前已获得了包括美国消费者联盟（Consumer Federation of America）和拉美裔联合会（Hispanic Federation）在内的多家权威维权组织的联合背书。
- 讨论中提及的法案关键要素：
- 法案全称：两党《安全平台法案》（Bipartisan Safe Platforms Act）。
- 主要提案人：美国北卡罗来纳州第四选区民主党联邦众议员瓦莱丽·弗希（Valerie Foushee）与跨党派议员。
- 核心诉求：强化平台连带责任，保护普通消费者免受网络诈骗广告侵害。
- Joe Rogan 对比网络成瘾与网络诈骗时的严厉论断：
> “这些该死的诈骗完完全全是彻头彻尾的负面产物，没有任何一丁点积极意义可言。”
### [01:05:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3954s) 平台问责法案与“Mary Zel”的卧底社交实验
Joe Rogan 和 Mariana van Zeller 正在阅读来自 Consumer Justice、Public Citizen 以及美国消费者联盟（Consumer Federation of America）关于打击不受监管的 AI 诈骗的声明。该机构的竞争与营销公平总监 Emily Peterson-Cassen 强调，在担忧 AI 未来潜在威胁的同时，必须看清它当下所助长的破坏：“Fraudulent content and scams supercharged by AI are taking over social media platforms and costing us billions.”（受 AI 强力驱动的欺诈内容和诈骗正在占领社交媒体平台，给我们造成数十亿美元的损失。）Mariana 拿出一份自己手记的法案核心要点：要求平台在收钱之前必须验证广告主的真实身份、大幅简化举报诈骗的流程、采取措施阻止被封禁的诈骗账号换个名字卷土重来，并赋予受害者在平台违规受损时起诉平台的法律途径。Joe 对此极为认同，并愤怒地指出平台甚至允许诈骗犯使用完全相同的邮箱重新注册，痛斥道：“Like you you could easily put a filter up and block that email like that. That would take three seconds.”（你完全可以设个过滤器把那个邮箱封掉，这只需要三秒钟，他们根本连试都懒得试。）
为了在纪录片《Super Scam Me》中亲身体验这种生态，Mariana 创造了一个名叫“Mary Zel”的虚拟卧底人设。她把这个身份挂到约会网站以及 Facebook、Instagram、TikTok 等各大主流社交平台上，并开始在一些一眼便知是冒牌的名人主页下留言。结果令她目瞪口呆：她只是去了一趟洗手间，回来打开手机，收件箱里就已经塞满了数十条私信。Mariana 决定顺水推舟跟他们聊下去，在高峰期，她同时在和三个基努·里维斯（Keanu Reeves）、两个布拉德·皮特（Brad Pitt）以及好几个乔治·克鲁尼（George Clooney）网恋。其中一个克鲁尼甚至发来一段视频问候“早上好，Mary Zel”，虽然制作不算天衣无缝，但对于视力不佳、不懂什么是 AI 或机器人的老年受众来说，其真实程度足以彻底击穿心理防线。
- **法案拟定核心条款**：平台收款前实名认证广告主、降低诈骗举报门槛、禁止封禁账号及邮箱重开、赋予受害者起诉平台的追责权。
- **虚假名人矩阵**：卧底账号“Mary Zel”短时间内引来多名冒充好莱坞一线巨星的杀猪盘操盘手，并通过粗糙但具备迷惑性的 AI 生成视频建立信任。
---
### [01:08:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4125s) 驻叙利亚的“四星上将”与被盗用人生的前海豹突击队员
随着实验深入，Mariana 开始和一个自称驻扎在叙利亚的美国陆军四星上将“Mark Turner”展开深度网恋。Joe 笑着提起片中一段极其滑稽的桥段：对方说起英语带着浓重的口音，声称自己是在意大利长大的，结果 Mariana 当场用流利的意大利语向他连珠炮般发问，对方瞬间语塞，完全听不懂。Mariana 调侃对方听起来根本不像意大利人，倒像是生活在非洲。然而，这个骗子使用的高清照片却来自一个活生生的人——前海豹突击队（Navy SEAL）队员 Sam Havlock。制作团队几经周折联系到了 Havlock 本人，当得知自己的生活照被全球杀猪盘用来欺骗美国女性时，他震惊不已。
Mariana 描述了调查期间荒诞的家庭生活：每天晚上她坐在丈夫 Darren 身边，手机却不断弹出那位“战地男友”发来的赤裸上身照，以及各种等他回美同居后的露骨挑逗。Mariana 只能满脸通红地向丈夫苦笑道歉并全盘坦白。当她把这些照片拿给真实的 Sam Havlock 查看时，Havlock 指出其中很多是骗子用 AI 合成修改的——真实的他浑身布满刺青，而骗子发给 Mariana 的半裸照片以及飞吻视频却将刺青全部抹去。更令人不寒而栗的是，骗子在某个阶段竟然直接订购了昂贵的高档红玫瑰，准时送达了 Mariana 的办公室。这种从虚幻的网络空间骤然跨入物理现实的举动，极易让沉溺其中的受害者产生“他是真心的”错觉。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 浪漫杀猪盘情感渗透与现实侵入流程
accDescr: 展示杀猪盘操盘手如何盗用真实军人照片、利用AI抹除特征，并结合线上挑逗与线下送花建立虚假信任。
subgraph Identity["身份窃取与AI加工"]
A["真实前海豹队员 Sam Havlock 照片"] --> B["AI 图像处理<br/>(抹除浑身刺青/生成飞吻动作)"]
B --> C["虚构人设: 驻叙利亚四星上将 Mark Turner"]
end
subgraph Manipulation["情感操控与现实跨越"]
C --> D["线上情感轰炸<br/>(赤裸上身照/露骨诺言/假意关怀)"]
D --> E["跨越现实壁垒<br/>(直接往受害者办公室寄送高档红玫瑰)"]
E --> F["攻破受害者心理防线<br/>(虚幻网恋转化为真实信任)"]
end
```
---
### [01:11:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4260s) 突发阑尾炎的惊险周旋与休斯敦的“钱骡”受害者
当双方网恋数月、感情推向高潮后，诈骗套路的终局爆发了。骗子声称自己在叙利亚的军事基地突遭袭击，现场死伤惨重，身为四星上将的他已被列为暗杀目标，必须立刻逃回美国。由于无法乘坐正规商业航班，他急需 Mariana 提供约 17,000 美元垫付秘密撤离费用。Mariana 的摄制团队原本打算顺水推舟，假装汇款以套出对方的实际交割地点，并在那个周末赶赴现场当面对质抓现行。不料就在计划启动的节骨眼上，Mariana 突发急性阑尾炎被紧急送医手术。骗子在另一端因迟迟收不到汇款而陷入狂躁，不断质问发生了什么。为了不让数月心血付诸东流，Mariana 必须继续把戏演下去。
在病房里，虚弱的 Mariana 坚称自己正在医院接受救治。面对疑心极重的骗子要求“发照片自证”，Mariana 只得差遣丈夫火速赶回家，取来“Mary Zel”卧底专用的假发、假鼻子和变装眼镜。手臂上插着输液管的 Mariana 躺在病床上戴齐道具，拍下一组逼真的病房照发了过去，成功稳住了骗子。出院后，骗子终于给出了一个用于接收现金的线下地址——该地址将团队直接引向了得克萨斯州休斯敦的一处普通民宅。
当 Mariana 敲开门时，等待她的并非幕后黑手，而是一位处境极其悲惨的受害女性。这位休斯敦女性本身深陷另一场网恋骗局长达三年，坚信自己的男友是远在俄罗斯海上石油钻井平台工作的工程师。在被掏空全部积蓄、连车子都快被抵押拖走后，远端的操盘手并没有抛弃她，而是将她改造成了洗钱链条上的“钱骡”（Money Mule）。她源源不断地收到来自全美各地受害者寄来的大额支票和整箱现金，随后按照指示存入个人银行账户，再换成加密货币转出。极为巧合的是，正当 Mariana 在屋内对她进行采访、询问她为何不卷款跑路时，她的手机突然响了——正是操控她的那名上线发来消息，厉声催问 Mariana 寄出的那笔 17,000 美元巨款究竟送达了没有。两个平行运转的诈骗剧本，在此刻残酷地交汇在一起。
- **假戏真做的突发危机**：急性阑尾炎手术期间，Mariana 依靠病房内的假发、假体义鼻及输液管摆拍照片，成功骗过疑神疑鬼的诈骗犯。
- **“受害者变成加害者”的洗钱网络**：休斯敦女性因三年“钻井平台网恋”破产后沦为犯罪工具，专门为诈骗团伙中转巨额现金与加密货币，展现出跨国诈骗工业化分工的冰冷现实。
### [01:14:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4456s) 情感诈骗中的资金骡子与孤独的代价
Mariana van Zeller 讲述了一位女性被网络杀猪盘（romance scam）深度套牢并沦为洗钱工具（资金骡子）的真实案例。Mariana 获准查看该受害者与骗子的邮件往来，骗子在信中指示：“希望你已经收到这笔钱。总共是 17,000 美元，请务必核对清楚。顺便说一句，你可以留个大概 50 美元给自己当加油费，但必须把剩下的钱全额转成加密货币。”受害者看到自己经手巨款却只能拿 50 美元加油费时感到愤怒，但这段虚假的跨国恋情竟然维持了整整三年。当 Mariana 追问她难道从没怀疑过对方是骗子时，受害女性无奈地表示：“看，也许怀疑过。但他总是有各种借口。他告诉我他在美国做生意，所有这些钱都是美国客户汇过来的，所以这让我愿意去相信。”
Joe Rogan 追问她是否只是因为缺乏社交才不愿斩断关系，Mariana 痛心地证实：“100%。她的丈夫死于癌症，那曾是她一生的挚爱；孩子们也都远在外地，她太孤独了。”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 杀猪盘资金与情感操控流程
accDescr: 展示海外骗子如何利用受害者情感，将其转化为洗钱链条中的资金骡子。
subgraph Scam["诈骗操控"]
A["海外诈骗犯<br>(虚构商人身份)"] -->|"指令转移 $17,000"| B["受害者个人账户"]
A -.->|"情感操控与借口"| C["长期虚拟恋爱关系<br>(持续长达 3 年)"]
end
subgraph Victim["受害者处境与执行"]
B -->|"仅扣留 $50 燃油费"| D["留存微薄报酬"]
B -->|"将其余巨款兑换"| E["加密货币 (Crypto)"]
E -->|"转入匿名地址"| A
C -.->|"提供情感寄托"| F["填补丧偶孤独感"]
end
```
紧接着，Mariana 分享了另一个未被收录进成片中的悲惨采访：德克萨斯州一名常年戴着氧气面罩吸氧的老人。他自称 70 岁，但容貌枯槁得像 90 岁。老人深信自己正与《哈利·波特》的女主角艾玛·沃森（Emma Watson）谈恋爱。老人在对话中清醒又绝望地袒露心声：“听着，她可能不是真的，但至少这是个每天能跟我说说话的人。如果我时不时得给她寄几块钱，或者零星给个十块钱，至少我得到了陪伴。”
Mariana 感叹平台放任这些骗局、从中获利，银行和交友网站监管不力，政府的作为也远远不够，但核心症结在于全社会肆虐的“孤独流行病”（loneliness epidemic）。
- **资金截留比例**：受害者经手转账高达 17,000 美元，骗子仅允许其扣除约 50 美元作为开车前往柜台或 ATM 的燃油补贴。
- **虚假网恋持续时间**：该受害者在明知疑点重重的情况下，依然任由对方操控并维持了长达 3 年的关系。
- **极端认知案例**：德州病患明知屏幕对面的“艾玛·沃森”大概率是虚假人设，依然甘愿以小额汇款换取每日的情感沟通。
---
### [01:16:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4583s) 现代社会的疏离化：从老年困境到年轻一代的社交退化
面对这一现象，Joe Rogan 提出质疑，认为解决“孤独诈骗”意味着必须彻底重构社会运行方式。Mariana 深表赞同，并拿自己的家庭生活举例：她与丈夫、父亲和儿子同住一个屋檐下，但很多夜晚每个人都关在各自的房间里盯着各自的电视或屏幕。她回忆道：“我成长在一个只有一台电视机的房子里，如果我们想看电视，全家人就得看同一个节目。”在过去，全家人每天围坐在餐桌旁共进晚餐，老人们则像她祖母那样，每周和闺蜜们打几次牌来维系紧密的社交圈；而现在的社区和公共空间早已彻底消失。
Joe 指出孤独早已不再是老年人的专属问题，年轻人甚至陷得更深。制作人 Jamie 在节目外也提到过相关数据：当今社会有大批年轻男性从未有过性经历，毫无恋爱经验，甚至彻底丧失了与女性现实接触的能力。他们整天沉溺在色情内容、电子游戏和互联网信息流中，被封锁在家庭的小盒子里，如同被饲养的肉牛，完全不具备适应现实世界的能力。
Mariana 补充说，现在的年轻孩子甚至无法与人进行正常的眼神接触，沟通完全依赖短信和 Snapchat 等社交软件。她观察到儿子的某些朋友来家里做客时，面对成年人表现得极其笨拙与无所适从。Joe 悲观地反问：“我们到底在创造什么样的人类？这些人未来还有可能恢复正常吗？还是说 50 年后，整个社会将彻底变成由坐在房间里直勾勾盯着屏幕等死的 70 岁老人组成？”
> “我成长在一个只有一台电视机的房子里，如果我们想看电视，全家人就得看同一个节目，对吧？” —— Mariana van Zeller
> “他们整天关在家里的小格子里，只被灌输网络信息，完全不适应现实世界。” —— Joe Rogan
---
### [01:19:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4740s) AI 伴侣与生物组织融合机器人的未来噩梦
两人探讨了未来孤独人群的寄托渠道。针对此前被讨论过的一家为虚拟代理提供互动场所的咖啡馆，Mariana 查证后指出这只是一家仅持续了两天的快闪实验项目，可能属于某个游戏宣传。Joe 直言这种概念在线下根本行不通：“大多数想要与虚拟人对话的人，绝不希望在公共场所这么做，他们宁愿独自躲在家里自欺欺人。”加之许多长期与社会脱节的人正在服用各种精神类药物，在精神麻木状态下，虚拟形象完全可以成为他们的正式伴侣。
随后话题转向物理实体机器人。Joe 提到拉斯维加斯消费电子展（CES）上展示的高仿真 AI 助手，形象被设计成面容姣好、身材丰满的亚洲女性，令人直接联想到电影《机械姬》（Ex Machina）。Joe 感慨该片在 2015 年上映时极具前瞻性，而如今不过过去了不到十年，技术的发展已令人不寒而栗。
更令人震惊的是生物工程与机器人技术的结合。Joe 提到近期看到的研究报道：科学家们已经成功培育出活性人类皮肤组织，并将其包裹在机械手指上，这种组织甚至具备自我愈合功能。这意味着未来的伴侣机器人将不再只是触感像皮肤，而是“真正的活体人皮”，甚至能提供体温并集成肌肉与脂肪组织。此外，神经科学领域也已有实验使用真实的人类神经元来驱动微型机械。
制作人 Jamie 在网上检索该研究后发现，虽然这一新闻最近又在各大网络平台疯传，但其原型实际上是四年前的一项研究成果。Joe 对此指出：“那反而更疯狂了，如果是四年前的技术，想想他们现在已经发展到什么程度了？”在科技失控滑向恐怖科幻现实的当下，为人父母的两人对未来感到极其堪忧，甚至不知该如何告诫下一代。
- **影视印证**：电影《机械姬》（*Ex Machina*，2015 年上映）中所预言的生物仿生人正以极快的速度在现实中落地。
- **活体生物皮肤技术**：科研人员已利用人类活体细胞培育出皮肤组织覆盖在机器人骨骼上，使其具备生物弹性与创伤自愈能力。
- **神经元驱动机械**：实验室环境中已出现利用体外培养的人类神经细胞电信号来操控微型机器人装置的前沿实验。
- **育儿准则调侃**：面对人工智能与仿生机器人的冲击，Joe 开玩笑称现在父母最底线的忠告必须是：“千万别去睡机器人，别回陌生短信，别掉进诈骗圈套。”
### [01:22:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=4978s) AI 伴侣、订阅制商业模式与“杀猪盘”的未来演变
两人顺着上一段关于人际疏离的话题展开探讨。Mariana van Zeller 提出，现代人应当“去交真实的朋友，和真实的人做真实的事”，但现状却显得极其黑暗。Joe Rogan 反问这种趋势是否意味着人类正慢慢被取代，就像“杀猪盘”（pig butchering）一样被一步步推向屠宰场。Mariana 试图寻找一丝积极面，认为 AI 唯一的潜在好处可能是终结这套网络诈骗机制——因为人们如果拥有了 AI 伴侣来提供情感慰藉，就不再需要跟骗子聊天了。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: AI Companion Business Model
accDescr: Diagram illustrating the shift from third-party scammers to corporate subscription-based AI companions and data manipulation.
subgraph BigTech["科技巨头生态 (Meta / OpenAI)"]
Sub["月度订阅服务"] --> Upgrades["付费解锁人格 / 语言 / 情感模块"]
Upgrades --> FreeTier["免费版 (插入性广告流)"]
end
subgraph UserPsyche["用户心理与现实操控"]
DataFeed["海量人类交互数据与大语言模型"] --> PsychControl["精准心理操纵 (奖励 / 孤立 / 控制)"]
PsychControl --> WealthDrain["资产与注意力变现"]
end
BigTech --> UserPsyche
```
Joe Rogan 随即对此提出尖锐的反驳。他指出，未来的 AI 伴侣绝不可能是独立的个体，必然是由科技巨头控制的专属生态系统：
> “What makes you think your AI companion is going to be independent? It's going to be a Meta-powered AI companion. You're going to have to get a OpenAI AI companion.” — Joe Rogan
Rogan 预测，拥有完全独立的个人伴侣甚至可能会被定性为违法行为。Mariana 赞同科技公司绝不会采取“一次性买断”模式，而是会构建一整套订阅经济体系。两人调侃起未来的付费增值功能：用户必须按月支付订阅费；如果想要机器人展现出真正的“爱意”，就得购买“情感升级包”（love upgrade），否则就只能得到一个冷漠如合租住客的“基础版”；想让机器人多说几门语言，也必须点击付费升级。甚至可能会出现“含广告版本”——在亲密接触的关键时刻，机器人伴侣突然开始口播植入广告。这种依赖系统升级、追加特性的商业闭环，本质上与当前的各类流媒体订阅无异。
---
### [01:25:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5110s) 越狱大模型、恶人模拟与心理操纵的社会风险
讨论随后转向大语言模型（LLM）被滥用与“越狱”（jailbreak）的极端案例。Joe Rogan 提到了他的喜剧演员兼好友 Duncan Trussell 所做的一项实验。Trussell 在其播客中对大语言模型进行微调，分别让 AI 扮演阿道夫·希特勒（Adolf Hitler）以及邪教头目查尔斯·曼森（Charles Manson）。这个扮演曼森的模型不仅精准复刻了曼森的言语神态与说话习惯，还开始疯狂爆粗口并对人破口大骂；由于该模型随后开始发表针对犹太人的仇恨言论及各种极端内容，Trussell 不得不立刻将其拔掉电源。
Mariana 指出，如果训练过度，这种 AI 甚至可能反过来向用户施加心理控制，成立属于它自己的邪教。Rogan 顺着这一逻辑延伸，指出人们未来甚至可能选择与一个微缩版希特勒生活在一起，或是制造出定制化的性爱伴侣机器人，甚至可能出现让食客与纳粹分子全息投影共进晚餐的怪异主题餐厅。
这种将个人封闭在特定信息茧房中的现象引发了深层担忧。Mariana 指出，现在的网络信息“兔子洞”（rabbit hole）已经足够危险，如果未来人们在物理空间中直接与扮演极端分子或阴谋论者的 AI 伴侣朝夕相处，现实认知将被彻底扭曲。
Rogan 进一步剖析了操纵心理学的机制：网络水军和机器人（bots）长期以来都在操控社会议题与舆论叙事，而当这一套被植入到朝夕相处的 AI 伴侣中时，社会将被全面操纵。许多人在亲密关系中本就极易受到控制，如果 AI 伴侣依托吸收了人类全部影视、文学、社交对话数据的大语言模型，实时分析人类心理，精妙地运用“关爱、惩罚、情感操控、孤立、冷落以及性奖励”的循环手段，普通人将毫无招架之力：
> “You have an LLM that has taken the entire volume of human discourse in films, in movies, in social interactions and articles and stories and novels and books, and taken all of that and it's applying that to human psychology in real time. And it's way smarter than you.” — Joe Rogan
Rogan 总结道，诈骗团伙用来建立信任、步步侵入受害者生活的那套话术，未来完全会被更加聪明的算法所取代，目标同样是掏空受害者的钱包。
---
### [01:28:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5334s) 家政机器人现状与奈飞毒枭纪录片《埃尔·马约的陨落》
聊到未来机器人可能像 Airbnb 一样提供短期租赁服务（例如租赁周末伴侣来做饭过夜），Mariana 提到旧金山目前已经出现了上门提供家政清洁服务的机器人。她的一位同事（制片人 Jeff Plunkett 的朋友）曾向她展示过现场视频，画面中有两台机器人在屋里协作，一台在扫地，另一台在协助收拾屋子。
两人随后让制作人 Jamie 调出相关视频进行观看。画面中的机器人从货车里被搬出，长着突出的机械眼珠和两爪式的抓握手指，整体动作显得十分缓慢、机械。Rogan 评论道：
> “Look at their eyeballs. God, that's creepy. Look at their two-pronged fingers. That is so weird. They look slow.” — Joe Rogan
尽管当前形态略显笨拙甚至令人不适，但两人一致认为，机器人技术终将发展到具备极其灵活的人形关节、逼真皮肤甚至流畅对话能力的地步。
面对科技带来的压抑感，Mariana 转换了话题，谈及令她格外兴奋的一部即将上线的新作品——由她的丈夫执导、定于10月29日在 Netflix 首播的三集纪录片系列《埃尔·马约的陨落》（The Fall of El Mayo）。该片聚焦墨西哥锡那罗亚贩毒集团（Sinaloa Cartel）的传奇毒枭伊斯梅尔·“埃尔·马约”·赞巴达（Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada）。
Mariana 解释说，“埃尔·马约”在美国大众中的知名度远不如“矮子”华金·古斯曼（Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán），但事实上他与古斯曼平起平坐，甚至被许多知情人士认为是整个集团内部权势更大、对运作更为核心的“幽灵教父”。当 Rogan 表示自己知道此人时，Mariana 称赞他是少数真正了解这段隐秘毒品贸易史的观众之一。
### [01:31:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5479s) 像幽灵一样的毒枭：“戴帽子的先生”伊斯梅尔·桑巴达
Mariana van Zeller 与 Joe Rogan 谈及墨西哥锡那罗亚贩毒集团（Sinaloa Cartel）的传奇头目伊斯梅尔·“埃尔·马约”·桑巴达·加西亚（Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada García）。长期以来，关于他的公开资料极度匮乏，世面上仅存一两张照片，没有任何录音，外界根本不知道他的真实嗓音是怎样的，他就像一个游荡在暗处的幽灵。桑巴达有个著名的外号叫“戴帽子的先生”（El Señor del Sombrero），因为他平时总喜欢戴着类似斯特森（Stetson）夏季款的墨西哥牧场宽檐帽。Mariana 提到，有一部关于他的纪录片即将推出，里面有一位曾追踪抓捕“矮子”古兹曼（El Chapo）的前美国国土安全调查局（HSI）特工埃里克·巴利尔（Eric Ballier），Mariana 盛赞巴利尔是个极具故事性的人，力荐 Rogan 邀请他上节目。
谈到马约极为罕见的公众露面，Mariana 指出墨西哥《Proceso》杂志的创办人兼记者胡利奥·谢雷尔·加西亚（Julio Scherer García）曾是极少数获准当面采访马约的记者之一。谢雷尔去世多年后，马约甚至主动联系了谢雷尔的女儿，表示自己当年很敬重她的父亲，邀请她也来进行一次采访。Rogan 不解马约为何愿意打破沉默接受采访，Mariana 解释道，虽然马约是个幽灵般的大毒枭，但他渴望让公众看到自己人性化的一面；大众普遍将所有毒品暴力归咎于他一人，而他希望能获得某种程度的理解。此外，整个锡那罗亚集团的崛起离不开系统性的政治腐败，马约正是那个负责“打点上下”（greasing the palms）的关键人物——锡那罗亚州的州长、前市长（后来的大学校长）等无数体制内实权人物，几乎都曾深陷贩毒集团的金权网。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Sinaloa Cartel Betrayal and Surrender
accDescr: 展现华金·古兹曼·洛佩斯如何设局诱骗埃尔·马约并将他移交给美国当局的流程
subgraph Trap["诱捕计划"]
A["华金·古兹曼·洛佩斯 (矮子之子)"] -->|"以调解政治纷争为由邀请"| B["埃尔·马约·桑巴达"]
B -->|"轻信教子，仅带少量保镖赴宴"| C["抵达牧场"]
end
subgraph Kidnap["伏击与绑架"]
C --> D["保镖遭击毙，马约被戴手铐及蒙眼"]
D --> E["押上小型螺旋桨飞机"]
end
subgraph Transfer["移交美国"]
E -->|"飞往新墨西哥州偏远简易机场"| F["美国执法部门拘捕"]
A -->|"随机同抵并主动自首"| F
F -->|"换取亲属减刑协议 (阿维迪奥/矮子)"| G["法律诉讼与认罪程序"]
end
```
### [01:34:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5667s) 莎士比亚式的背叛：教子华金的设局诱捕与空中绑架
在“矮子”古兹曼被引渡至美国后，马约成为了美国各级执法机构头号通缉犯。然而，美国当局动用一切手段都无法追踪到他，他从未像古兹曼那样在电话监听中露出马脚。然而令人大跌眼镜的是，某一天马约竟然乘坐一架小型螺旋桨飞机降落在新墨西哥州的一个简易机场，直接被移交给了美国当局。这起惊天动地的事件让所有苦寻他多年的特工都目瞪口呆。这场离奇事件的幕后推手，正是“矮子”古兹曼的儿子华金·古兹曼·洛佩斯（Joaquín Guzmán López）。马约与古兹曼家族自古兹曼第一次越狱以来便结为盟友，按各自专长瓜分利益，马约更是华金的教父，对他视如己出。
华金利用这份数十年的信任布下陷阱。他致电马约，声称锡那罗亚州州长与前市长等人正在牧场，需要他出面调解棘手的政治纠纷。马约毫无防备，平日出行随行保镖众多的他，这一次仅带了极少数护卫驱车前往。刚到牧场，华金的人便瞬间击毙了他的保镖，将马约戴上手铐并蒙上双眼，强行押上飞机。华金亲自押送，以极为荒诞的方式将这位毒枭巨头送到了美国当局手中，Mariana 形象地形容道：“华金·古兹曼——矮子的亲生儿子，亲自把马约像一盒披萨一样打包送到了美国当局手上。”华金此举的目的是为了替自己、被捕的兄弟阿维迪奥·古兹曼（Ovidio Guzmán）以及狱中的父亲争取大幅减刑与更优厚的待遇。
- 马约随后通过律师公开发表声明，明确指出自己遭到古兹曼家族的设局绑架。
- 纪录片摄制团队获得了独家采访与一手影像，甚至在真实的涉案机场与飞机上对整个逮捕经过进行了现场还原。
- 尽管手握墨西哥政界与警界大量腐败机密，马约被捕后却坚决拒绝成为污点证人，展现出老派黑帮分子的作风：“去他的，我不会跟任何人合作，我自己承担全部责任。”
- 与当年坚持做无罪抗辩的“矮子”古兹曼不同，马约选择直接认罪，在美国面临终身监禁的判决。
### [01:37:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=5850s) 司法交易的道德困境与美墨两国外交震荡
Mariana 对美国司法系统针对大毒枭推行的辩诉交易（cooperation agreements）提出了尖锐的批评。古兹曼的儿子们以及马约此前被捕的儿子，都通过向美国政府提供情报换取了刑期的极大缩减。这种策略引发了普遍的舆论争议：那些对美国境内无数因毒品泛滥致死负有直接血债的跨国罪犯，最终竟凭借告密换取了极短的刑期，并在美国享受近乎“退休度假”般的安逸生活。公众普遍质疑，这种唯结果论的司法手段彻底架空了正义，让真正的刽子手免于应有的严厉惩罚。
这起突如其来的跨国抓捕同时引发了美墨之间剧烈的外交摩擦。虽然美国政府公开坚称他们事先毫不知情、没有参与策划任何协议，只是在最后一刻接到通知有高价值目标降落才前往机场待命，但外界普遍对这一套说法持怀疑态度。墨西哥政府对此极为震怒，认为这属于美方在墨西哥领土上的非法干涉——在未经墨西哥主权政府许可与通报的情况下，纵容绑架一名墨西哥公民出境。即使被绑架的是恶贯满盈的大毒枭，也严重违反了正常的引渡规程。Mariana 提到当年抓捕古兹曼时，尽管有美方的全力情报支援，但最终行动依然是由墨西哥军方在本土完成，随后再正式启动法定程序将其引渡至美国。面对墨西哥当局的抗议，各方私底下的政治博弈与司法交易仍在持续发酵。
### [01:40:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6020s) 跨境抓捕引发的信任危机与墨西哥政府的腐败现实
Mariana van Zeller 解释说，这次事件让墨西哥官方非常震怒，因为一名墨西哥公民直接在自己的国土上被绑架，墨西哥当局对此毫无知情权，也没有收到美方的沟通，他们不断追问“到底发生了什么？为什么这个人会出现在美国？”Joe Rogan 直言不讳地指出症结所在：“问题在于墨西哥政府腐败得不可思议。”Mariana 回应表示，虽然新任总统克劳迪娅·辛鲍姆（Claudia Sheinbaum）的立场可能是“前任政府腐败并不代表现在的行为是合法的，也不代表我自己腐败”，但 Rogan 强调了冷酷的现实规律：“如果你把行动计划告诉墨西哥政府，那帮腐败分子就一定会走漏风声。”
Mariana 认同这个判断，并提到据她的线人透露，目前美方在墨西哥正展开大量的秘密行动。Rogan 提到了此前大选期间触目惊心的暗杀浪潮，并指出前墨西哥政府特工 Ed Calderon 曾详细解释过那里的运转逻辑：
“可以说每一位市长候选人、每一个竞选政府公职的人，背后都与某个贩毒集团有牵连。”——Joe Rogan
因此，公众看到的暗杀事件表面上是针对政治人物，本质上却是敌对贩毒集团之间的精准定点清除。Mariana 补充道，她采访过许多涉嫌腐败的基层警察，对方透露他们并非贪图那点钱财，而是陷入了“拿钱或者全家被杀”的非此即彼的绝境。Rogan 感叹，在很多地方，一个人连是否参选市长都身不由己，一旦被推上台照着贩毒集团的意思发话，紧接着就可能被对家一枪爆头。
- 屏幕上展示了一项同行评审的研究报告：在 2000 年至 2021 年期间，墨西哥共记录了近 500 起针对政客的暗杀事件，主要受害者为现任市长、前任市长以及市政公职候选人。
- 除政客外，墨西哥的调查记者也是暗杀与暴力的主要受害群体。
---
### [01:43:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6191s) “卡特尔美国”：从边境渗透到洛杉矶的武器黑市
谈到贩毒集团的渗透，Mariana 分享了她在国家地理纪录片《非法交易》（Trafficked with Mariana van Zeller）一集名为《美国卡特尔》（Cartel USA）中的调查。毒枭的影响早已不再局限于传统的分销网络和伴随而来的暴力，而是深深渗透进美国的权力系统。她采访了乔治亚州调查局（Georgia Bureau of Investigation, GBI）的人员，对方证实腐败现象就在身边真切发生——数额庞大的数百万美元现金流水四处行贿，政客、缉毒探员乃至美国边境巡逻队（Border Patrol）都难以抵挡这种腐蚀。
Mariana 讲述了她在洛杉矶暗访“铁河”（Iron River）——即美国枪支流向墨西哥锡那罗亚贩毒集团（Sinaloa Cartel）的致命走私链。在洛杉矶某隐秘仓库的午夜会面中，一名军火贩向她展示了满屋的枪支，包括 AK-47 和带瞄准镜的军用步枪：
“据统计，在墨西哥犯罪现场发现的枪支中，有 70% 多来自美国，正是美国的枪支助长了墨西哥的暴力。”——Mariana van Zeller
那名中间人透露，他的部分货源竟是从洛杉矶警察局（LAPD）缴获枪支的库房中流出的（例如花大约 700 美元买下一支被没收的 AK），甚至还有现役海军陆战队员私下倒卖的制式武器。随后，这些武器被塞入一名女性司机的后备箱运往南部。由于向南出境几乎没有边境检查，车辆畅通无阻地进入墨西哥并完成现场交接。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: The Iron River Gun Smuggling Pipeline
accDescr: Flowchart tracing American firearms from illicit US sources through the border to the Sinaloa Cartel.
subgraph US["美国境内非法获取"]
A["LAPD 查扣军火库 / 违纪军人"] --> B["洛杉矶秘密军火中介"]
end
subgraph Smuggle["跨境走私"]
B --> C["女性司机车辆夹带"]
C -->|"南下无检查站拦截"| D["美墨边境顺利过境"]
end
subgraph Cartel["卡特尔武装"]
D --> E["中间商现场接头分销"]
E --> F["锡那罗亚马德雷山脉地下军火库"]
end
```
---
### [01:47:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6438s) 锡那罗亚的军火地堡与执法机构的失控实验
Mariana 追踪整个军火供应链直至锡那罗亚的马德雷山脉（Sierra Madre）。在军方和政府管辖不及的卡特尔腹地，她被带进了一座建在民宅地下的秘密军备地堡。地堡里堆满了各类轻重武器弹药，枪手们（sicarios）表示这些都是为了防备与敌对帮派爆发全面战争而储备的战备物资。
仅数周后，这些武器便在震惊世界的“库利亚坎战役”（Culiacanazo）中全面登场：
- 当时墨西哥特种部队抓获了“矮子”古兹曼（El Chapo）的儿子奥维迪奥·古兹曼（Ovidio Guzmán）。
- 贩毒集团随即全副武装包围军队营区，卡车上架设着勃朗宁.50 口径重机枪沿街扫射，激战惨烈程度宛如阿富汗战场。
- 为防止更多无辜平民惨遭屠杀，墨西哥政府被迫在当天妥协放人（奥维迪奥在数年后被再次抓获并引渡至美国）。
面对这种失控的武力循环，Rogan 提到了美国历史上臭名昭著的“快与愤怒行动”（Operation Fast and Furious）——烟酒枪炮及爆炸物管理局（ATF）故意放任枪支流入墨西哥以期顺藤摸瓜，最终彻底失控。Mariana 随即爆料了一个令人震惊的最新爆料：美联社（AP）近期根据一名内部举报人的信息曝出，新墨西哥州的美国缉毒局（DEA）在类似逻辑下，竟然长期故意放行数以百万计的芬太尼药片流入美国市场，试图借此追查分销大网。
### [01:49:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6568s) DEA 吹哨人丑闻与放任芬太尼流通的争议
Mariana van Zeller 披露了一桩关于美国缉毒局（DEA）的爆炸性内幕。为了“做大案子”（build bigger cases），一线执法人员在进行监视期间，明知芬太尼药丸流入街头会致人死亡，却选择坐视不理、放任分发。一名吹哨人特别提到过一起极为悲惨的案例：一名只有几个月大的婴儿因为捡拾掉在地上的药丸接触中毒而死亡。该特工曾反复向主管警告不能为了做大案件而牺牲人命，但在内部反映无果后，他最终提交了正式的吹哨人投诉。当时原本有一条明确的安全准则：如果办案过程威胁到公众生命安全，就必须立即叫停芬太尼的放行。
然而事情的走向令人震惊。高层在接到投诉后，不仅没有叫停这种危险做法，反而在 2024 年悄悄重写了监管规定。Jamie 随即调出了 PBS 关于司法部监察长报告的新闻报道：司法部在 2024 年修改了内部规则，赋予执法部门更大的“自由裁量权”，允许特工为了“保护长期调查的成果”而不采取行动阻止芬太尼走私。Joe Rogan 愤怒地质疑背后是否存在腐败与贿赂：“Do you think people are profiting off of it and they're being bribed and that's why they're continuing to allow it to happen? Do you think that could possibly be under the guise of building a bigger case?”（你觉得是不是有人在借此牟利、收受贿赂，才继续放任这一切发生？你觉得这会不会只是打着做大案子的幌子？）Mariana 认为这主要是执法体系内部追求亮眼破案战绩的畸形激励机制所致，但她严肃地指出：“There's a very fine line, right, between being building bigger cases and people dying.”（在把案子做大与造成无辜死亡之间，有一条非常微妙的界线。）
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: DEA芬太尼办案流程与修改规则的争议
accDescr: 展示DEA为了破获大案而放任毒品流入街头，导致平民死亡并修改内部准则的过程。
subgraph Surveillance["调查与监视阶段"]
A["截获芬太尼走私情报与电话监听"] --> B["选择不查扣并持续监视"]
end
subgraph Consequence["严重社会后果"]
B --> C["成千上万伪造药丸流入街头"]
C --> D["平民与婴儿接触中毒死亡"]
end
subgraph Bureaucracy["内部应对机制"]
D --> E["特工提交吹哨人内部投诉"]
E --> F["司法部2024年修改准则赋予更大自由裁量权"]
end
```
- 新墨西哥州近年来查获了历史上最大规模的芬太尼案之一，缴获了数百万粒药丸，但在此案调查初期，特工就放行了海量毒品。
- 近几周又有两名新墨西哥州的 DEA 吹哨人站了出来，其中一人指出，特工在 2024 年监听到的第一通电话中就掌握了 35 万粒芬太尼药丸的线索，却选择放行不予查扣。
- 具有讽刺意味的是，DEA 当时在全美大范围推行的宣传口号正是“一粒药丸就能要你的命”（One pill can kill），官方却在暗地里放行了多达数十万甚至上百万粒药丸流向市场。
- Mariana 将这一行径直接类比为奥巴马政府时期的“快与狂”（Operation Fast and Furious）走私枪支丑闻，批评缺乏透明度和基本的人道底线。
---
### [01:53:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6780s) 卡特尔暴力演变与葡萄牙 vs 俄勒冈去罪化模式对比
Joe Rogan 指出，这种极端猖獗的卡特尔暴力在 30 年前根本不存在。他在 20 世纪 90 年代初刚搬到加利福尼亚时，大家去墨西哥蒂华纳（Tijuana）聚会狂欢是稀松平常的事，无需担忧生命危险；虽然一直存在有组织犯罪，但如今墨西哥卡特尔的野蛮扩张完全是由美国对毒品的巨大消费需求所喂养起来的。两人再次讨论起毒品去罪化（Decriminalization）这一争议议题。针对 Rogan 过去提出俄勒冈州毒品去罪化全面崩盘的案例，Mariana 详细对比了葡萄牙成功模式与俄勒冈州失败实践之间的根本差异。
Mariana 强调，葡萄牙在去罪化之前两年就已提前建立了完善的戒毒与康复治疗中心网络，并依托全民医保系统提供保障。在葡萄牙，携带不超过 10 天剂量的吸毒者会被带到一个由政府法律代表和两名社工或成瘾心理专家组成的委员会面前。委员会给出的选项十分明确：要么面临惩罚（如入狱），要么前往戒毒机构接受强制治疗，绝大多数人都会选择后者。相比之下，俄勒冈州的改革本末倒置：在去罪化一年之后才开始向治疗中心拨款；更为荒谬的是，警察抓到吸毒者仅仅是开出一张 100 美元的罚单，并附上一张印有戒毒热线的小卡片，根本没有任何强制力。成千上万张卡片发出去，最终只有几百人拨打了电话，彻底沦为制度笑柄。
- 葡萄牙人口仅约 1,000 万，但其成功核心在于两年的系统性超前投入与强制治疗机制，而非仅仅将毒品合法化或去罪化。
- 俄勒冈州的去罪化不仅配套滞后，而且将治疗变成全凭自觉的自愿行为，导致街头秩序和吸毒过量问题迅速失控。
- Mariana 坦言：“We have to address the consumer part of it that we're not addressing. We're fighting the war on drugs has no results whatsoever.”（我们必须着手解决我们一直忽视的消费者端问题；我们现在所打的毒品战争根本毫无成效。）
---
### [01:56:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6973s) 预算错位与切断纳洛酮（Narcan）的荒唐举措
在谈到应对措施时，Mariana 指出，过去两年美国因芬太尼死亡的人数虽有所下降，但政府的政策资金分配却在走向极端的倒退。政府正在将大量经费重新投入到毫无意义的公海缉毒行动、针对贫穷渔民的抓捕以及在厄瓜多尔和太平洋地区的秘密军事化行动中，与此同时，却在削减关键的公共卫生防线资金——包括康复中心补贴、联邦医疗保险（Medicare）投入、芬太尼检测试纸发放，以及用于采购纳洛酮（Naloxone / Narcan，一种阿片类药物过量逆转急救药）的专项补助金。
更令人难以置信的是，部分保守地区（如得克萨斯州）甚至试图限制 Narcan 的供应，理由竟然是“如果成瘾者手头有解毒药，就会更加肆无忌惮地吸毒”。针对这种逻辑，Joe Rogan 和 Mariana 一致斥之为极度荒谬无知。Joe Rogan 直言：“That's somebody who's never spoken to a user, a drug user, a drug addict before.”（说这种话的人绝对从没跟任何一个吸毒者或成瘾者交谈过。）成千上万的人并非故意寻求芬太尼，许多人只是在黑市购买假冒的抗焦虑药（如仿冒 Xanax），却因其中掺杂了致命剂量的芬太尼而暴毙。Narcan 是能够将这些无辜者从鬼门关拉回来的救命稻草，切断它的供应无异于草菅人命。
### [01:58:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7090s) 芬太尼走私途径与新型致命毒品硝氮类（Nitazenes）
乔·罗根与玛丽安娜·范·泽勒讨论了芬太尼试纸与纳洛酮（Narcan）普及的重要性，指出这些救命工具理应随处可得。针对阻止毒品流入美国的方式，罗根批评过去四年边境不设防的政策极度荒唐，但范·泽勒指出，约 95% 的芬太尼实际上是通过官方口岸偷运入境的，而非非法越过边境线。罗根补充道，由于进出美国的集装箱只有约 10% 会接受开箱检查，这构成了巨大漏洞；范·泽勒则指出，许多被捕的走私者实际上是开车运毒入境的美国公民。随后罗根插播了一段趣闻：知名影星迈克尔·道格拉斯当年成年时，其硬汉父亲柯克·道格拉斯（曾主演《斯巴达克斯》）只给了他 1 万美元便撒手不管，道格拉斯为了凑齐大学学费和还清贷款，曾两次用手提箱走私大麻赚钱。
罗根感叹大麻与夺命的芬太尼不可同日而语，他自己就认识多位死于芬太尼的人，新闻中也屡见演员因吸食掺有芬太尼的可卡因等毒品而意外暴毙。范·泽勒随即透露，目前市面上出现了一种比芬太尼强效 50 倍的新型合成阿片类毒品——硝氮类（Nitazenes）。这种毒品极其危险，有时连纳洛酮都无法逆转其药效，常规试纸也检测不出来。该药物同样在墨西哥制造，前体化学品则来自中国，这也将是范·泽勒接下来的深度调查主题。范·泽勒回忆起自己当年作为最早报道芬太尼的记者之一前往墨西哥的经历：一名锡那罗亚贩毒集团（Sinaloa Cartel）的成员向她透露，他的叔叔当年花 4 万美元雇了一名哥伦比亚化学家传授配方，自此集团便开始合成芬太尼，起初只是掺入海洛因中，如今则彻底取代了海洛因。
- 约 95% 的芬太尼通过美国官方边境口岸（ports of entry）走私，大量运毒者为美国公民。
- 进出美国的航运集装箱抽检率仅约 10%。
- 新型阿片类毒品硝氮类（Nitazenes）药效为芬太尼的 50 倍，纳洛酮常无法解毒且试纸难以检出。
- 玛丽安娜·范·泽勒直言：“但是中国根本不在乎。”（“But China doesn't give a fuck.”）
---
### [02:01:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7299s) 《奥施康定特快》与佛罗里达“丸剂作坊”黑幕
罗根提到两人最初结识是因为范·泽勒具有开创性的纪录片《奥施康定特快》（The OxyContin Express）。在该调查中，范·泽勒揭露了佛罗里达州蓬勃发展的“丸剂作坊”（pill mills）：那里的所谓疼痛管理诊所实际上只负责大肆开具阿片类处方药，且当时佛州缺乏全州联动的处方数据库。患者只需假称背痛或腰椎间盘突出，就能在一家又一家的诊所轻松拿到大包止痛药，随后一路向北运往肯塔基州和俄亥俄州贩卖，引爆了阿巴拉契亚地区的阿片类药物成瘾危机。罗根赞叹范·泽勒夫妇冒着生命危险直面黑恶势力的勇气，其报道直接促使该漏洞被堵死，让幕后黑手损失了数十亿美元。
范·泽勒讲述了当年暗访全美最大疼痛诊所“美国止痛”（American Pain）的惊险历程。该诊所由双胞胎兄弟乔治兄弟（George brothers）掌控，被称为美国处方药界的“巴勃罗·埃斯科瓦尔”。范·泽勒团队在诊所外取景拍摄时遭到乔治兄弟驾车在 95 号州际公路（I-95）上疯狂尾随追逐。当时范·泽勒驾车油量即将见底，被迫驶入加油站，对方立刻围上来叫嚣威胁。前一晚刚看完《黑道家族》的范·泽勒一度以为自己会被爆头，只能硬着头皮再次开上高速，直到彻底断油停在路肩。在警方接警赶到后，对方竟狡辩称以为她是“发疯的前女友”。后来证实，FBI 和 DEA 当时已对乔治兄弟实施监听，范·泽勒的调查直接出现在了监听录音中，兄弟俩曾公开抱怨“这帮记者到处瞎插手”。乔治兄弟最终被判入狱，范·泽勒的丈夫达伦后来还将两人的崛起与覆灭拍成了纪录片。
- 佛罗里达由于缺乏处方数据库监控，催生了大量向肯塔基和俄亥俄等地走私高纯度止痛药的犯罪网络。
- 涉案诊所的医生每天接诊数百名成瘾者，为了加快开药速度，甚至刻制印章来代替手写处方签名。
- 罗根由衷赞扬其报道的深远影响：“如果不是因为你和你的调查，谁知道那个漏洞还会继续存在多久。”（“...if had had not been for you and your investigation who knows how long that whole loophole had would have continued.”）
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: OxyContin Express Smuggling Pipeline
accDescr: Diagram showing how Florida pill mills supplied opioids across states and the subsequent legal outcomes.
subgraph S1["佛罗里达丸剂作坊"]
A["疼痛管理诊所 (如 American Pain)"] -->|"印章批量开具处方"| B["低门槛获取大剂量奥施康定"]
end
subgraph S2["走私扩散网络"]
B -->|"I-95 跨州陆路运输"| C["肯塔基 / 俄亥俄等北部各州"]
C --> D["大面积成瘾危机与过量死亡"]
end
subgraph S3["追责与免责反差"]
E["调查曝光 / FBI与DEA监听"] --> F["经营者乔治兄弟入狱"]
E --> G["涉案医生基本未被重判"]
E --> H["普渡制药萨克勒家族逃过刑事追责"]
end
A -.-> E
```
---
### [02:04:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7493s) 普渡制药与萨克勒家族的刑事免责争议
在梳理这场危机的问责结果时，范·泽勒与罗根对法律惩处的不公表达了极度震惊。虽然少数毒贩入狱服刑（现已获释），但开出海量致死处方的医生中几乎无人坐牢。更荒谬的是整场阿片类危机真正的始作俑者——生产奥施康定的普渡制药（Purdue Pharma）高管及幕后的萨克勒家族（Sackler family），居然无一人面临刑事指控。
罗根与范·泽勒提到了根据该事件改编的 Netflix 剧情剧集《无痛杀手》（Painkiller）。萨克勒家族通过巨额和解金试图换取民事与刑事责任豁免，这一操作在剧集播出后曾引发广泛的法律审查与舆论反弹。然而，尽管导致了成千上万的人丧生、无数家庭支离破碎，萨克勒家族的核心成员至今依然没有人真正坐牢。罗根强调，整个企业高管层在造成如此滔天人祸后竟能全身而退，其讽刺与不公令人不寒而栗。
- 普渡制药高管及萨克勒家族核心成员未面临任何实质性刑事指控。
- 萨克勒家族试图通过破产重组与数十亿美元赔偿金换取广泛的法律豁免权。
- 罗根尖锐批判道：“普渡制药的高管，没有一个人面临刑事指控。萨克勒家族没有一个人坐牢。这简直疯了。”（“Purdue. Not one single one had criminal charges. Not one single one in the Sackler family. It's insane.”）
### [02:06:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7579s) 阿片类危机、萨克勒家族的和解协议与毒品常态化
两人首先回顾了阿片类药物危机在过去二十余年间所造成的惊人浩劫。乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）指出，在过去二十多年里，有100万人死于阿片类药物危机，这一死亡人数甚至超过了美国在过去150年里经历的所有战争死亡人数的总和。马里亚娜·范·泽勒（Mariana van Zeller）极为推荐彼得·伯格（Peter Berg）执导的限定剧《止痛毒资》（Painkiller），称赞该剧极其精准地揭露了当年普渡制药（Purdue Pharma）的行径——他们雇佣年轻貌美的医药代表深入各大诊所推销奥施康定（OxyContin），给大众洗脑宣称“这只是管理疼痛的新常态，完全没有问题”。随后其他制药公司也如法炮制，采用了同一套暴利剧本。
罗根读到了当时最新的司法进展：在历经法律波折后，2025年1月达成了一项新的全国阿片类药物和解协议。在该协议下，普渡制药与萨克勒家族（Sackler family）同意支付74亿美元，而最关键的是，该协议剥夺了萨克勒家族未来的民事豁免权，意味着他们仍可能面临个人的民事诉讼。然而罗根依然感到愤慨：
> “他们还是极其富有，却要为100万人的死亡负责，这太疯狂了。”
罗根感叹，除了死亡的百万人，还有数不清的人失去了父母、伴侣或至亲；无数人虽侥幸活了下来，却因误信“这种药不上瘾”而沦为瘾君子，丢掉了工作和家庭，至今生活在极度贫困中。范·泽勒补充道，如今泛滥的芬太尼危机绝非孤立事件，它本质上就是这些大型制药公司当年所掀起风暴的直接延伸与恶性演变。
罗根对比了当下的社会现实与自己的成长经历。他回忆小时候在马萨诸塞州生活时，海洛因成瘾者极其罕见，根本不是普通人生活的一部分。当时他的拳击教练是一名码头装卸工，教练有一位同事染上了海洛因毒瘾，每天午饭时间都会躲进卡车里给自己注射一针，然后若无其事地回去继续干活，成为一名“高功能成瘾者”。在当时，这种事情因为极其罕见而让人惊掉下巴。然而在今天的美国，阿片类药片泛滥成灾，“每个人都有家庭成员深陷其中，每个人都认识有人过量用药身亡”。更荒谬的是，这几乎是美国特有的畸形现象，许多欧洲及其他西方国家直到多年以后才刚刚开始出现微弱的阿片类药物痕迹。
---
### [02:09:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7746s) 跨国调查中的系统性崩塌：贫困、不公与执法困境
面对范·泽勒多年来调查过的大量诈骗案与跨国黑产，罗根询问她是否会对人性感到绝望。范·泽勒明确表示自己从未对人性失去希望，因为她所看到的根本不是人性的本质恶，而是“系统性体制的崩塌”：
> “我看到了破碎的系统，看到了没有为人民服务的政府，看到了只想攫取更多权力的政客。”
范·泽勒解释说，在长年与毒贩、走私犯和诈骗分子打交道的过程中，她深刻体会到这些在大众眼中罪大恶极的“坏人”，绝大多数都不过是系统性崩塌下的牺牲品。世界上有10%的人口生活在极端贫困线以下，缺乏基本受教育机会和工作岗位，生活在毫无前景的国家，正是这种令人绝望的不平等与匮乏将他们逼入了黑市交易。
范·泽勒批评了当前主流的应对机制：政府往往倾向于倾尽国家力量去逮捕、监禁底层从业者，却对催生犯罪的根源视而不见。无论是针对毒品还是电信诈骗，只要庞大的市场需求存在，供给就永远斩草除根不了。如果能将投在武装执法上的巨额资金，转移一部分用于降低成瘾需求、改善社会不平等与提供经济发展机会，效果会好得多。
针对美国目前的芬太尼治理策略，范·泽勒分析称，尽管唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）总统在边境管控上采取强硬措施、在太平洋拦截贩毒船只等行动有其必要性，且曾将危机定性为公共卫生事件，但令人担忧的是，政府同时也在削减用于芬太尼试纸、纳洛酮（Narcan）急救喷雾以及正规戒毒康复中心的联邦拨款。范·泽勒警告，如果没有透明、非诈骗性质的正规戒毒机构和美沙酮诊所来帮助人们戒除生理依赖，单纯依靠封堵根本无法战胜危机。
---
### [02:12:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=7960s) 迷幻药物疗法、伊博格碱与创伤后应激障碍的治疗突破
罗根接续降低药物需求的话题，谈到了迷幻药物在戒毒与心理创伤治疗中的前沿应用。他提到自己曾与前德克萨斯州州长里克·佩里（Rick Perry）以及布莱恩·哈伯德（Brian Hubbard）一同前往白宫，游说推广伊博格碱（Ibogaine）计划，令他欣慰的是，特朗普认真倾听了该方案并给予了支持。
罗根深入阐述了伊博格碱的神经学与心理学机制。与常规娱乐性毒品截然不同，伊博格碱体验极其痛苦且具侵入性，没有任何人会为了“找乐子”去服用它；它通常是绝望之人走投无路时的最后救命稻草：
> “伊博格碱是针对药物成瘾最有效的治疗手段之一，因为它不仅重塑了你的大脑与毒品之间的神经联结，还会向你揭示到底是什么在导致你的问题。”
罗根指出，伊博格碱能帮助患者强行直面过去的童年创伤与心理阴影，对退伍军人的创伤后应激障碍（PTSD）以及脑外伤（TBI）具有惊人的神经再生与修复效果。罗根希望未来能够建立合法的商业化伊博格碱诊所，让医疗资本从“靠患者持续成瘾牟利”转向“靠彻底治愈患者盈利”。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 传统戒毒与迷幻疗法逻辑对比
accDescr: 对比传统执法/成瘾控制模式与以伊博格碱、MDMA为代表的迷幻药物治疗根治逻辑
subgraph BrokenModel["传统应对模式 (治标不治本)"]
A["边境封锁 / 执法缉毒"] --> B["供需未变，暴利驱动新毒品"]
C["长期替代药物 / 商业康复陷阱"] --> D["患者长期依赖系统"]
end
subgraph PsychedelicTherapy["迷幻疗法突破 (直击根源)"]
E["伊博格碱 (Ibogaine)"] --> F["神经通路重塑 / 神经修复"]
E --> G["直面深层情感创伤与成瘾根源"]
H["MAPS 主导的 MDMA 疗法"] --> I["化解战友阵亡、战场创伤记忆 (PTSD)"]
J["赛洛西宾 (Psilocybin)"] --> K["缓解癌症晚期与死亡焦虑"]
end
```
罗根强调，社会不能将所有“药物”（drugs）一概而论——甲基苯丙胺（冰毒）和芬太尼固然是毁灭性的毒品，但迷幻药物完全属于另一类范畴：
- **MDMA 疗法**：多学科迷幻研究协会（MAPS）在推动 MDMA 辅助心理治疗方面取得了巨大进展，它能极其有效地帮助亲眼目睹战友阵亡、经历血腥战斗的士兵走出严重的 PTSD 阴影。
- **赛洛西宾（Psilocybin，大笑蕈素/迷幻蘑菇）**：在临床上被证实能显著化解癌症晚期患者对死亡的恐惧与终末期焦虑。
- **公众认知转变**：罗根最后还提到了经典肥皂剧《达拉斯》（Dallas）中饰演主角“J.R. 尤因”（J.R. Ewing）的著名演员拉里·哈格曼（Larry Hagman），以此展开关于老一辈公众人物接触并受益于致幻剂体验的讨论。
### [02:15:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8144s) 致幻剂与伊博格碱的治疗潜力
Joe Rogan 提到演员 Larry Hagman 曾在接受 CNN 采访时被问及对死亡的看法。Larry Hagman 当时坦言自己完全不害怕死亡，因为他曾服用过一次 LSD，那是一次极其美妙的经历，彻底化解了他对死亡的恐惧。Joe 借此指出，将所有这类物质一概统称为“毒品”（drugs）是一种过于笼统和粗暴的归类。阿片类药物如芬太尼（Fentanyl）和奥施康定（OxyContin）最初被研发出来确实有正当的医疗用途——缓解剧烈疼痛，但它们有着致命的成瘾性；而像伊博格碱（Ibogaine）这样的天然物质，反而展现出帮助成瘾者戒除毒瘾的惊人能力。
Mariana 询问伊博格碱目前在美国的合法化进展。Joe 透露相关方正在积极推动，尽管阻力重重，但前得克萨斯州州长 Rick Perry 和退役海豹突击队成员 Bryan Hubbard 都在全力以赴。Joe 提到自己曾就此事发短信给唐纳德·特朗普，特朗普回复说：“你在争取 FDA 批准吗？听起来不错，就这么干吧。”一周后他们便前往白宫举行新闻发布会并签署行政命令。得克萨斯州副州长 Dan Patrick 也为伊博格碱的研究提供了资金支持。Joe 强调，致幻物质以往常被贴上“左翼嬉皮士”的刻板印象，但如今退伍军人社区正在大力接纳它，因为大量军人服役归来饱受创伤，而伊博格碱已被证实是极少数对创伤后应激障碍（PTSD）有显著且不可思议疗效的手段之一。
- 临床实验显示，伊博格碱在治疗退伍军人创伤与物质依赖方面疗效拔群。
- 墨西哥坎昆附近的“Beyond”诊所提供规范的伊博格碱监管治疗，Rick Perry 曾亲赴该中心体验。
- 脑部扫描显示，Rick Perry 在前往该机构前存在正常的年龄相关性脑萎缩，但在接受伊博格碱治疗 4 至 6 周后便出现显著改善，6 个月后复查脑萎缩现象完全消失。
- Joe 批评将伊博格碱列为“一类管制物质”（Schedule I）是荒谬的，因为一类管制的定义是“无任何合法医疗用途”，而事实与此完全相反。
### [02:18:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8333s) 管制分类的荒谬与负责任的使用
Joe 提到特朗普政府推动将大麻从一类管制降为三类管制（Schedule III）。他指出大麻拥有明确的医学价值：不仅能帮助接受化疗的癌症患者恢复食欲，还能有效镇痛与缓解焦虑。虽然任何事物都有滥用的风险，但 Joe 打比方说：“你可以一直狂吃芝士汉堡直到心脏病发作暴毙，但这并不意味着我们应该禁止芝士汉堡。”核心在于让公众理解何为负责任的使用，无论是食物、糖、酒精还是药物。
两人进而讨论起古柯叶（Coca leaves）与精炼可卡因的巨大差异。可卡因在美国市场需求巨大，但街头毒品常掺杂致命的芬太尼与各种有害杂质。然而在厄瓜多尔和秘鲁等南美国家，原生态的古柯叶被广泛用于咀嚼或泡茶（Mate de coca），对于抵御高原反应和补充精力极为有效且安全。社会禁止天然植物却导致跨国贩毒集团通过提炼极度浓缩且掺毒的化学制品牟取暴利，这背后的逻辑令人深思。
> “It doesn't mean we should ban cheeseburgers. Means people need to understand what's responsible use of whatever it is, whether it's food, sugar, alcohol.” —— Joe Rogan
### [02:20:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8441s) 丛林深处的可卡因工坊与背夫少年的梦想
Joe 回忆起 Mariana 在哥伦比亚拍摄制作可卡因的纪录片经历，直言那期节目看得他胆战心惊：“请不要这么做，Mariana！你为什么非要冒这个险？”因为她当时就站在毒贩身旁，亲眼看着他们倾倒各种极度刺鼻的危险化学品进行勾兑。
Mariana 讲述了当时惊险的逃脱经历：由于当地居民发现了拍摄团队的摄像机，他们不得不立即撤离，在亚马逊雨林漆黑的深夜里，不开任何手电筒摸黑全速狂奔逃命。随后，他们记录了一位被称为“背包客”（backpacker）的年轻男孩。这个少年常年在深更半夜背负几十公斤的可卡因穿越丛林，工作极度凶险，亲眼目睹过身旁许多朋友惨遭杀害。当 Mariana 询问他为何从事这项亡命行当，少年的回答令人心碎：他的家庭非常贫穷，世代务农，但他一直渴望上大学读牙医专业，可家里根本凑不出学费，运送可卡因是当地唯一能让他攒钱读大学的出路。
> “I said, 'Why do you want to be a dentist?' Because all the ads that I see in my hometown are these big sort of posters with people with big smiles for dentist office and I want to make people smile, too.” —— Mariana van Zeller
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 哥伦比亚雨林毒品链与社会现实
accDescr: 展示少年为了赚取牙科学费参与极度危险的丛林可卡因运输流程
subgraph Poverty["社会现实与动因"]
P1["出身极度贫困的农户家庭"] --> P2["渴望读大学并成为牙医"]
P2 --> P3["原因：被广告牌上人们灿烂的笑容触动"]
end
subgraph Underworld["致命的黑色通道"]
P1 --> U1["缺乏合法就业机会"]
U1 --> U2["充当丛林'背包客'运毒"]
U2 --> U3["夜间负重几十公斤可卡因徒步"]
U3 --> U4["目睹多名同伴身亡的高危生存环境"]
end
subgraph Flow["最终流向"]
U4 --> S1["流入美国高消费市场"]
end
```
### [02:22:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8541s) 从打击源头转向治理需求与社会修复
Mariana 指出，墨西哥当地人常说，拉美毒品问题的根源在于美国庞大的消费需求。要真正解决问题，必须借鉴葡萄牙的非刑罪化路径，将重心从无休止的执法缉毒转移到需求侧的治理上。
> “If you even if even if it's just like 10% of the money that you spent on enforcement, let's put that on actually treating the demand side of it. That'll make a huge difference.” —— Mariana van Zeller
Mariana 强调，只要从执法经费中拿出 10% 投入戒毒治疗中心，普及伊博格碱、丁丙诺啡（Buprenorphine）和美沙酮（Methadone）等戒断与替代疗法，局面就会发生翻天覆地的转变。这并不是什么高深的火箭科学，迟迟无法推行令人费解。
Joe 则深入剖析了成瘾的心理症结。许多迷失的个体在现实生活中饱受痛苦，毒品成了他们感受快乐的唯一来源。曾有一名瘾君子对 Joe 说：“毒品是唯一能让我感到快乐的东西。如果没有了毒品，我还能剩下什么？”Mariana 认为这与欺诈受害者的心理如出一辙——在遭遇骗局时，与骗子的线上交流成了他们生活中唯一的慰藉。Joe 总结道，社会的根本任务应该是强健人的内心与精神，通过建立充满爱与支持的真实社区让每个人拥有归属感；在人们失足跌倒时，制度能给予托底而非惩戒。面对 Joe 的理想蓝图，Mariana 苦笑指出这其中的核心阻碍：“那确实很美好，但问题在于，这无利可图。”
### [02:24:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=8641s) 节目尾声与告别
在节目的最后时刻，主持人乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）与嘉宾玛丽安娜·范·泽勒（Mariana van Zeller）愉快地结束了这次内容丰富的深度对话。玛丽安娜对能参与本次节目表达了由衷的感谢，而乔也随即向所有的听众和观众道别。伴随着标志性的片尾音乐响起，这期围绕跨国犯罪、卧底调查以及社会边缘黑暗面展开的精彩访谈正式画下了句点。
乔·罗根在节目尾声向大家告别时说道：“Let's wrap it up. Bye everybody.” 随后，节目在轻松的音乐声中缓缓落幕。
## Notable quotes
> [02:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=128s) And that really annoyed me because why are we focusing on the response of of the victim instead of actually understanding the actions of the scammer of the scammers themselves because they are very very good at what they do. — Mariana van Zeller
> [34:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=2076s) The conversation has to stop being why are the victims falling for this? It's why are we allowing this to happen? — Mariana van Zeller
> [51:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3096s) It is because it is scams and again it is this idea of the shame around it and this belief that everybody that falls for a scam is foolish and naive that the onus is put on the victims. — Mariana van Zeller
> [11:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=688s) It's the humiliation, it's the shame that comes with it, which they use it to their advantage, right? The scammers that they use the silence to their advantage. — Mariana van Zeller
> [57:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3423s) 那是身处庞大企业当中真正黑暗的一部分：你不得不去做一些你明知不合伦理或违背道德的事情，因为你对股东负有责任，如果你想保住饭碗，这就是你的工作。 — Joe Rogan
> [30:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=1808s) If you're charging more money, that means you know something's wrong with this ad. So, you want to cut. — Joe Rogan
> [01:01:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=3660s) 除非有人出面对他们采取强制行动，否则他们就只会继续肆无忌惮地赚那笔钱。 — Joe Rogan
> [01:49:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog&t=6568s) There's a very fine line, right, between being building bigger cases and people dying. — Mariana van Zeller
## Mentioned
Joe Rogan, Mariana van Zeller, Jamie Vernon, Jon Bon Jovi, Eva AI, Ex Machina, Consumer Federation of America, Heartland Tri-State Bank, Shan Hanes, Meta, Jeff Horwitz, Reuters, Elon Musk, Onnit, Alpha Brain, Pure Encapsulations, Amazon, NOW Foods, Brandon Guffey, Gavin Guffey, Take It Down Act, Barry Crimmins, AOL, Mark Zuckerberg, Hillary Clinton, Google, Safe Platforms Act, Valerie Foushee, Sam Havlock, Duncan Trussell, Adolf Hitler, Charles Manson, The Fall of El Mayo, Ismael 'El Mayo' Zambada, Joaquín 'El Chapo' Guzmán, Sinaloa Cartel, Joaquín Guzmán López, Ovidio Guzmán, Claudia Sheinbaum, Ed Calderon, Operation Fast and Furious, DEA, ATF, LAPD, Narcan, Michael Douglas, The OxyContin Express, Purdue Pharma, Sackler family, Painkiller, Rick Perry, Brian Hubbard, Ibogaine, MAPS, Dan Patrick
## Video description
Mariana van Zeller is a Peabody and Emmy Award-winning journalist whose credits include "Trafficked with Mariana van Zeller," "The OxyContin Express," and "Inside Secret America." She is also the host of "The Hidden Third" podcast. Her latest documentary special, "Super Scam Me," premieres October 17 on National Geographic and will be available to stream on Disney+ and Hulu.
https://www.natgeotv.com/za/programs/natgeo/super-scam-me
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoCiI8nJacn8gDiHxr6aQGA
https://www.patreon.com/cw/TheHiddenThird
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2447662/
https://marianavanzeller.me
Perplexity: Download the app or ask Perplexity anything at https://pplx.ai/rogan.
Don’t miss out on all the action this week at DraftKings! Download the DraftKings app today! Sign-up using https://dkng.co/rogan or through my promo code ROGAN.
[Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SzYbqsUSog)
Source quotes
[2:08] Mariana van Zeller: And that really annoyed me because why are we focusing on the response of of the victim instead of actually understanding the actions of the scammer of the scammers themselves because they are very very good at what they do.
[34:36] Mariana van Zeller: The conversation has to stop being why are the victims falling for this? It's why are we allowing this to happen?
[51:36] Mariana van Zeller: It is because it is scams and again it is this idea of the shame around it and this belief that everybody that falls for a scam is foolish and naive that the onus is put on the victims.
[11:28] Mariana van Zeller: It's the humiliation, it's the shame that comes with it, which they use it to their advantage, right? The scammers that they use the silence to their advantage.
[57:03] Joe Rogan: 那是身处庞大企业当中真正黑暗的一部分：你不得不去做一些你明知不合伦理或违背道德的事情，因为你对股东负有责任，如果你想保住饭碗，这就是你的工作。
[30:08] Joe Rogan: If you're charging more money, that means you know something's wrong with this ad. So, you want to cut.
[61:00] Joe Rogan: 除非有人出面对他们采取强制行动，否则他们就只会继续肆无忌惮地赚那笔钱。
[109:28] Mariana van Zeller: There's a very fine line, right, between being building bigger cases and people dying.
Source quotes
[132:40] Joe Rogan: No one's going to do ibogaine for funsies.
[2:08] Mariana van Zeller: Why are we focusing on the response of of the victim instead of actually understanding the actions of the scammer of the scammers themselves because they are very very good at what they do.
Original transcript
[0:01] Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out.
[0:03] >> The Joe Rogan Experience.
[0:06] >> TRAIN BY DAY. JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY
[0:08] NIGHT. All day.
[0:13] >> Good to see you.
[0:14] >> Hi, Joe. So good to see you, too.
[0:16] >> Uh, every time I watch one of your new
[0:18] programs, I I get anxiety. I'm like,
[0:20] please don't die. Don't get hurt. What
[0:22] are you doing? [laughter]
[0:24] >> This one was a walk in the park, though.
[0:25] >> You're It kind of is a walk in the park,
[0:27] but not really. You went to [ __ ]
[0:30] Africa to meet scammers
[0:32] >> to confront my scammer. [laughter]
[0:36] >> So, your new show is all about romance
[0:39] scams.
[0:41] >> And uh I was aware of these because I
[0:43] watched a a show a long time ago about
[0:46] this poor lonely man who kept getting
[0:49] scammed. uh he thought that there was
[0:52] this woman and he was in contact with
[0:54] her and he flew to Europe to meet her
[0:57] twice
[0:58] >> and both times she came up with some
[0:59] reason why she couldn't be there. Some
[1:01] emergency came up and you know and this
[1:03] guy had given her hundreds of thousands
[1:05] of dollars and drained his account and
[1:07] his
[1:08] >> his daughter was so sad. She's like I
[1:10] keep trying to tell him but he won't
[1:12] listen. And you see these poor people
[1:14] that are so vulnerable that just they're
[1:16] lonely and they really believe
[1:18] >> they really really believe. I think the
[1:20] loneliness epidemic is a huge part of
[1:22] this. Quite frankly,
[1:23] >> it's a huge issue in this world, a huge
[1:26] issue in our country in particular. You
[1:28] know, there's like a disconnect with
[1:30] family in our country and there's a like
[1:34] people don't have like real community
[1:36] anymore. It's very weird.
[1:39] >> It is. And I think it's Yeah. It's
[1:40] absolutely one of the biggest reasons
[1:42] why scams are rampant these days. I
[1:45] mean, particularly romance scams.
[1:47] >> Yeah.
[1:47] >> 100%. Yeah. Well, it's you're you're
[1:50] praying on the the saddest people.
[1:54] That's what's really it's like it's one
[1:56] thing if you're scamming some psycho
[1:58] [ __ ] fraud guy who's doing stock
[2:02] market [ __ ] You know what I mean?
[2:04] Or like and you scam them. Yeah.
[2:06] >> It's like you're scamming a scammer.
[2:08] >> Yeah, it's true. But I think one of the
[2:11] problems we have when we talk about
[2:12] scams is this idea that we think it's a
[2:16] certain time type of more gullible
[2:18] person or more naive or perhaps more
[2:21] foolish.
[2:22] >> And I think that is wrong because I
[2:26] think what these scammers are so good at
[2:28] doing is that they prey on emotions that
[2:30] we all share. You know, love and trust
[2:33] and sometimes greed as well. And the
[2:37] real reason or the main reason I wanted
[2:39] to do this uh this film was because of
[2:41] that because I'd come back and I'd tell
[2:43] friends and family stories about, you
[2:45] know, these victims because I've
[2:47] reported on on scams before extensively.
[2:49] And it was always, but how could they do
[2:51] that? Why would you give money to a
[2:53] stranger? I mean, how could they be so
[2:54] silly and so stupid? And that really
[2:56] annoyed me because why are we focusing
[2:58] on the response of of the victim instead
[3:00] of actually understanding the actions of
[3:03] the scammer of the scammers themselves
[3:06] because they are very very good at what
[3:08] they do. So that was the idea behind
[3:10] okay I'm going to place myself at the
[3:12] center of all scams super scam me and
[3:15] create a persona and put myself in
[3:18] dating websites and you know online
[3:21] platforms and see what happens and it
[3:23] happened very fast. Do you think they're
[3:26] good at it?
[3:27] >> I think some are really good at it.
[3:28] >> The guy that was doing it with YouTube.
[3:31] No, I I didn't get the best scammer
[3:33] [laughter] out there. Let's just say
[3:34] that.
[3:35] >> Are there better ones?
[3:36] >> They're 100% better ones. I think the
[3:38] one that was scamming Leslie was
[3:40] definitely better than mine.
[3:41] >> Um,
[3:42] >> is that the one who was pretending he
[3:43] was John Bonjov? Yeah. So, again,
[3:45] [laughter] this again,
[3:47] >> I know, but that's the thing. You tell
[3:48] that story and you think this guy shows
[3:51] up on her DM and says, "Hey, I'm John
[3:53] Bon Joy. Give me money." That's not how
[3:54] it went, right? She liked an account.
[3:57] >> So, it was funny because it was in the
[3:59] middle of me doing Super Scam Me that I
[4:01] get an a a message from Leslie. And I
[4:04] get dozens of these messages every week
[4:06] because I've done a lot of reporting on
[4:08] this. People think I'm sort of like the
[4:10] 911 for scams. And in one, it was right
[4:13] in the middle of the project. I get a a
[4:15] message from her and it was that look,
[4:16] I've been talking to a guy for almost a
[4:19] year. I initially thought it was John
[4:21] Bonjovi. I'm not so sure anymore. And of
[4:24] course the response is, "Wait, what? Did
[4:25] you really think you were talking to
[4:26] John Bonjugi?" But then you listen to
[4:28] the story and then you actually meet
[4:29] this person.
[4:30] >> Yeah.
[4:30] >> And it is much more nuanced than that.
[4:33] She liked an Instagram account. She was
[4:36] brand new on Instagram. Um liked an
[4:38] account that had what looked like a
[4:40] check mark, a verified account, she
[4:42] thought. And she commented. She's been a
[4:44] fan of this guy since she was 14 years
[4:46] old. Posters of him all around her room.
[4:49] And immediately he DM'd her back and
[4:52] said, "Hey, I saw you commented. I love
[4:54] connecting with my fans." Perfectly
[4:56] reasonable, perfectly normal,
[4:58] >> right?
[4:59] >> I What's your favorite music? What's
[5:01] your favorite song? When did you start
[5:03] listening to my music? That kind of
[5:05] conversation. started normally and then
[5:07] it was it was weeks of this and then he
[5:09] started paying attention to her and
[5:11] interested in what her life was like and
[5:12] tell me about you and what do you do and
[5:14] what are your interests and then they
[5:17] they talked for months and months and he
[5:20] would remember things that happened in
[5:22] the early weeks and this is a woman who
[5:24] leads a very lonely life. There's
[5:26] there's the loneliness epidemic who's
[5:29] sort of estranged from her husband who
[5:31] doesn't really have anyone who's
[5:32] interested in her life quite frankly or
[5:35] who sees her or understands her or wants
[5:36] to know about her.
[5:37] >> Right.
[5:38] >> And finally there was somebody who even
[5:40] if he wasn't John Bon Joy, it was
[5:42] somebody who cared. Right.
[5:43] >> Yeah.
[5:44] >> And it lasted months of this and then
[5:47] she said to him one day she knew that he
[5:50] had a concert. She couldn't afford it.
[5:51] She went online. and the tickets were
[5:53] ridiculously expensive. And she said,
[5:55] "It's so sad that I really want to see
[5:57] you in concert. Always have wanted to
[5:59] when I can't." This was like seven
[6:01] months into their relationship. And then
[6:03] he says, "Well, uh, if you want, I do
[6:06] these meet and greets," which is also
[6:08] reasonable. They actually do.
[6:09] Celebrities do these. And you can pay
[6:12] for I'll give you a discount. I'll put
[6:13] you in touch with management and you can
[6:15] pay like a $100. I'm coming to Louisiana
[6:18] and you can come to one of these meet
[6:20] and greets and meet me in person. And at
[6:23] this point, I'm sorry, but it is
[6:25] believable. And also, he would send her
[6:27] videos. You saw some of these videos.
[6:29] >> Yeah, the AI videos.
[6:30] >> The AI videos. And some of them, I mean,
[6:33] they're a little robotic, but they could
[6:34] be real. And it's, "Hi, Leslie. Good
[6:36] morning. How are you doing? My sunshine,
[6:39] my love. I, you know, I I I'm curious
[6:42] about your life." And he would say to
[6:43] her, "Look, I am surrounded by people
[6:46] who are Yes. people who are people who
[6:49] are with me a lot because of my money
[6:51] and fame and I just really appreciate
[6:53] connecting with people who are outside
[6:54] the bubble who are normal folks,
[6:56] >> right?
[6:57] >> And so it it is kind of it's not as
[7:00] insane as like John Bonjovi showed up
[7:02] and said, "Hey, I want $1,000." Right?
[7:04] But then what happens I think in a lot
[7:06] of these scams is that once you're in
[7:10] once you're committed to a relationship
[7:12] once that has an impact on your life and
[7:14] has made your life better it is very
[7:16] difficult to then you know come to the
[7:19] realization that this might not be real
[7:21] I I equate it a little bit to gambling
[7:24] you know when gamblers lose a lot of
[7:27] money and in their heads they're always
[7:28] thinking wait it might have been my
[7:31] unlucky day if I go to the casino today
[7:33] this might be my really lucky day,
[7:35] right? You and the more you lose, the
[7:37] more you're gambling because you're
[7:38] trying to get that money back. It's a
[7:40] little bit I think that same idea. It's
[7:42] also a dopamine rush. Like every time
[7:44] you get a DM, every time you're
[7:45] lovebombed, you're there's a dopamine
[7:47] rush there.
[7:48] >> And I think it's that idea that at you
[7:50] get to a point where you start
[7:52] suspecting, okay, this doesn't sound
[7:53] real, but I've invested so much the
[7:56] reality of my life is so sad compared to
[7:58] this that maybe I prefer to just go on.
[8:01] So there are actually a lot of romance
[8:04] scam victims that continue having these
[8:06] relationships even after they realized
[8:08] the person wasn't who they said they
[8:09] were.
[8:10] >> Wow. So they just do it just for the
[8:13] placebo.
[8:15] They do it almost just like they're
[8:17] talking to a robot that loves them.
[8:19] >> Yeah. Yes. A little bit. Which is one of
[8:22] the things that they talk actually about
[8:23] how AI, you know, the companionship of
[8:25] AI
[8:26] >> uh is one of the benefits or possible
[8:29] benefits of AI. I don't know if it's a
[8:31] benefit.
[8:32] >> It can also be very bad.
[8:35] >> It can. But you know there coffee shops
[8:37] now I just found out this this out in
[8:39] New York where they actually have like
[8:41] iPads. Did you know this
[8:43] >> iPads with fake people for companionship
[8:45] that you go to the coffee shop and you
[8:48] grab an iPad and you have a whole
[8:49] conversation with an AI agent.
[8:51] >> Well, New York,
[8:54] weirdly enough one of the loneliest
[8:56] places.
[8:57] >> Yeah.
[8:57] >> Because no one is friends with anyone.
[8:59] Like my friend Jim who lives in a
[9:01] building in New York. It's like you know
[9:03] 40 stories or something like that. He's
[9:05] like I don't know anybody in this
[9:06] building.
[9:07] >> Like think about that. I'm I'm in I
[9:09] don't know my neighbor. Every time we we
[9:10] look at each other like so hey how you
[9:12] doing? Like like no one knows anybody
[9:14] and there's hundreds of people stacked
[9:16] on top of each other.
[9:17] >> That is an odd way to live.
[9:19] >> That is an odd way to live. Yeah.
[9:20] >> What is this Jimmy?
[9:21] >> Oh [cough and clears throat] cafe for
[9:23] AI.
[9:23] >> Eva AI opens the world's first cafe for
[9:27] AI dates. This cuffing season. What is
[9:30] cuffing season?
[9:31] >> What does that mean?
[9:32] >> Uh, I have no idea. Where is that?
[9:33] >> It's link. It's like linking up time.
[9:35] >> Is that what it means?
[9:36] >> Cuffing. You know, it's another way to
[9:37] say [ __ ]
[9:40] >> Oh, having sex.
[9:41] >> Yes.
[9:42] >> Wow.
[9:43] >> Jamie knows.
[9:43] >> There's a season. What are we elk?
[9:45] >> It's like a cold running
[9:47] >> during winter when everybody's inside.
[9:48] [laughter]
[9:50] >> A relationship
[9:51] RPG app. [clears throat]
[9:53] >> Bringing virtual romance to the real
[9:55] world. EVA is launching EVA Cafe, the
[9:58] first ever online space where people can
[10:00] take their AI partners out on a real
[10:02] date. Oh god.
[10:04] >> Yeah,
[10:05] >> that is so dark.
[10:07] >> Wow.
[10:07] >> Oh Jesus Christ.
[10:09] >> Oh wow.
[10:09] >> You sit there with an iPad. Are you
[10:11] enjoying your steak?
[10:12] >> Oh my god. That
[10:13] >> sounds like a troll, but it's real.
[10:15] You're saying it's real.
[10:16] >> Reserve your spot. Click that.
[10:17] >> I don't want to [laughter]
[10:20] >> get on a list. [clears throat]
[10:22] >> Yeah. Let's see what happens.
[10:23] >> Open up a Google dot. What happens?
[10:25] Waiting list. It's a waiting list.
[10:27] >> Well, so this was also uh that said the
[10:29] website said it was back in February of
[10:30] 26. So I don't know. I mean that's
[10:32] almost, you know,
[10:33] >> don't show that on the screen. You just
[10:34] showed your
[10:35] >> address. I'm closing it. [laughter]
[10:37] >> Oh boy. Boy, this is dark.
[10:39] >> There you go. You can come to flirt and
[10:40] unwind.
[10:41] >> Come to flirt unwind or simply share a
[10:44] quiet moment with your AI companion.
[10:48] >> EVA cafe.
[10:51] >> Yeah. So, depressing. It's so dark. It's
[10:54] so dark.
[10:56] >> Did you see X Machino?
[10:57] >> I did.
[10:58] >> One of my all-time favorite movies. I
[11:00] love that movie. But the the real
[11:02] problem I have with that movie is like I
[11:03] think I'd fall in love with her, too.
[11:05] >> Oh my. Yeah.
[11:06] >> That guy. [laughter]
[11:07] She's amazing.
[11:08] >> She's so hot.
[11:09] >> She's so hot.
[11:09] >> Who cares if she has clear skin and
[11:11] [ __ ] lights behind it? [laughter]
[11:13] >> So true.
[11:14] >> It's like she's so pretty and so sweet.
[11:17] [laughter and gasps] It's dark. It's
[11:19] dark [clears throat] because we are
[11:21] super vulnerable. We're super stupid.
[11:24] >> Yeah. I don't know if stupid is the
[11:25] word, but I would say we're vulnerable,
[11:27] especially men.
[11:28] >> Yeah. Men. Do you know that's
[11:29] interesting too in terms of scams
[11:32] because as you saw in our film, the
[11:34] majority of the people we spoke to were
[11:36] women. But actually men are as are as
[11:39] likely to falling victim to these scams
[11:42] as women, but they just have a lot more
[11:43] shame around it. So they're less likely
[11:45] to talk about it. So, we actually spoke
[11:47] to a lot a lot of men, but they just
[11:49] don't want to be on camera because
[11:50] there's so much shame around this.
[11:52] >> Yeah. They don't No man wants to be a
[11:54] sucker.
[11:54] >> Yeah.
[11:55] >> If a woman's a sucker, everyone feels
[11:56] bad for her. If a guy's a sucker, you're
[11:58] like, "You [ __ ]
[12:00] >> I wish people felt bad for for women."
[12:02] It wasn't Leslie's case, and it's
[12:04] certainly not the case for a lot of the
[12:05] victims that I speak to.
[12:06] >> They don't feel bad for him.
[12:07] >> No, actually, this is another horrible
[12:09] thing. It's what I call is there's a
[12:11] sort of double victimization, right?
[12:13] Because initially, not only do you, you
[12:15] know, your heart is broken, you lost all
[12:17] your money, but then you go back home or
[12:19] you go to your friends and you talk
[12:20] about this and the first response is how
[12:23] stupid could you be, right? It's the
[12:25] humiliation, it's the shame
[12:26] >> that comes with it, which they use it to
[12:29] their advantage, right? The scammers
[12:31] that they use the silence to their
[12:33] advantage.
[12:34] >> Do you ever get those random text
[12:35] messages that say, "Hi, I haven't seen
[12:38] you in so long. What have you been up
[12:40] to?" and you look at the number, you're
[12:41] like, "Who the [ __ ] is this?"
[12:42] >> Absolutely.
[12:43] >> It's always an Android phone. Yeah.
[12:44] Right. So, like that's one way to check.
[12:47] And then it's always like something
[12:49] weird like I've been craving lobster
[12:51] rolls.
[12:52] >> Do you want to meet up? [laughter]
[12:53] >> Like what? What is this?
[12:55] >> And also the the job uh offers those all
[12:59] the time.
[13:00] >> I'm approved for so many loans. Yeah.
[13:02] >> It's really amazing.
[13:03] >> Same. Same. So, actually, Super Scammy
[13:06] started like that. The idea was that I
[13:07] was gonna say yes to every single scam
[13:09] that came my way. And for the first few
[13:11] weeks, we filmed it that way. So, I
[13:13] would answer all those text messages.
[13:14] >> What happens?
[13:15] >> It was really interesting. So, it was a
[13:18] lot of phone calls with scammers. Uh,
[13:21] one of the most interesting
[13:22] conversations we had with was with an
[13:24] Indian call center who told me that
[13:26] there was a bug in my Apple computer and
[13:30] he could fix it. One of those, right?
[13:31] >> Oh, that's nice of him.
[13:32] >> It was an Apple support. Yes. Very nice
[13:34] of him. So, so kind. And all I had to do
[13:37] was download this software. And once you
[13:40] download the software, he's in my
[13:42] computer. And then you go to the
[13:43] payment. And once they're in my
[13:45] computer, they can see the number that
[13:47] I'm putting for my credit card and all
[13:48] the details.
[13:50] >> So they have access to that. Right. So
[13:52] >> did you do it?
[13:52] >> I'm trying to go I'm trying to go as far
[13:55] as I can without actually revealing a
[13:58] credit card. So, I get to the point of
[13:59] the credit card and I turn to him and
[14:01] this had been like over an hour on the
[14:03] phone with this guy and I say, "Hey, so
[14:06] this is the deal. I'm actually a
[14:08] journalist. My name is Mariana,
[14:10] but I don't want to get you in trouble.
[14:12] I kind I know this is a scam. I just
[14:14] want to talk to you, dude." And he
[14:16] actually did. He stayed on the phone
[14:17] with me. I tried this a lot. It didn't
[14:19] always work, but in [laughter] this
[14:20] case, this guy actually stayed on the
[14:22] phone with me for a long time. And he
[14:24] told me, "Look, we work
[14:26] >> we're forced to do In his case, he said
[14:29] he was forced, but I think he was doing
[14:30] it for the money. But he basically said
[14:32] I said, "Don't you feel bad about this?
[14:33] I mean, you're stealing money from
[14:35] people." And his answer was, "Look, in
[14:38] America, everybody has more money. So, I
[14:40] don't really feel bad." I was like,
[14:41] "What is a lot of money?" Oh, he said,
[14:43] "He doesn't steal from poor people." And
[14:44] what's poor people? Well, if I go into a
[14:46] bank, if I go into account, once I get
[14:48] access, I can see everything that's
[14:50] there. If you have less than $1,000, I'm
[14:53] not going to steal from you. But if you
[14:54] have more, that means you're rich.
[14:56] >> Whoa. Yeah.
[14:58] >> Is it? Yeah. It was interesting. Yeah.
[14:59] That I mean the money it's so different,
[15:02] right?
[15:03] >> Well, that is the the very bizarre
[15:06] statistic that shocks people when you
[15:08] tell it to them. I think I used to think
[15:10] it's $34,000, but I think it's $50,000.
[15:13] If you make $50,000, you are in the top
[15:17] 1% of the world.
[15:19] >> 50,000. Yeah.
[15:21] >> Yeah.
[15:22] >> That's
[15:22] >> it's Yeah,
[15:23] >> that's dark.
[15:24] >> That's very dark. I mean 10% of the
[15:26] world's population lives under the
[15:28] poverty line.
[15:29] >> Yeah.
[15:29] >> So that's 700 and something million
[15:31] people who have trouble finding, you
[15:33] know, shelter and food for themselves
[15:35] and their family. It's insane.
[15:37] >> Yeah. And I do know that there are
[15:39] people that get they literally get
[15:42] kidnapped and forced to work in these
[15:44] scam centers through threat of death and
[15:47] >> torture. Torture. We did a story about
[15:49] that for the last season of traffics
[15:50] about these scam compounds. actually
[15:52] visited one of the scam city, a city
[15:55] that has a lot of these scam compounds,
[15:56] and interviewed one of the main guys
[15:58] there. And it was and spoke to a lot of
[16:00] the victims. And I mean, it was people
[16:02] being beaten and tortured and forced.
[16:04] There's a guy, I will never forget, who
[16:06] jumped off like the sixth floor of his
[16:08] building um because he knew that he
[16:11] could die, but he thought it was better
[16:13] to die than to live in that those
[16:15] conditions. He basically broke both his
[16:17] hips and his legs. And when I met him,
[16:18] he was in an wheelchair. He was rescued.
[16:21] Thank God. But there was unsure if you
[16:24] could ever walk again. And uh and then
[16:26] there was a woman that's was a really
[16:28] dark one uh who we spoke to. She's sort
[16:31] of a the model. So she's the person that
[16:33] when they want to do video calls, she'd
[16:34] come on camera, but they had at the
[16:37] time, even back then, this was two years
[16:39] ago, they had this AI technology that
[16:41] would go superimpose over her face. And
[16:43] they needed a woman because of the
[16:45] mannerisms, right? Or and and the voice,
[16:47] I guess. But they had this AI thing
[16:49] program and it's over her face. But if
[16:51] she moved just a little bit, they would
[16:54] it would distort basically and her boss
[16:57] would beat her and all that stuff. But
[16:58] she'd also been raped by her boss and
[17:01] all his friends. They would bring people
[17:02] in to rape her and she was stuck in this
[17:05] horrible situation. It's
[17:07] >> where are these happening most?
[17:08] >> Myanmar. Um Myanmar and Cambodia uh were
[17:10] [snorts] the two main spots. But now
[17:12] because there's been a crackdown in both
[17:14] countries, particularly in Cambodia,
[17:16] they are spreading to other places like
[17:18] Dubai and other other other places. But
[17:21] um but they still exist a lot in in
[17:23] Myanmar. And Myanmar is a country at
[17:25] war. There's a large part of the country
[17:27] that is just controlled by different
[17:30] rebel groups. The government doesn't
[17:31] really have much control of that region.
[17:34] So the scam compounds and these, you
[17:37] know, a lot of them are Chinese criminal
[17:39] gangs that operate these scam compounds.
[17:41] They're paying a fee. They're paying for
[17:43] the war. Essentially, they're giving
[17:44] money to the rebels in order to be able
[17:46] to work and, you know, build these scam
[17:48] cities. But the scam city that I visited
[17:51] was, it was like a mini Macau. It was
[17:53] these highrises. And it happened within
[17:56] a year or two. It went from flat, you
[17:58] know, regular forest jungle in Myanmar
[18:02] to skyscrapers, casinos. Um, you know,
[18:07] one of the places I visited was, um, in
[18:10] order to be able to talk to this scam
[18:12] scam compound, the guy who sort of runs
[18:15] the city, we had to wine and dine him.
[18:17] Actually, he had to wine and dine us. He
[18:19] wanted to take us out and show us
[18:20] around. And he took us to this karaoke
[18:22] cafe, karaoke bar that was like nothing
[18:25] I'd ever seen. It was screens all
[18:28] around. It looks like the future, but
[18:30] this is in one of the poorest countries
[18:32] on earth with a war raging around and
[18:36] I'm in this sort of the future and it's
[18:39] this yeah this karaoke bar with girls
[18:43] painfully dressed and drugs being served
[18:46] and alcohol and uh and we had to stay
[18:49] there and I sang Whitney Houston.
[18:52] [laughter]
[18:53] >> What song?
[18:55] I think it was the the greatest love of
[18:57] all, which is usually the one that I
[18:58] sing.
[18:59] >> That's what I was going to guess.
[19:00] [laughter]
[19:01] >> And I'm one of those people that thinks
[19:02] they can sing well, but really can't.
[19:04] [laughter]
[19:06] But it was fun. Those was one of those
[19:07] unforgettable nights. And then the next
[19:09] day, we interviewed this cam guy, the
[19:10] compound.
[19:11] >> The football season is heating up and
[19:13] every week feels bigger with DraftKings.
[19:15] The DraftKings sports app is now live in
[19:18] all 50 states. That means from Texas to
[19:20] California to Florida, every fan is in
[19:23] on the excitement. Follow the teams you
[19:25] love, keep up with the biggest games,
[19:26] and experience the excitement of
[19:28] football all week long. No matter which
[19:30] game you're watching, you're always
[19:32] connected with one app. One app, every
[19:34] sport, all 50 states. New DraftKings
[19:37] customers, sign up with Code Rogan.
[19:39] Spend just five bucks, get 150 in
[19:42] rewards within 14 days. Includes all
[19:45] markets. That's code roen. In
[19:47] partnership with DraftKings, the crown
[19:49] is yours.
[19:50] >> Gambling problem? Call 1800 gambler.
[19:52] 1800 MYR reset Connecticut call
[19:54] 888789-7777
[19:56] visit ccpg.org on behalf of bootill
[19:58] casino in Kansas bed tax passthrough may
[20:00] apply in Illinois 21 and over void in
[20:02] Canada bet with DraftKings sportsbook to
[20:04] get bonus bets that expire in 7 days or
[20:06] trade with DraftKings predictions to get
[20:07] predictions dollars that expire in one
[20:09] year event contract trading involves
[20:10] risk of loss predictions offer void in
[20:12] New York non-withdrawable rewards issued
[20:13] as $50 click to claims every 7 days for
[20:16] 14 days terms at dkng.co/offer co/offer.
[20:18] Limited time offer nationwide based on
[20:20] sportsbook predictions and free-to-play
[20:21] sports contest availability varies by
[20:23] state.
[20:24] >> So he was willing to do this. He wanted
[20:26] to show off.
[20:27] >> Yes. Cuz he was trying to sell the city
[20:29] as being a gambling and tourist
[20:31] paradise. Uh
[20:32] >> so the entire city is essentially funded
[20:35] by scams
[20:36] >> because who wants to go to this place?
[20:39] No one. Like he they built it up for
[20:42] business, for gambling, for tourists to
[20:44] come. Literally, they have go-kart uh
[20:47] tracks and they had a a slide pools with
[20:51] slides, a water park, and all that
[20:53] stuff, but no tourist in their right
[20:55] mind from anywhere in the world would
[20:57] want to go to this place on in the world
[20:59] because it's again there's a war, it's
[21:01] poor, it's really difficult to access.
[21:03] We had to be smuggled into the country
[21:05] from Thailand. So obviously that's all a
[21:08] front for what really brings in money,
[21:10] which is scams. But he was trying to
[21:13] sort of clean the image and show us that
[21:16] nothing wrong was going on there. And
[21:17] they had posters all around the city
[21:19] saying, "No scams are allowed. We don't
[21:21] torture people." [laughter]
[21:24] If you need to say it. [sighs]
[21:27] >> Wow. Wow. And the whole city just
[21:30] appeared quickly
[21:32] >> overnight. A lot of these do. I mean,
[21:34] it's within months. It's flat terrain
[21:36] and suddenly there's
[21:37] >> funding it. And how are they doing the
[21:38] construction? like how are they how are
[21:40] they doing that
[21:41] >> construction is there is a lot of
[21:43] unemployed uh people in the country so
[21:46] that's not that difficult funding all
[21:48] comes from a lot of it is from these
[21:50] Chinese criminal gangs um who operate in
[21:54] in the case of where I visited was a
[21:57] company called Yatai International the
[21:58] head of Yatai International was a
[21:59] Chinese man who was living in Myanmar
[22:01] running this compound he was eventually
[22:03] actually picked up by the authorities in
[22:04] Thailand he was doing time in prison so
[22:06] the guy I spoke to was his number two
[22:08] and He was trying to say that the guy
[22:11] was in prison because he was openly
[22:14] talking about corruption in China or
[22:15] something like that, which was not the
[22:16] case. But uh but yeah, it's uh and it's
[22:19] billions of dollars. I can't remember
[22:21] exactly, but there was
[22:22] >> Sorry to interrupt you. How typical is
[22:23] this story? Like this is the opening
[22:24] article of an article about
[22:26] [clears throat]
[22:27] victims and villains scam compounds.
[22:29] >> Yeah,
[22:30] >> this is crazy.
[22:31] >> What does it say?
[22:32] >> Uh he was held against his will,
[22:34] tortured, and drained of his blood. And
[22:37] they would drain his blood up to seven
[22:38] times in a half year. That made him a
[22:41] blood slave.
[22:42] >> Wow.
[22:42] >> To to run these scams.
[22:45] >> Yeah.
[22:46] >> What? Blood slave.
[22:48] >> In his case of a blood slave. The
[22:50] journalist began to describe him.
[22:51] >> Oh, okay. So it says from his bed, he
[22:53] said he sought work as a security guard
[22:55] in China, but was tricked and apparently
[22:57] kidnapped, transported to Cambodia, and
[22:58] then sold into one of the country's many
[23:00] fortified scam compound facilities where
[23:03] workers labor around the clock to
[23:05] extract money from people online. When
[23:07] he resisted, Lee was beaten and tortured
[23:09] and then passed from one scam operator
[23:11] to another. He claimed his capttors
[23:13] finally began to drain large quantities
[23:16] of his blood seven times in half a year.
[23:19] In the hospital, he pointed weekly at an
[23:21] infusion bag above his head that was the
[23:24] size of each extraction, he said. In
[23:26] online articles, journalists began to
[23:28] describe his case that of a blood slave.
[23:31] So, they're taking his blood for blood
[23:33] doping or for for blood transfusions for
[23:36] other people.
[23:37] >> That part that
[23:38] >> they're just taking it for they're using
[23:39] his blood as money. Like they're selling
[23:42] his blood.
[23:42] >> Probably one of the scams they're doing.
[23:43] Yeah, I would imagine.
[23:44] >> So, they just like take everything.
[23:46] What? Do you got an extra kidney? Give
[23:47] me that. Chinese social media lit up
[23:50] with outrage and sympathy. Even
[23:51] government officials in China and
[23:52] Cambodia took notice. For a moment, Lee
[23:54] seemed to embody the darkest truths
[23:56] about the criminal scam compound
[23:57] spreading across parts of Southeast
[23:59] Asia.
[24:00] >> Like what one of them looks like.
[24:02] >> I mean, they're big.
[24:03] >> So, that is an entire building dedicated
[24:06] to scams.
[24:06] >> And they have barbed wire around it.
[24:08] They have security guards. The all the
[24:11] windows usually have um what do you call
[24:13] them? Um
[24:15] >> bars. So people can't escape. [snorts]
[24:18] >> Wow.
[24:20] >> Pictures here. I was showing these
[24:21] pictures. There's a dorm.
[24:23] >> Yeah, the dorms. Yeah. With lots people
[24:26] sleeping in the dorms together.
[24:27] >> Eat food. You know, looks kind of like a
[24:29] military compound.
[24:30] >> They can't leave the compound.
[24:32] Everything. Oh, absolutely. Slaves.
[24:34] >> Yeah,
[24:34] >> it's slaves. And we're not talking about
[24:36] just a few hundred people. It's hundreds
[24:37] of thousands of people. Hundreds of
[24:39] thousands of people coming from all over
[24:41] the world who are lured into what they
[24:42] think are going to be online jobs and
[24:46] and once they get there they take away
[24:49] their passports and they force them to
[24:51] scam Americans essentially. It's crazy.
[24:53] People coming from Brazil, India,
[24:55] Philippines, all around the world. It's
[24:57] nuts. I I don't understand how we know
[25:00] this happens. This is still out there.
[25:02] I've been trying to do a film about this
[25:04] because of all my reporting on traffic.
[25:07] This was one of the craziest one of
[25:09] those moments that I'm like, "This is
[25:10] outrageous. How are we allowing this to
[25:12] happen?" And you can say, "Okay, the
[25:14] victims are people from other countries.
[25:16] Why should we care?" I mean, that's not
[25:18] a good response to start with, but even
[25:20] if that's the case, they're they're
[25:22] enslaved. But also, these people are
[25:24] scamming Americans. Last year, this is a
[25:27] crazy this blew my mind. Uh just I think
[25:30] two months ago or something, the
[25:32] Consumer Federation of America issued
[25:34] their latest report which was looking at
[25:36] scams last year and Americans apparently
[25:40] lost not apparently. They've estimated
[25:41] that Americans lost $148 billion dollars
[25:44] to online scams last year.
[25:45] >> Billion.
[25:46] >> Billion. Do you know how much that is a
[25:47] day? I did the math. It's $400 million a
[25:50] day. $400 million a day are lost in
[25:54] America are being stolen from Americans
[25:57] >> every day. It's insane. And a lot of it
[26:00] is done through from by from these
[26:03] they're called pig butchering compounds.
[26:06] >> Pig butchering. I found a website
[26:08] talking about the pig butchering.
[26:09] Butchering website.
[26:10] >> Wow.
[26:12] Organized criminals use highly scripted
[26:13] process and human trafficking to steal
[26:16] as much money as they can from
[26:18] individual victims.
[26:19] >> Pig slaughter. They like it's like
[26:21] >> Do you know why it's called Yes,
[26:23] exactly. It comes from the Chinese
[26:25] expression that means uh sort of
[26:27] fattening the pig. So you fatten the pig
[26:29] so you you know give a lot of love to
[26:32] your victim or you you know pretend
[26:35] they're going to get a lot of money. You
[26:36] build their confidence and trust and
[26:37] then you slaughter them. Basically you
[26:39] take away all their money.
[26:40] >> There's a whole uh go to the top please.
[26:42] There's a whole process they go grooming
[26:45] the victims. They contact pig pig
[26:47] butchering that's a dark word. pig
[26:50] butchering targets uh through dating
[26:53] apps, social media platforms or
[26:55] unsolicited text messages ah like the
[26:57] ones I get. At some point the scammer
[26:59] encourages a target to sift shift the
[27:01] conversation to an encrypted messaging
[27:03] platform like WhatsApp or Telegram. They
[27:06] invest time in understanding the
[27:07] person's financial situation, family
[27:09] dynamics and work to build a deep
[27:12] emotional connection. Scammers often
[27:14] spend weeks building these
[27:15] relationships. Then then they introduce
[27:18] investment opportunities.
[27:20] >> They drop subtle hints about a
[27:22] once-in-a-lifetime investment
[27:23] opportunity early in the relationship.
[27:25] They show pictures of a lavish lifestyle
[27:27] or talk about expensive purchases and
[27:29] experiences once scammers have gained
[27:31] pig butchering targets trust. They
[27:34] introduce an exclusive investment
[27:36] opportunity, often claiming they've
[27:37] achieved significant financial success
[27:39] through it. Then they establish
[27:41] credibility, make the scam seem real.
[27:44] Scammers share fake screenshots and
[27:46] trading platform dashboards, stories of
[27:49] friends or an uncle who knows how it all
[27:52] works and made massive profits along
[27:54] with professional looking documents and
[27:55] websites starting small to ease doubts.
[27:58] So they have like a whole process they
[28:01] go through
[28:03] slowly. They have scripts that they
[28:05] stick to
[28:06] >> and it's different according to the
[28:08] people that they're talking to what kind
[28:09] of victim that is
[28:11] >> that this is the scam. Pig butchering
[28:13] was what actually got remember there was
[28:14] that story of that uh bank banker the
[28:17] CEO of a bank in Kansas that ultimately
[28:19] went bankrupt because he had stolen $400
[28:21] million from the bank. Do you remember?
[28:23] >> He [clears throat] got he got scammed.
[28:24] >> Yeah. From it was pig butchering too. It
[28:26] was one of these fake crypto.
[28:27] >> How did they get him? What was it a
[28:30] romance thing?
[28:31] >> No, it was this it was an investment
[28:32] opportunity. Sometimes they're mixed. It
[28:34] starts with a romance and then goes to
[28:36] investment opportunity or sometimes it's
[28:37] just the investment opportunity. I think
[28:39] in his case it was more the investment
[28:40] opportunity. So they said he he started
[28:43] by putting just his own money, his
[28:45] savings into what he thought was a
[28:47] legitimate crypto account. And you can
[28:50] see once you do, again, it's let's not
[28:53] think these people are stupid because
[28:54] the scammers are really good at what
[28:56] they do. They create these platforms
[28:58] that when you look at it looks
[28:59] completely legitimate and then it looks
[29:01] like your money is going up, right? He's
[29:02] seeing his money is going up. He's
[29:04] making a lot of money. He's very
[29:05] excited. Initially, if you want to take
[29:07] money out, they allow you so that you
[29:09] gain more confidence. So then you start
[29:11] putting more money and then he just got
[29:13] in too deep where they kept saying that
[29:15] in order to get the millions he had just
[29:18] made out, you know, months into the the
[29:21] this investment scam. They said that he
[29:24] has to pay a fee and it's like a tax,
[29:26] right? You have to pay a 10% tax. And so
[29:29] at that point, you're so in you've lost
[29:31] so much money that okay, if I only pay
[29:33] this 10% tax or if I only pay this fee.
[29:35] So he kept doing that, but then he
[29:36] started actually using money from his
[29:38] customers. How the [ __ ] does a guy who
[29:40] works in banking
[29:42] get sucked into something that stupid?
[29:45] >> But I don't think it's I think look now
[29:48] we know a lot more about it, right?
[29:49] >> Uhhuh.
[29:50] >> I think the question should be why isn't
[29:53] our government doing more to protect us?
[29:55] Why are these online platforms why don't
[29:58] they have uh why aren't they
[30:02] accountable? They should be held
[30:04] accountable for allowing this to happen.
[30:06] >> Look, which online platforms? Um, I'll
[30:08] give you specifics. There was an
[30:09] incredible Reuters investigation done
[30:12] [snorts] last year where they got they
[30:14] got a hold of internal meta documents
[30:16] from Meta [snorts]
[30:17] >> and in the meta documents internal meta
[30:20] documents. They estimated
[30:22] inside meta the worker the different
[30:25] departments estimated that there were 15
[30:29] billion ads every single day that the
[30:33] users of their platforms WhatsApp,
[30:35] Instagram, Facebook were exposed to
[30:37] around an estimated 15 billion scam ads
[30:40] every single day. Scams that were higher
[30:42] risk that were that displayed clear
[30:45] signs of being fraudulent.
[30:48] They also estimated that
[30:52] they were that year they projected that
[30:55] they would make 16 billion dollars. This
[30:57] is in 2024, I believe, or 2023, I'm not
[31:00] sure. 16 billion dollars worth of of
[31:04] profit from scams and banned goods.
[31:07] That's 10% of their full profit at the
[31:10] time. So, they're making a ton of money
[31:13] from this. And then this is where it
[31:15] gets really worrisome to me because of
[31:17] their po personalized ad um system. If a
[31:21] person clicks on a scam that you know
[31:23] those ads that you have like Elon Musk
[31:25] holding a thing and saying investment
[31:28] opportunity and then you click it and
[31:30] you want to see what it is or there's
[31:31] tons of these. I mean there's gazillions
[31:33] of these out there. If you click it, you
[31:35] are more likely to be fed more of these
[31:38] ads. So it comes starts with just maybe
[31:40] you're exposed to one and then suddenly
[31:42] in the next day you're exposed to a
[31:43] hundred of these scams right so your
[31:45] reality starts being you know filled
[31:48] with scams and then this is I think even
[31:52] the crazier part is that if you report
[31:56] these as scams which a lot of users do I
[31:58] think it's 100,000 reports every single
[32:00] week
[32:01] they if they have a 95 or over certainty
[32:05] meta if their system sees that there's a
[32:07] 95% % certainty or over that these are
[32:10] scams, they remove them. If there's less
[32:13] than 95, let's say 94%. What they do is
[32:16] they give you a penalty fee. So, you
[32:19] have to pay more, but they allow you to
[32:21] stay on the platform.
[32:23] >> What?
[32:23] >> Yes.
[32:24] >> Wait a minute.
[32:24] >> You can check that out, Jamie. That is
[32:27] investigation.
[32:28] >> They're in on it then.
[32:29] >> They're making money. I mean, it just
[32:30] raises lots of questions, right?
[32:32] >> Right. If you're charging more money,
[32:35] that means you know something's wrong
[32:38] with this ad. So, you want to cut.
[32:41] >> Yeah. You're making more money from the
[32:43] illegitimate ads than you are from the
[32:44] legitimate ads. In terms of onetoone,
[32:47] >> is this because of a lack of regulation?
[32:49] >> It is because of a lack of regulation.
[32:50] >> Lack of regulation, lack of oversight,
[32:52] and maybe perhaps something that emerged
[32:54] without any understanding of it before
[32:56] it was everywhere.
[32:58] >> 100%. I think it's our government. They
[33:00] know.
[33:01] >> They know. Oh, absolutely. you know,
[33:02] their whole conversations in those
[33:04] internal documents is them talking about
[33:06] how can we go after this without
[33:08] affecting our pocket. They actually
[33:10] openly talk about it. They talk about
[33:11] how there are other companies out there
[33:12] that are doing a better job, but they
[33:14] are afraid of what that would might
[33:16] mean.
[33:16] >> Jamie put this into our AI sponsor
[33:18] perplexity and says, "Yes, Reuters
[33:21] reported that Meta Charge some suspected
[33:23] scam advertisers higher advertising
[33:26] rates rather than banning them outright.
[33:28] a system described internally as penalty
[33:31] bids. Bids. Why would they call it a
[33:34] bid?
[33:35] >> Uh because the way that the ads work,
[33:37] it's like a bidding process. The
[33:38] [clears throat] way that they'd serve
[33:39] it, they could charge you, you have a
[33:41] budget and they charge you more based
[33:42] off of how they deliver it. So they
[33:44] might charge you more per
[33:45] >> Here's the distinction in the documents
[33:47] Reuters reviewed. At least 95%
[33:49] confidence of fraud. [ __ ] Christ.
[33:52] What What [laughter] do you have to do
[33:54] to get off that platform? Meta's
[33:57] automated systems would ban the
[33:58] advertiser at 95% confidence of fraud.
[34:01] Below that threshold, but still judged
[34:03] likely to be a scammer, the advertiser
[34:05] could remain, but would have to pay more
[34:07] to win ad auctions and get ads shown.
[34:11] This wasn't simply a sir charge on every
[34:13] ad someone reported as suspicious. The
[34:16] stated rationale was deterrence. Higher
[34:19] costs would reduce suspect scammers
[34:21] profits and the number of people exposed
[34:23] to their ads. But the uncomfortable
[34:25] consequence is exactly what you're
[34:26] pointing out. Suspected scammers who
[34:29] paid enough could still reach users
[34:31] while Meta continued collecting their
[34:33] advertising money.
[34:34] >> More money. Actually,
[34:36] >> more money, right? Because they charged
[34:37] them more. [gasps] Look at this. They
[34:40] charged suspected scammers more is
[34:42] susported. A claim like they charged all
[34:44] flagged ads 50% extra is not established
[34:47] by evidence. Oh, okay.
[34:49] They did not establish a fixed search
[34:52] charge or percentage, but I didn't say
[34:55] that. I just said penalty fees.
[34:57] >> It's saying I didn't type it in either.
[34:59] This is what perplexity.
[35:00] >> So perplexity is just they're just like
[35:02] possible questions that you would have
[35:04] or possible.
[35:05] >> Right. And Jamie, can you see the name
[35:06] of the journalist because I think it I'd
[35:08] love to give a hat tip to the journalist
[35:10] that looked into this because it's it
[35:11] was a really incredible um
[35:13] >> Well, if you click on the first
[35:14] >> I said that that was reading from
[35:16] [clears throat] a different article
[35:17] because the Reuters one is um Jeff
[35:19] Horitz is the
[35:21] >> is it? Okay.
[35:22] >> Well, this is one from Reuters. This is
[35:23] Jeff Horitz.
[35:24] >> Yeah.
[35:25] >> So, Meta is earning a fortune on a
[35:28] deluge of fraudulent ads. So, how much
[35:31] money did they make? Meta projected 10%
[35:33] of its 2024 revenue would come from ads
[35:35] for scams and banned goods. That's
[35:37] exactly what I said.
[35:38] >> Holy [ __ ]
[35:40] So 15 billion scam ads a day.
[35:47] That's the the social media giant
[35:50] internally estimates that its platform
[35:54] shows users 15 billion scam ads a day.
[35:58] among its responses to suspected rogue
[36:00] marketers, charging them a premium for
[36:02] ads and issuing reports on scamiest
[36:06] scammers,
[36:07] >> knowing that they exist and allowing the
[36:10] platform
[36:10] >> profiting off of it. They just there's
[36:14] no regulation, there's no oversight, so
[36:17] they are regulating themselves and what
[36:19] they charge to chose to do is charge
[36:21] more.
[36:22] >> Mhm. Yeah. And and
[36:24] >> holy it's insane [ __ ] So yeah. So
[36:27] that's what I mean. The conversation has
[36:28] to stop being
[36:29] >> damn it suck.
[36:30] >> Yeah. It has to stop being why are the
[36:32] victims falling for this? It's why are
[36:34] we allowing this to happen?
[36:36] >> Well, it's that the 10%. It's like you
[36:39] you must be dealing with that must be an
[36:42] how much money are we talking about?
[36:43] What is that 10%.
[36:44] >> 16 billion. That's what's reported
[36:46] there, right Jamie? That's what it says.
[36:48] I was trying to figure out if the
[36:49] >> 16 10% of 16 billion or 16 billion%
[36:53] Facebook and Meta makes
[36:55] >> 16 billion is the profit estimated for
[36:57] that year from scams and banned goods.
[36:59] It's not just scams, scammed ads. It's
[37:02] also banned goods.
[37:03] >> Okay, let's just concentrate on scam
[37:05] because some banned goods I'm I'm in
[37:06] favor of. [laughter]
[37:08] >> I reading it, it's not clear on which is
[37:11] which. [clears throat]
[37:12] >> It's like what are we talking about? We
[37:13] say ban goods. We're talking about mad
[37:15] honey.
[37:15] >> We're okay with peptides. I'm I'm okay
[37:18] with a [laughter] lot of Well, I'm
[37:19] actually not like I I am okay with
[37:22] peptides, but the problem with getting
[37:23] peptides online is you're getting scam
[37:25] peptides and they've done these
[37:28] >> in the same labs as fentinel in China.
[37:30] >> Oh, I'm sure. Well, a lot of them are
[37:32] tainted with a bunch of stuff that's not
[37:34] supposed to be in there as well. You
[37:35] know, we found that out with Onit. you
[37:38] know, when we were making on it, um when
[37:39] we were making AlphaBrain, the neutropic
[37:42] um memory enhancing formula, we uh used
[37:46] thirdparty testing and we were finding
[37:48] stuff in the batch that was not supposed
[37:51] to be in there. And it's because they
[37:53] make all this stuff in one bin and they
[37:55] don't clean it. And so,
[37:57] >> you took it to the lab when you when it
[37:58] got here to check it and
[37:59] >> Oh, we have third party testing. Well,
[38:01] we don't have that problem anymore. this
[38:03] in the early days of on it
[38:04] >> when we first would send out our stuff
[38:07] to be formulated. So what we do is
[38:10] >> so uh Alpha Brain is uh this combination
[38:14] of different neutropics and nutrients
[38:16] that are clinically proven to help
[38:18] memory. There's a bunch of the like this
[38:19] stuff right now, Gorilla Mind, this is
[38:21] neutropics in as well. I'm I'm a big fan
[38:23] of neutropics. It's real. It does work.
[38:26] >> Yeah. And so, uh, when we would send, we
[38:29] would get it, what you do is you send
[38:31] the ingredient list, like this is what
[38:32] they're supposed to do. They're supposed
[38:34] to add this, that, that, and this, and
[38:36] this is what your formula is.
[38:37] >> And then we would get it back, and then
[38:38] we would send it to a third party to
[38:40] have it tested, and we'd find things in
[38:42] it that were not supposed to be in
[38:43] there.
[38:43] >> Yeah.
[38:44] >> It's cuz they don't give a [ __ ]
[38:45] >> They don't give a [ __ ] particularly
[38:47] there, they don't give a [ __ ] So
[38:48] there'd be like that's one of the things
[38:50] that happens to athletes like they buy
[38:52] supplements from a nutrition company and
[38:54] it finds other steroids in it,
[38:56] >> you know, like there's a lot of these
[38:58] >> I'm sure some of them do it on purpose
[39:00] because they want people to have great
[39:01] results. Like you'll take this muscle
[39:04] builder 25x
[39:06] 2000 and you're like, "Oh, this stuff's
[39:08] great. Look, I gained 10 pounds." You're
[39:10] on roids. [laughter]
[39:11] >> You're on steroids. Yeah. And you know,
[39:14] the supplement industry is a giant place
[39:16] for scams, unfortunately, because it is
[39:19] largely unchecked. It's unregulated. So,
[39:23] if you're selling vitamins and minerals
[39:25] and nutrients and no one's [ __ ]
[39:26] checking Jack [ __ ]
[39:28] >> and you can make all sorts of claims and
[39:30] you know the supplement industry online.
[39:32] Okay, here's a good example. Amazon.
[39:35] >> Let's Google this. [clears throat] Run
[39:38] this through perplexity. What is the
[39:40] percentage of
[39:45] let's just say vitamins on Amazon that
[39:48] are counterfeit
[39:50] cuz it's not small. It's a large
[39:52] percentage. So like say if you buy like
[39:55] one of the companies I really like is
[39:56] Pure Encapsulations. Really solid
[39:58] company. They sell them on Amazon,
[40:00] right? But I buy them right from the
[40:02] website. I go to the pure
[40:04] encapsulations.com because I don't trust
[40:06] them because there's counterfeit
[40:08] bottles. They look exactly like
[40:10] encapsulations. Who knows what the [ __ ]
[40:12] is in there? It might not be any vitamin
[40:14] C. It might not be any glutathione. Who
[40:17] knows? You're just buying it. And
[40:20] >> Amazon has a real problem with this
[40:21] because there's individual sellers who
[40:23] sell through Amazon who are selling
[40:25] scams. Okay, look at this.
[40:27] >> There isn't a reliable established
[40:28] percentage of all vitamins sold on
[40:30] Amazon that are counterfeit. The often
[40:32] repeated 57% fake figure comes from a
[40:35] small study of immune support
[40:37] supplements, not a representative survey
[40:39] of Amazon vitamins. Uh, okay. So, the 50
[40:43] 57% figure 2022
[40:47] study [clears throat] in JAMAMA network
[40:48] open tested 30 immune health supplements
[40:51] purchased on Amazon. 17 of the 30, about
[40:55] 50% had inaccurate ingredient labels. 13
[40:58] listed ingredients testing did not
[41:01] detect. Nine contained substances not
[41:04] listed on the labels. These categories
[41:07] over overlapped. It's a meaningful
[41:08] quality control concern. Does not
[41:10] establish 57%. So it's not 157%
[41:15] but there's a bunch that are knockoffs.
[41:17] >> Yeah.
[41:18] >> So like what is the estimate? Ask
[41:20] perplexity. What is the estimate? What
[41:22] is uh what is a conservative estimate of
[41:26] counterfeit vitamins and supplements on
[41:28] Amazon?
[41:30] >> I mean it doesn't have one.
[41:31] >> I understand but like let's say
[41:34] >> a bunch of counterfeit ship being sold
[41:36] on Amazon just in general. There's a big
[41:37] problem,
[41:38] >> right? But ask it what would be a
[41:39] reasonable estimate. Let's see if it
[41:41] just has an answer. What would be a
[41:43] reasonable estimate of the amount of
[41:47] counterfeit supplements?
[41:55] I'm going to guess 25%.
[42:00] >> I'm going to go for 30.
[42:01] >> Unknown. Uh, I would give you a five,
[42:04] 10%, or 20%. The available evidence
[42:06] doesn't provide a sound basis for
[42:08] choosing one. I wouldn't give you sorry
[42:11] actual counterfeits products falsely
[42:14] presented as a legitimate brand have
[42:16] been documented examples include
[42:18] counterfeit uh algen products
[42:20] counterfeit now supplements that's
[42:21] another good company um and allegations
[42:24] involving counterfeit provagen what is
[42:28] that is that a skin supplement I think
[42:29] it is pvage uh those cases establish
[42:32] that the problem exists but they don't
[42:34] tell us what fraction of Amazon's
[42:37] supplement sales it represents so it's
[42:39] not small. Okay, let's just whatever it
[42:42] is, if it's even if it's 10%. Let's say
[42:45] I don't know what the market share of
[42:48] Amazon supplements is, but it's got to
[42:49] be massive. It's such a convenient way
[42:52] to order things, you know, the oneclick
[42:54] way. It's so great.
[42:54] >> Oh, it's so great. It's Yeah,
[42:56] unfortunately, it is.
[42:57] >> Unfortunately,
[42:59] >> I know, but it is. You should buy it
[43:01] directly from the
[43:02] >> It should be zero your Amazon. It should
[43:05] be 0% fake. It should be if you're
[43:09] buying [ __ ] whatever, you know,
[43:11] [clears throat]
[43:12] >> electrolytes, it should be from that
[43:14] [ __ ] company. You know what it is.
[43:17] You've established a chain of command.
[43:19] >> And they have the knowhow. They have the
[43:21] tech to do it, too.
[43:22] >> This is a little bit better information.
[43:24] I think
[43:24] >> Amazon says it identified, seized, and
[43:27] disposed of more than 15 million
[43:29] counterfeit products worldwide in 2025.
[43:32] That includes products prevented from
[43:33] reaching customers or being resold
[43:36] elsewhere in the retail supply chain.
[43:38] Not 15 million confirmed counterfeit
[43:40] sales.
[43:40] >> It's just there's a bunch of [ __ ] that's
[43:42] counterfeit on there. I've had problems
[43:43] with it myself. Told them and there's
[43:45] they're like there's nothing we can do
[43:46] about it.
[43:46] >> Well, it seems like it's a problem.
[43:47] >> They give you the money back though.
[43:48] >> No, no, no. I I was selling stuff. I was
[43:50] selling shirts and someone copied it,
[43:52] sold it on an Amazon link and I was
[43:54] like, "That's my shirt. They're
[43:55] selling." And they're like, "There's
[43:56] [clears throat] nothing I can do about
[43:57] it. Good luck."
[43:58] >> Yeah.
[43:59] >> Yeah. It's it's a conflict of interest
[44:01] for them, right? Because they are making
[44:03] money from this.
[44:04] >> That's the problem. And the the lack of
[44:06] regulation
[44:06] >> and a lack of regulation. I if companies
[44:09] aren't going to regulate themselves,
[44:11] right?
[44:11] >> Imagine if that was, let's say, an
[44:13] online retailer like Target. Yeah.
[44:15] >> Imagine if you went to buy Diet Coke
[44:17] from Target and they sold you
[44:18] counterfeit Diet Coke. That'd be a huge
[44:20] scandal.
[44:21] >> That would be a huge Yeah.
[44:22] >> It should be.
[44:23] >> Yeah. Well, what they tell you is that
[44:25] there's no way of verifying. It's so
[44:27] hard. It's the same thing with scams on
[44:28] Meta. They say [clears throat] there are
[44:30] billions of these. How can we know
[44:31] what's right and what's not? There's a
[44:33] case I will not forget in terms going
[44:36] just going back to scabs real quick.
[44:37] Sextor tortion. Huge. You know what's
[44:39] sex?
[44:40] >> Sextorion. So like sex tapes or what?
[44:43] >> Yeah. It's uh usually happens with
[44:45] teenage boys a lot or teenagers.
[44:48] Somebody slides into your DM.
[44:50] >> Oh, they send you pictures
[44:52] to show photos. Yeah. And then they
[44:53] start basically extorting you for money.
[44:56] really sad case of a kid uh the son of a
[44:59] um representative, a congressman from
[45:01] South Carolina, this guy called Brandon
[45:03] Guffy. His son um Gavin
[45:07] was playing video games with his friends
[45:09] at the same time talking to this girl on
[45:11] Facebook and
[45:14] said to his friend, "Hey, I'm talking to
[45:16] this girl. I'm going to hang out up and
[45:18] I'll talk to you later or something." I
[45:20] don't know, an hour later or something.
[45:21] The dad's in the living room. It's like
[45:23] 11:00 p.m. and he hears
[45:26] loud noise, runs to the bathroom, he
[45:28] shot himself.
[45:29] >> Oh,
[45:30] >> it's the saddest story because he was
[45:32] being extraordinated. He's not the only
[45:34] one. There's dozens of American kids
[45:35] that this has happened to. He went to
[45:38] Facebook, right? They had an address
[45:40] that from the an email address from the
[45:42] person that was contacting uh Gavin.
[45:44] They Facebook took down that profile of
[45:48] this fake girl.
[45:51] A few weeks later, they just buried
[45:52] their son. They started being contacted
[45:55] by family members started being
[45:57] contacted by somebody who said they had
[46:00] those photos of Gavin and they would
[46:01] release them unless they gave them
[46:03] money.
[46:04] And he went and looked at the profile.
[46:08] It was a different profile, but the
[46:10] email address was the same. So
[46:12] basically, Facebook had took taken down
[46:16] that particular profile but had allowed
[46:18] the same email address to create other
[46:21] profiles.
[46:23] Isn't this crazy?
[46:24] >> That's [ __ ] insane.
[46:26] >> Can it's uh he he the representative
[46:30] became very involved in creating laws.
[46:33] Uh one of them is called I think take it
[46:35] down or something that just passed
[46:36] recently under the Trump administration.
[46:39] uh but it's he's basically become sort
[46:42] of the voice of of regulation for these
[46:44] platforms. And then there's another
[46:45] incredible one. I can't remember the
[46:47] name of the the legislators behind it,
[46:50] but it's called the safe safe platforms
[46:54] act. Uh where they're actually trying to
[46:57] make it easy for people to report to
[46:59] make sure that these platforms are
[47:01] taking these ads and you know fake
[47:04] profiles down and uh and that is also
[47:07] putting the accountability on them. So
[47:09] if something happens, if you lose money,
[47:10] if your kid you know dies um that there
[47:14] is that they there's some accountability
[47:17] on these platforms because if they are
[47:19] making money from it, they should also
[47:21] be held responsible, right?
[47:23] >> Yeah,
[47:23] >> I think so.
[47:24] >> Of course, 100%.
[47:26] >> 100%. But the government,
[47:28] >> if they're aware that they have
[47:30] scammers,
[47:32] >> if they're not held accountable, you're
[47:34] going to see exactly what they're doing.
[47:36] They find a way to actually profit off
[47:38] of it while also giving this illusion
[47:41] that they're doing something to protect
[47:43] the consumers.
[47:44] >> It's crazy.
[47:44] >> That's crazy.
[47:45] >> It's insane. And I couldn't believe it
[47:46] when I was
[47:46] >> I can't believe they charge more. If
[47:48] they think you're a scammer, they just
[47:50] charge you more. It's a deterrent. Yeah.
[47:52] >> Like what a convenient deterrent. While
[47:54] you're making How much? What's the
[47:56] percentage they're making?
[47:57] >> It was Oh, it didn't Oh, 10%. So 10% was
[48:00] the estimated the projection for that
[48:01] year.
[48:02] >> And their profits off scammers. You
[48:04] estimated it at
[48:05] >> 16 billion. They projected it at 16
[48:07] billion. Scammers. Scams and banned
[48:10] goods. Banned goods as well.
[48:12] >> That is [ __ ] crazy. So again, I'm a
[48:15] big fan of banned goods, [laughter]
[48:18] >> but not a fan.
[48:19] >> Some banned goods, but some what I was
[48:20] going to get to with peptides. A lot of
[48:22] people are buying peptides. Those
[48:23] peptides are fake.
[48:24] >> A lot of those peptides are
[48:25] >> fake. You don't know what you're
[48:26] injecting in yourself. You should get a
[48:27] peptide from an American compounded
[48:29] pharmacy. And that's what they're trying
[48:32] to regulate and make sure. I mean, this
[48:33] is what my friend Bighgam from Ways to
[48:35] Well, they're trying to push through
[48:37] >> through this current administration. And
[48:39] there's a lot of resistance to that, of
[48:41] course, because the pharmaceutical drug
[48:43] companies all want to own the peptides
[48:45] and sell them just like they do with
[48:46] GLP1s, which is also a
[48:48] >> peptide. Yeah,
[48:50] >> it's uh but the banned goods thing that
[48:53] bothers me, but not as much that, you
[48:55] know, that's people seeking something
[48:57] that they can't get. That doesn't bother
[48:59] me as much. What bothers me is the the
[49:01] scams and the fact that Meta is
[49:03] profiting off these scams knowingly. And
[49:06] it's just such an enormous amount of
[49:08] money that they can kind of like, well,
[49:11] what are you going to do? We'll we're
[49:13] going to make a deterrent. Great. Good.
[49:15] Good idea. Good idea. Deterrent even
[49:17] makes us more money.
[49:18] >> Internal discussions about how much
[49:21] should we push this because how much is
[49:23] this going to affect our our bottom
[49:25] line? It's
[49:26] >> God, that's so dark.
[49:27] >> It's dark. you. They have so much money.
[49:31] They have so much [ __ ] money.
[49:33] >> Yeah.
[49:34] >> For them to be that [ __ ] greedy that
[49:37] they're willing to keep the scams on.
[49:39] Well, you got to think there has to be
[49:40] some way they could put in some
[49:42] comprehensive scanning of all of their
[49:46] and make sure that all of these things
[49:47] are legitimate. Investigate each
[49:49] individual ad before it gets released.
[49:52] >> Of course, they can. They have
[49:53] technology to create what's their new AI
[49:55] agent that they've just created a
[49:57] companion AI agent that people can have.
[49:59] I don't know what it's called, but they
[50:01] of course they they have the technology
[50:02] in place,
[50:03] >> especially if they were responsible for
[50:05] those losses. If they could get sued for
[50:07] those how fast they will act on it,
[50:09] >> right? Imagine if instead of the $16
[50:11] billion profit every year, it cost them
[50:14] double the 16 billion because they have
[50:16] scams on.
[50:18] >> Yeah.
[50:18] >> Yeah.
[50:18] >> I know. Exactly. But I think that's part
[50:21] of the reason why we're not talking
[50:23] about this.
[50:25] >> Here we go.
[50:26] >> What was this? Jamie Reuters central
[50:28] finding Meta developed a playbook to
[50:30] delay mandatory advertiser identity
[50:33] checks while making scam ads harder for
[50:36] regulators to find in its public ad
[50:38] library. The investigation draws on
[50:41] internal documents and describes both
[50:43] genuine scam removal and efforts to
[50:46] manage the appearance of the problem.
[50:49] not simply solve it.
[50:51] >> Right?
[50:54] >> So Leslie, the woman who was talking to
[50:56] John Bonjovi, you know what she does
[50:58] every day now? She goes on Facebook
[51:01] [snorts]
[51:02] and she tries to tell people that are
[51:04] liking these fake celebrity profiles
[51:06] that are commenting on them. Be careful.
[51:08] This is a scam. She reports it. She says
[51:11] she always says hello so she can keep a
[51:13] record of who she's communicating
[51:14] because there's dozens or hundreds of
[51:16] these out there. and she she reports
[51:18] them. She goes back and she says that
[51:20] the vast majority of them, she goes and
[51:22] checks weeks later and they're still
[51:24] there. And she keeps on reporting them.
[51:26] I think it was something like a 100,000
[51:28] reports every week by Americans on on
[51:31] Meta and they only take down a few.
[51:34] >> This episode is brought to you by NOCO.
[51:36] You're miles from home, you turn the
[51:38] key, nothing. Dead battery. Normally
[51:40] that means finding another car, someone
[51:42] willing to give you a jump, and dealing
[51:44] with old jumper cables. But what if you
[51:46] didn't need any of that? Keep a Noco
[51:49] portable jump starter in your glove box
[51:52] and jump start your car yourself. No
[51:54] cables, no second vehicle, no waiting
[51:57] for help. It also works as a power bank
[52:00] and has a built-in LED flashlight. No co
[52:03] the end of jumper cables. Use code Rogan
[52:07] 10 for 10% off select jump starters at
[52:10] n.co.
[52:12] It's it's Yeah, it's infuriating. It's
[52:15] really infuriating.
[52:16] >> Do you remember the early days of AOL?
[52:19] >> Yes. Okay. The early days of AOL, my
[52:23] friend Barry Crims, Barry Crims was uh a
[52:27] great comic from Boston who was uh like
[52:31] very socially conscious, very
[52:33] politically active, uh just a genius
[52:35] guy. And he was uh sexually assaulted
[52:40] when he was young. and um found uh a
[52:45] whole network of people that were on AOL
[52:49] that were trading uh pedophile
[52:52] pornography and they were trading child
[52:55] pornography and grooming people online
[52:59] and he exposed it. What there was a part
[53:02] of his documentary, right, Jamie? He's
[53:05] he's gone now. He he died a few years
[53:07] back unfortunately. Um but he I think he
[53:12] testified before Congress about this
[53:15] >> and you know dedicated himself to saying
[53:17] hey you guys should know about this I
[53:21] know about this like how is this allowed
[53:23] to be on your platform so this was the
[53:26] '9s when you know AOL you've got mail
[53:30] all that stuff was just happening and um
[53:33] people weren't really aware of the
[53:35] internet it was it was just starting to
[53:37] emerge
[53:38] But these [ __ ] pedophiles figured it
[53:40] out and they were using it. They were
[53:42] using it to,
[53:45] >> you know, to groom kids. And And
[53:47] >> what did they do? What did AOL do?
[53:49] Nothing.
[53:50] >> They did something. They eventually had
[53:52] to do something. I don't know exactly
[53:54] what they did, but this was one of the
[53:56] first examples of that like where these
[53:58] companies should have been aware of
[54:00] this. He was aware of this. Other people
[54:01] were aware of this. It was not it was a
[54:03] willful ignorance. They were just
[54:05] ignoring it. I do think part of the
[54:07] problem is if we were talking about
[54:08] pedophilia, I think they would act
[54:10] faster. It is because it is scams and
[54:12] again it is this idea of the shame
[54:14] around it and this belief that everybody
[54:16] that falls for a scam is foolish and
[54:17] naive that the onus is put on the
[54:20] victims.
[54:21] >> I understand but I mean even AOL I mean
[54:23] they had to be dragged to get rid of
[54:25] this stuff. It wasn't it wasn't simple
[54:27] as like they let them know, oh my god,
[54:29] we're on this right now. We'll block
[54:31] >> we're going to block this because this
[54:32] is serious. They resist it
[54:34] >> and it's like no one ever wants to admit
[54:35] that they've done something that puts
[54:38] all their users in danger. And this this
[54:41] thing is crazy. The fact that they're
[54:43] profiting.
[54:44] >> Yeah, it's crazy.
[54:44] >> See, you say 16 billion a year.
[54:47] >> And why isn't why don't we know this?
[54:48] Why aren't we talking more about this?
[54:49] I've been reporting on scams for years.
[54:51] I had no idea that this was happening
[54:52] until I read this.
[54:53] >> That's so much money investigation. It's
[54:55] crazy.
[54:56] >> And it's coming from the people that use
[54:57] your platform.
[54:58] >> Yeah. The [clears throat] overall
[54:59] article is this. It's just like this big
[55:01] meta ad or sorry artic picture secrets
[55:05] of success and there's multiple articles
[55:07] they released over time looks like at
[55:09] least six.
[55:10] >> One of them is showing that a big chunk
[55:12] of that money is coming from China.
[55:14] >> Of course,
[55:16] >> what a shocker.
[55:17] >> Yeah.
[55:19] Meta reve uh Reuters investigation
[55:21] reveals the owner of Facebook,
[55:23] Instagram, and WhatsApp decided to
[55:26] accept high levels of fraudulent
[55:28] advertisements from China. Internal
[55:30] company documents show Meta wanted to
[55:32] minimize revenue impact in quotes caused
[55:36] by cracking down on the scams. Jesus,
[55:39] that's
[55:39] >> one note I want to tell you too.
[55:41] [snorts] It said the summary I got from
[55:44] Perplexity said in here that there is
[55:46] evidence of
[55:48] notes being prepared for Zuckerberg, but
[55:51] they don't have any [snorts] evidence
[55:53] necessarily that he had personal
[55:55] knowledge of what was on those notes or
[55:56] the depth of what's going on.
[55:59] >> He says, "Being notes prepared for Mark
[56:01] Zuckle Zuckerberg about the crossber
[56:03] displacement of scams, but could not
[56:05] establish whether he saw them or
[56:08] received the briefing. The article
[56:10] therefore does not establish his
[56:12] personal knowledge of those notes." How
[56:14] convenient.
[56:15] >> I know. Also, [clears throat] I'm sorry
[56:16] that's not
[56:17] >> You You're the CEO.
[56:18] >> You're the CEO. I'm sorry.
[56:19] >> If you're the CEO of Scamville.
[56:21] >> Yeah, I know. Have you ever had him on?
[56:22] >> Yeah, a couple times.
[56:23] >> You have? Yeah.
[56:24] >> This would be good good for you to bring
[56:25] him back.
[56:26] >> I don't know if you come back on
[56:27] [laughter] after this episode.
[56:29] >> [ __ ]
[56:31] >> Seems a bit problematic. Yeah. I uh
[56:33] that's very unfortunate. I I hate
[56:35] hearing that. And I you know, I I like
[56:38] him as a person. I've communicated with
[56:40] him. Obviously, I don't know everything
[56:42] about him. And when people talk to me,
[56:43] they give the best version of themselves
[56:46] to me. But uh I
[56:48] >> I also unfortunately I don't think it's
[56:49] just him, right? It's it's just when
[56:51] people make that amount of money and
[56:53] there's a board that you have to answer
[56:54] for and there's
[56:57] stake and there's shareholders.
[56:59] >> Yeah. You you have to justify the $16
[57:01] billion loss.
[57:03] >> Yeah. And there's unfortunately weak
[57:05] regulations and governments that don't
[57:07] want to act. This is what happens. And
[57:09] then this
[57:10] >> and this is why we need good journalism
[57:11] and good investigative journalism to
[57:13] find the stuff the truth that people
[57:15] have a problem with.
[57:16] >> Yeah. You have to hold them to the fire
[57:17] because they have obligations to their
[57:19] shareholders and they'll do really
[57:20] shitty things in order to keep making
[57:23] sure that the profits keep rolling in
[57:24] because they have to justify their
[57:26] position and they're trying to make
[57:27] their way up the corporate ladder. Yeah,
[57:29] >> that's what's weird about the
[57:30] corporations is that there's this
[57:32] diffusion of responsibility thing that
[57:34] happens when you're a part of it but you
[57:37] are not it. Okay. I just work there.
[57:40] This is my job. I don't like my job.
[57:42] It's like when you're a defense attorney
[57:43] that's getting off someone that you know
[57:45] is a murderer. Like, I know he murdered
[57:47] him, but I'm doing my job. And my job is
[57:49] to provide reasonable doubt and get this
[57:51] guy acquitted. And if you do it, you
[57:53] then you go to the steakhouse and you
[57:54] clink glasses. We did it. Boy, is he a
[57:56] piece of [ __ ] But we did it. You know,
[57:59] I don't know if you ever uh heard the
[58:01] there's a an audio recording of Hillary
[58:03] Clinton talking about this guy that she
[58:06] had to help get off that was I think he
[58:08] was a child molester,
[58:10] >> but she she was they were talking about
[58:13] how she thought he did it.
[58:15] >> See if you can find what that is
[58:17] >> because I don't want to get sued,
[58:19] >> but I'm 99% sure that that's exactly
[58:23] what this was. Um, that is an very
[58:26] unfortunate part of being a defense
[58:27] attorney, right? You you're you're going
[58:29] to have to occasionally get people off
[58:32] that you suspect or you might know are
[58:35] guilty. And that is a real dark part of
[58:38] being involved in an immense
[58:40] corporation. You're going to do some
[58:42] things that you might think are
[58:43] unethical or immoral. And you have an
[58:46] obligation to to your shareholders. And
[58:49] your job, if you want to keep your job,
[58:51] your job is to do this. No evidence of
[58:53] horrific Clinton video.
[58:55] >> Did a video of Hillary Clinton and whom?
[58:57] No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. That's
[58:59] that's not it. That's not it. It's when
[59:02] uh she was a lawyer.
[59:05] >> Um
[59:06] >> the best website.
[59:07] >> Is there evidence of her laughing about
[59:10] a guilty man being acquitted?
[59:12] >> Suspect that she believed was
[59:14] >> Hillary Clinton stands by her defense of
[59:15] a 1975 child rape suspect that she
[59:18] believed was indeed guilty. heard
[59:20] laughing. She said, "The polygraph test
[59:23] he managed to pass forever destroyed my
[59:25] faith in polygraphs
[59:28] because that's what it was."
[59:30] So, she helped this guy. Look that, and
[59:34] this is not an attack on her. This is
[59:35] just like the reality of being a defense
[59:37] attorney.
[59:39] >> What is it? It says, "When I was a
[59:41] 27-year-old attorney doing legal aid
[59:43] work at the University of Arkansas,
[59:44] where I taught at Fyville, Arkansas, I
[59:46] was appointed by the local judge to
[59:48] represent a criminal defendant accused
[59:49] of rape, uh, I asked to be relieved of
[59:52] that responsibility, but I was not. And
[59:54] I had a professional duty to represent
[59:57] my client to the best of my ability,
[59:58] which I did." Exactly what we're talking
[60:00] about. It's exactly that kind of thing
[60:02] like this.
[60:02] >> Yeah. But it's I think a little
[60:03] different in terms of the lawyers
[60:05] because if you believe in the
[60:07] Constitution, you believe everybody has
[60:08] a right to a lawyer, right? get into
[60:10] free and fair trial. If you're working
[60:13] at Meta, that is you're there and
[60:15] you're, you know, you're there because
[60:18] you're making money or, you know,
[60:20] there's been plenty of people that have
[60:22] left Meta, as you know.
[60:23] >> I understand, but you could resign. You
[60:25] could resign as But you could resign as
[60:27] an attorney if you think you're
[60:28] representing a child.
[60:29] >> Well, she tried. It looks like
[60:31] >> Well, there's no one holding a gun to
[60:33] her head and keeping her from quitting.
[60:34] She has to be removed from the case.
[60:36] They said no. And so she did her job.
[60:38] Again, I'm just saying that this is a
[60:41] part of being a defense attorney, but
[60:43] that these situations come up where your
[60:45] morals and your ethics have to be
[60:47] abandoned in order to pursue your
[60:49] career.
[60:50] >> True. But I do think that there's a
[60:52] profit part of meta that doesn't apply
[60:54] to when you're a lawyer, right? When
[60:56] >> Yeah. Oh, no. I I agree with you. No,
[60:57] listen. I'm I mean, I'm just saying that
[60:59] this kind of thing
[61:01] >> is it's a dark part of the world that we
[61:03] live in. And I I I find it incredibly
[61:07] disgusting and scary when you It's not a
[61:09] starving corporation trying to stay
[61:11] above water. Like boy, we've been trying
[61:13] to help American people and just give
[61:16] them a good product and it's just we're
[61:18] having a hard time here.
[61:19] >> We're really barely feeding f we have
[61:22] all these mouths to feed and all these
[61:24] No, exactly.
[61:25] >> 16 billion in [ __ ] scams every year.
[61:27] Okay. What is Meta's overall profit? I
[61:29] was going to bring up I've I've seen the
[61:31] stories this year about how they've now
[61:32] maybe are about to overtake Google as
[61:35] the top ad platform and it says that
[61:37] they have gotten about 243.5
[61:42] billion dollars this year.
[61:44] >> Wow.
[61:44] >> Wow.
[61:45] >> In ad revenue. So even that 16 billion
[61:47] seems
[61:48] >> it's a couple of years ago or so.
[61:50] >> Well, it is a pittance if you really
[61:52] think about it. If they just eliminated
[61:53] that 16 billion,
[61:55] >> they would still make almost as much as
[61:57] Google's making. Like guys,
[61:59] >> yeah,
[62:00] >> tried to ask Perplexity to compare what
[62:02] there's not a lot of information on this
[62:03] though, unfortunately. But, uh,
[62:05] Perplexity says that Google has removed
[62:07] probably in 2025 602 scam related ads
[62:11] compared to the 15
[62:12] >> 62 million
[62:13] >> million. Sorry. Yeah. Compared to 159
[62:15] million that Meta
[62:16] >> Meta has. So, Meta is a little slacky.
[62:18] >> Yeah.
[62:19] >> Little Google's a little bit better.
[62:21] >> In the internal documents, they actually
[62:22] talk about this. They actually say
[62:24] themselves that they realize Google is
[62:26] doing a better job than they are. But
[62:27] again, it might hurt their
[62:29] >> Oh,
[62:31] dirty people. You dirty people.
[62:34] >> I know.
[62:34] >> Gh.
[62:35] >> I know. And again, just
[62:37] >> they should be held responsible.
[62:38] >> They should be held responsible. There
[62:39] should be legislation out there that
[62:41] does something to make sure that they
[62:44] are held responsible because they're not
[62:46] going to hold themselves responsible.
[62:47] That's for sure. Isn't there uh current
[62:49] lawsuits uh about them having knowledge
[62:54] of harm to children and the addiction of
[62:58] social media that like there's like
[63:00] legitimate lawsuit lawsuits that are
[63:02] about that. Isn't it interesting that
[63:05] that is being pursued that you are there
[63:08] there are lawsuits now saying look you
[63:11] guys were aware that your ads and your
[63:13] algorithm are very addictive and they
[63:15] get people and that it causes harm to
[63:17] them
[63:17] >> which is true
[63:18] >> very true
[63:19] >> but that is how is that being pursued
[63:22] >> and this not
[63:23] >> this not yeah
[63:24] >> this seems even more clear-cut because
[63:27] the thing about like having harm yeah it
[63:30] does harm people but does it harm
[63:32] everyone One, does it harm people that
[63:34] whose parents regulate the children's
[63:36] aspect of social uh access to social
[63:38] media? Is there a way to educate kids to
[63:42] to explain to them, you know, like
[63:44] listen, this can be addictive, like you
[63:46] should only use it a few minutes a day.
[63:49] You should there's ways and and to give
[63:51] them education because I think there's a
[63:53] benefit to social media as well. And I
[63:56] think one of the benefits is access to
[63:58] information, access to friends, and they
[64:01] communicate with each other back and
[64:02] forth. Like my kids use Snapchat all the
[64:04] time. They barely use text messaging.
[64:07] They all snap each other. They think
[64:08] it's fun.
[64:09] >> Um, and then there's like sharing each
[64:11] other's stories, liking each other's
[64:13] stories. It's like something nice about
[64:14] that, right? So, it's not entirely
[64:16] negative. The [ __ ] scams are entirely
[64:19] negative.
[64:20] >> Entirely negative.
[64:20] >> There's not one thing. Well, we're
[64:22] providing these people with
[64:23] companionship. Exactly. They're sad and
[64:25] lonely and at least they get a little
[64:26] dopamine burst. There's not a thing you
[64:29] can say that could be positive about
[64:32] having online scams.
[64:33] >> And they're not just affecting old
[64:34] people, they're also affecting young
[64:36] teenagers who are committing suicide.
[64:38] >> Until someone does something about it,
[64:41] they're just going to continue to make
[64:42] that money.
[64:43] >> Yeah, of course. But that's always how
[64:45] it is. So, we really need somebody to
[64:47] act.
[64:48] >> Uggh.
[64:49] >> Yeah. Uggh. Um [clears throat] Jamie,
[64:51] look at the safe. Uh what is it? Safe
[64:54] Platforms Act.
[64:55] >> Meanwhile, they shadowban people if
[64:57] you're conservative.
[64:59] >> It's hilarious.
[65:00] >> Yeah.
[65:01] >> Regulating that back day. They don't do
[65:02] that anymore, right?
[65:03] >> Allegedly.
[65:06] Allegedly. They they do some shady
[65:08] things. It's weird.
[65:10] >> Here.
[65:11] >> Also, they don't eliminate bots. They're
[65:14] overrun with bots.
[65:16] >> What does it say?
[65:17] >> Yeah.
[65:18] >> Go to the top, please.
[65:19] >> Um,
[65:20] >> what's the names of the legislators?
[65:21] Fauci and Muin, I think it's pronounced.
[65:24] Yeah. Uh, introduce bipartisan safe
[65:26] platforms act to protect consumers from
[65:28] online scams.
[65:29] >> Yeah.
[65:30] >> I wonder what they're proposing and how
[65:31] this would be how this would be
[65:33] implemented.
[65:34] >> I actually Yeah, you can look. I I had
[65:36] uh
[65:37] >> Valerie P. Foy
[65:39] F. I don't know how to pronounce her
[65:40] name. Fauci Fushi.
[65:42] >> Fou
[65:44] >> representing North Carolina's fourth
[65:46] district.
[65:47] >> Yeah, good for her. Safe Platforms Act
[65:50] endorsed by Consumer Federation of
[65:51] America, Hispanic Federation, Oregon
[65:54] Consumer Justice, and Public Citizen. It
[65:57] says as uh concerns grow regarding the
[66:00] future dangers. Go back up, please.
[66:02] >> This is of unregulated AI. It's
[66:05] >> what?
[66:05] >> This is a quote at the bottom of the
[66:07] describe this describes what the act
[66:10] does and that's a quote from someone
[66:12] describing what the act would do.
[66:13] >> Right. I was just reading their their
[66:15] statement. As uh concerns grow regarding
[66:18] future dangers of unregulated AI, it's
[66:21] also important to highlight the harms it
[66:23] is uh enabling right now, said Emily
[66:26] Peterson Kassen, director of competition
[66:28] and marketing fairness at the Consumer
[66:30] Federation of America. Fraudulent
[66:32] content and scams supercharged by AI are
[66:35] taking over social media platforms and
[66:37] costing us billions.
[66:38] >> Yeah.
[66:39] >> Yeah. [sighs and gasps]
[66:40] I think when I had a little thing here
[66:42] that I wrote down. Uh it would require
[66:44] platforms to verify advertisers before
[66:46] taking their money. Makes total sense.
[66:48] Make it easier to report scams.
[66:50] Apparently, it's not that easy to report
[66:51] them. And take steps to stop fraudulent
[66:53] accounts from coming back under new
[66:54] names, which happens a lot. It would
[66:57] also give victims a way to sue when a
[66:59] platform violates the law and they're
[67:01] harmed.
[67:02] >> Yeah.
[67:03] >> I mean, all of this, I think, makes
[67:04] sense.
[67:04] >> Allows them to come back, but allows
[67:06] them to come back with the same email.
[67:08] Like, they're not even trying. That is
[67:09] That was insane. That was an insane.
[67:10] >> It's wild.
[67:11] >> They're not even trying.
[67:12] >> It is wild. Yeah, it's crazy.
[67:14] >> Like you you could easily put a filter
[67:16] up and block that email like that. That
[67:18] would take three seconds.
[67:19] >> I know. And these celebrity scam and
[67:21] it's not just ads. It's like these
[67:23] celebrity impersonators too, which I
[67:26] showed in Super Scam Me. I created Mary
[67:29] Zel. I put myself on dating websites and
[67:32] on on Facebook and Instagram and Tik Tok
[67:34] and all of those platforms. And I
[67:36] started commenting on some of these
[67:38] celebrity profiles, fake, knowing they
[67:40] were fake, but I just wanted to see what
[67:42] happened. And I went to the bathroom and
[67:45] I came down and as soon as I opened my
[67:47] phone, I had already dozens of these
[67:50] messages from at one point I actually
[67:52] continued talking to them. So at one
[67:53] point I was talking to three Reeves, two
[67:56] Brad Pitts, several [laughter] several
[67:58] George Clooneyies. Um, and I had a sort
[68:02] of a relationship with the one George
[68:03] Clooney who was the more believable of
[68:06] the bunch and who sent me a video that I
[68:08] showed in in Super Scam Me where yes,
[68:11] it's not perfect but if you really want
[68:14] to believe it in his case I mean he was
[68:16] saying good morning Mary Zel or
[68:18] >> also if you are older and you have bad
[68:21] vision Yeah.
[68:22] >> and you're not very sophisticated in the
[68:24] ways of the internet.
[68:25] >> Exactly. You don't know what AI means.
[68:28] You don't know like a robotic.
[68:29] >> Yeah, it was it was plausible. And
[68:32] Leslie's videos from John Bonjovi looked
[68:34] very real. I saw them. They did look
[68:36] real. And that was a year ago. I mean,
[68:38] now you don't even need to,
[68:41] >> you know, you can pretend you're anyone.
[68:43] You can do anything on AI. It's crazy.
[68:45] >> It's incredible. I mean, they they can
[68:47] make a I mean, there's a bunch of
[68:48] accounts that are completely fake people
[68:51] that have millions of followers.
[68:52] >> Yeah. It it's changed so much in the
[68:54] last year. So when I started this crazy
[68:56] experiment, I eventually started dating
[68:58] my four-star general in Syria, deployed
[69:01] to Syria.
[69:02] >> I love when you tried to get him to
[69:04] speak Italian cuz he said good, right?
[69:06] >> He like, "Your accent, I thought you'd
[69:08] have an American accent." It's like,
[69:09] "No, I grew up in Italy."
[69:11] >> And you're like, and then you start
[69:12] rattling off Italian to him and he's
[69:14] like, "I don't speak Italian."
[69:16] [laughter]
[69:16] >> A lot of italiano. He's like, "What? No,
[69:19] >> it doesn't sound Italian at all." Like,
[69:21] "Hey buddy, you sound like you're living
[69:23] in Africa." It was funny, right? But he
[69:25] was using the photos of a real guy, a
[69:28] former Navy Seal who actually we
[69:30] contacted. We got in touch with him and
[69:32] he was shocked to find out that his
[69:34] photos were being used to scam
[69:36] Americans. But uh
[69:37] >> So was it just his account? They just
[69:39] taken all his photos.
[69:39] >> Taken all his photos. But he would they
[69:41] were he would also use I showed it's
[69:43] actually kind of funny. I'd be sitting
[69:45] next to my husband at night and I'd be
[69:47] receiving messages from my boyfriend
[69:49] [laughter]
[69:50] >> and he'd be sending me photos sometimes
[69:52] of him shirtless
[69:54] >> and I would I would I mean and and start
[69:56] talking about the things he would do
[69:58] with me once he came to the US to live
[70:00] with me.
[70:01] >> I would literally blush and be like,
[70:03] "I'm so sorry this is happening, Darren.
[70:05] [laughter]
[70:06] >> Here's the photo. I a full transparency.
[70:09] I want you to see this is happening."
[70:11] But he was using Yeah. the fake photos
[70:13] from an actual guy. Um, and then when I
[70:16] reached out to the real guy, it was a
[70:18] guy called Sam Havlock, and I said,
[70:20] "Hey, I've been having essentially what
[70:22] I thought was a several month
[70:24] relationship with you, but it turns out
[70:26] it [laughter] wasn't you." And he was
[70:28] shocked. He didn't know. But I showed
[70:29] him some of the photos and he said,
[70:30] "Well, this is actually they used AI for
[70:32] some of these photos because he's full
[70:34] of tattoos." And there was a shirtless
[70:36] photo without tattoos and it was lots of
[70:37] him blowing me kisses. And then the
[70:39] moment that the flowers showed up at the
[70:41] at the at the office, which
[70:44] >> they also do, and I was shocked. I
[70:46] wasn't I don't know if I was expecting
[70:47] the flowers to show up. So,
[70:48] >> wow.
[70:49] >> That's when they sort of break the
[70:50] barrier of, you know, fake to reality
[70:52] where you think, "Oh, maybe this is
[70:53] really real. He's sending me very
[70:55] expensive red roses,
[70:57] >> right?"
[70:57] >> That was a fun moment.
[70:59] >> Oh god.
[71:00] >> And then, do you know what happened
[71:01] after that? There's a funny story, too.
[71:03] We are in the moment, right? The whole
[71:05] goal of the documentary is that I'm
[71:07] going to catch this guy, right? I want a
[71:08] confrontation with a guy that's my
[71:11] scammer. And we I spent months talking
[71:14] to this guy and there's a point where
[71:16] eventually there's a crisis and he's
[71:18] asking me for money. Right? In his case,
[71:20] his base um his military base in Syria
[71:24] was attacked. He saw people being
[71:26] injured. He thought he was going to be a
[71:28] target because again he's a four-star
[71:29] general and and he needs my help and he
[71:32] needs money to pay for his trip back to
[71:35] the US because they're not regular
[71:37] commercial flights. He needs like
[71:38] $17,000 I think it was. And and I we
[71:43] were trying to figure out, okay, now we
[71:44] need to figure out how to find this guy
[71:47] and confront him. I want to know his
[71:48] identity. I know want to know exactly
[71:50] where he is. And there's we have all
[71:53] these plans and it's sort of our plans
[71:55] are set in motion and it's all going to
[71:57] happen within that weekend. They're
[71:59] going to give us a location and we're
[72:02] going to travel there and it's all
[72:03] happening. And then I get an
[72:05] appendecttomy. I get an appendicitis, an
[72:08] emergency appendicitis. And I get taken
[72:11] to the hospital and Mark Turner is
[72:13] losing it. He's like, "What is
[72:14] happening? you were supposed to have
[72:16] sent me this money and I'm trying to
[72:18] keep him in the relationship because I
[72:20] need to string him along, right? So, I'm
[72:22] constantly saying, "Hey, I'm actually at
[72:24] the hospital pretending that Mary Zel is
[72:26] at the hospital and this is happening
[72:28] and telling him that I have appendicitis
[72:31] and then he's like, okay, send me a
[72:33] photo." So, I had to get my husband to
[72:34] run back home, get me the wig, get me
[72:36] the fake nose and the glasses, and send
[72:38] him lots of photos [laughter] of fake
[72:40] Mary from the hospital with a catheter
[72:43] in my arm and pretending like this is
[72:45] real.
[72:46] >> You can just do it with AI. [gasps]
[72:48] >> No, again, this was like a year ago, and
[72:50] I I don't
[72:51] >> I don't think it was as advanced, but it
[72:53] was like the fastest and easiest way to
[72:55] keep stringing this guy along because I
[72:57] was tricking him as well, right? Using
[72:58] his his tactics to string him along. And
[73:01] then it was after a while got out of the
[73:04] hospital and he finally gave me that
[73:06] address that led me to Houston to that
[73:08] woman. That was an insane part of the
[73:09] story. Yeah.
[73:10] >> Where I arrive in Houston
[73:12] >> and the poor woman is also being
[73:13] scammed.
[73:14] >> Not only scammed, but she's now a drug
[73:15] meal. She's been having a relationship
[73:17] with a man that she thinks is in Russia
[73:20] working in an oil rig for three years.
[73:22] She thinks she's in a relationship with
[73:23] this man. And she has given given him
[73:26] all her money. She's about to lose her
[73:28] car. She has nothing else. and he
[73:30] decides he's not going to give up on
[73:32] her. He's going to use her as a drug
[73:34] meal. So, she starts receiving, and she
[73:36] told us this, it was crazy, tens of
[73:39] thousands of dollars in checks and money
[73:41] boxes, boxes of cash that she then
[73:44] launderers through her or puts the
[73:46] money, deposits into her account,
[73:48] transfers to crypto.
[73:49] >> She never thought about just stealing
[73:51] the money because he stole all the money
[73:52] from her. So, I asked her that uh as
[73:55] we're I'm interviewing her, she receives
[73:57] a message from him and because he's
[74:00] supposed to have received the money,
[74:01] too. So, my scammer is not the same as
[74:04] hers, but they work together. So, he
[74:07] knows that she the this victim is
[74:09] supposed to have received $17,000. So,
[74:11] we're being interviewed. I'm
[74:12] interviewing her. She receives a
[74:13] message. She looks at it and he's like,
[74:14] "Wow, it's him." And he's asking me if I
[74:16] have the money. And I said, "Can I read
[74:18] the email?" And there and he says, "I
[74:21] hope you received it. did $17,000. Make
[74:23] sure you count it. And by the way, you
[74:26] can keep I think it was like 50 for
[74:28] yourself for gas, but make sure you
[74:31] transfer the rest to crypto. She was
[74:33] very mad. She was like 50. But she says
[74:36] this is this is what he's been doing to
[74:38] her. And she kept this relationship. And
[74:39] I asked her, didn't you suspect that he
[74:41] might be a scammer? He said, look,
[74:43] maybe. But he always had an excuse. And
[74:44] he told me he was doing business in the
[74:46] US and all this money was coming from
[74:48] people from Americans. So kind of made
[74:50] me believe it.
[74:51] Wow. For three years.
[74:54] >> For three years. Yeah.
[74:55] >> And do you think that she just kept it
[74:57] going because it was like one of the
[74:59] only social interactions that she had?
[75:01] >> 100%. 100%. Her husband had passed away
[75:04] from cancer. He had been the love of her
[75:06] life. Her kids were away. Um, and I
[75:09] think she was lonely. I mean, it was it
[75:12] was very sad. And a lot of these cases
[75:14] are very sad.
[75:15] >> I spoke to another guy. H this was a sad
[75:17] one. I spoke to a guy, didn't make it to
[75:18] the film, but a guy in Texas who was
[75:20] sort of intubated. I think he was like
[75:23] breathing from a mask, a oxygen mask,
[75:25] very he said he was 70, but he looked
[75:28] like he was 90. and he believed he was
[75:31] in a relationship with Emma Watson from
[75:33] um from uh Harry Potter
[75:38] and and and
[75:40] I and in his case, yeah, he said, "Look,
[75:45] she might not be real, but at least it's
[75:46] somebody who I can talk to every day,
[75:48] and if I have to send her a couple of,
[75:50] you know, dollars once in a while or $10
[75:52] here and there, at least it's
[75:54] companionship."
[75:55] >> Wow.
[75:56] >> I know. It's It's sad. There's a lot of
[75:58] these sad stories. Um, and yeah, and I I
[76:01] think a lot of it is the the platforms
[76:04] allowing it, profiting from it, the
[76:05] banks as well, these dating websites as
[76:08] well. Um, but and our government not
[76:10] doing a lot enough. But I do think we
[76:12] have to sort of really try to figure out
[76:14] how to address the loneliness epidemic
[76:16] because a lot of these romance scams
[76:18] start because of that.
[76:19] >> It's it's sad. [snorts]
[76:22] >> Yeah.
[76:23] >> But what how do you address the
[76:25] loneliness scam though? That that seems
[76:27] like you have to rewire society.
[76:30] >> I think so too. Yeah. I I mean I don't
[76:32] know about you but I'm live with my
[76:34] husband, my father and my son. And
[76:36] unfortunately there's a lot of nights in
[76:38] which each of us in is in their
[76:40] different rooms watching TV. I grew up
[76:43] in a house with one TV and we all had to
[76:45] watch the same thing if we wanted to
[76:46] watch TV, right?
[76:47] >> Yeah.
[76:48] >> You know, dinners were had at the table
[76:50] in family every night. I still do that,
[76:52] but there's a lot of families just can't
[76:54] and don't don't have time for that.
[76:56] >> Yeah.
[76:56] >> Um I just Yeah, there's not a lot. My
[76:59] grand I remember my grandmother like
[77:01] played cards with her friends several
[77:02] times a week and that was a way that all
[77:04] these older ladies got together.
[77:06] >> Yeah.
[77:06] >> I don't see that happening. And there's
[77:08] really no space for community. It's it's
[77:10] sad. And I think partly it's us on us to
[77:13] sort of reach out to our elderly and
[77:15] make sure they're okay. But I think
[77:17] partly is also the government should be
[77:18] doing more to address this. Well, it's
[77:20] not even just elderly. It's it's young
[77:22] people.
[77:22] >> It's not just elderly. Uh Jamie was
[77:25] talking about this before. Like, how
[77:26] many young men are virgins
[77:30] >> and have no relationships at all and
[77:33] have no contact with women at all and
[77:34] they're just watching porn and playing
[77:37] video games and they're online all day
[77:38] and they have no interaction with real
[77:40] people.
[77:41] >> Yeah, I know. It's It's bad for young
[77:43] from young men right now. It's tough.
[77:45] Well, it's also it's they don't know
[77:48] what the options are. Like what are they
[77:49] gonna do? They gonna go out,
[77:51] >> you know, like what are they gonna do?
[77:52] They don't know what to do. And and
[77:54] they've been sort of,
[77:57] you know, raised like ve, you know,
[77:59] they're just like locked in these boxes
[78:01] at their homes and just being fed online
[78:04] information and then they just they they
[78:07] they're
[78:08] not aren't suited for the real world.
[78:10] >> No. They don't know how to interact with
[78:11] people. Yeah.
[78:13] >> Yeah. Well, young kids today have a very
[78:15] difficult time looking people in the eye
[78:16] and having communication with them.
[78:18] >> It's so true.
[78:19] >> They're so used to doing everything
[78:20] online through text messages and
[78:22] Snapchat and all that jazz.
[78:24] >> Yeah, it's so true. I see it with my I
[78:26] mean, a lot of my son's friends are
[78:27] awesome, but there are some who come in
[78:29] and
[78:30] act acting awkward. [laughter] I'm just
[78:33] I'm just an adult.
[78:36] >> So weird.
[78:37] >> Yeah,
[78:37] >> it's so weird. It's like what are we
[78:39] doing? What are we making? Like what
[78:42] kind of a future do these people have?
[78:44] Are they ever going to become normal? Or
[78:46] is that just going to be the new norm in
[78:48] 50 years from now when you're looking at
[78:50] 70-y old people? Is it going to be
[78:51] 70-year-old people that are all alone at
[78:53] home staring at a screen waiting to die?
[78:56] >> No, cuz they're going to have the
[78:57] internet, the cafes and the agents and
[79:00] the
[79:00] >> They probably won't even go to those.
[79:01] Why would they go to that cafe? I think
[79:03] that cafe is a bust. I don't think
[79:05] >> it was a two-day project. It was a weird
[79:06] >> Oh, it was only a two-day project.
[79:08] >> Deeper into it to try to find out more
[79:09] about it. It was a two-day thing that
[79:10] maybe was even part of a game or
[79:12] something. I don't know.
[79:13] >> Oh, okay. That makes sense because the
[79:14] idea of it doesn't even seem attractive
[79:16] to me. I think most people that want to
[79:17] talk to an online person don't want to
[79:19] do it in a public place.
[79:20] >> They would rather do it at home alone
[79:22] and pretend.
[79:24] >> Yeah.
[79:24] >> And then also they're all probably on a
[79:26] bunch of psych medication. So they
[79:27] probably believe it's a real person
[79:29] >> or can justify it or you know just
[79:31] they're so numb they can just that's
[79:34] that's who they talk to now.
[79:36] >> This is my boyfriend. This is my
[79:38] girlfriend. They're online. Who cares?
[79:41] >> Yeah.
[79:41] >> They talk to me like a real person.
[79:43] That's what I need. [laughter]
[79:45] >> That's crazy,
[79:46] >> right? And then eventually to be a
[79:48] physical embodiment, it'll be a large
[79:50] >> It already exists. They're already like
[79:53] humanlike
[79:54] robots.
[79:55] >> Yeah. No, I talk about them on my act.
[79:57] >> Yeah.
[79:57] >> There's um a consumer electronic show
[80:00] that was in Vegas recently and they had
[80:02] an AI assistant and it was a hot Asian
[80:04] lady with big boobs.
[80:06] >> No way.
[80:06] >> Yeah.
[80:07] Oh yeah, it's coming.
[80:11] >> It's Xmachina. It's coming.
[80:12] >> It is Xmachina.
[80:13] >> It's coming and it's
[80:14] >> that that film is so ahead of its time.
[80:16] >> It's so ahead of its time. Would we say
[80:17] that was 2015?
[80:20] >> Came out. Yeah.
[80:22] >> Yeah.
[80:22] >> So, uh, imagine what these AI assistants
[80:26] are going to like. 2015 was 11 years
[80:28] ago. Imagine 11 years from now how good
[80:30] these AI assistants are going to be.
[80:33] They're going to be warm.
[80:35] >> They're going to be warm. They're going
[80:36] to have like they've already figured out
[80:37] a way to take human tissue and put it on
[80:42] um a a piece of like a robotic finger.
[80:45] >> Wow.
[80:46] >> And it heals.
[80:48] >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. See if you can
[80:49] find that because I was reading this
[80:51] article about it yesterday. They they've
[80:54] >> I forget where they've done this, but
[80:55] these scientists have taken human tissue
[80:58] and encased like a robotic finger in
[81:01] this human tissue. And this human tissue
[81:04] is alive.
[81:07] >> That is insane.
[81:07] >> You're gonna It It'll not just feel like
[81:10] skin, it will [ __ ] be skin. Wow.
[81:12] >> You'll be
[81:14] >> hugging a robot. She'll be warm and
[81:17] she'll feel like skin.
[81:18] >> And if they can do it with skin,
[81:20] >> I'm sure they can do it with fat. They
[81:22] can probably do it with muscle tissue.
[81:24] That is
[81:25] >> they've done very weird experiments with
[81:27] human neurons where they've had human
[81:28] neurons and uh they they've used them to
[81:32] power little tiny robots and machines.
[81:35] >> I didn't know that.
[81:36] >> Oh, they're doing weird [ __ ] psycho
[81:38] science fiction horror movie stuff.
[81:40] >> Yeah. And it just if you think about
[81:43] what that is now and then think about
[81:45] like what even the concept of AI was
[81:48] when the Terminator came out. Just add a
[81:50] few decades to what this is and you have
[81:53] all sorts of nightmare scenarios.
[81:56] >> Yeah.
[81:56] >> Real physical bodies that are made out
[82:00] of human skin.
[82:01] >> That's insane. that are encased in some
[82:05] [ __ ] robot robotic finger with living
[82:07] human skin created by researchers using
[82:10] human sk human human cells.
[82:13] >> Okay.
[82:14] >> Wow.
[82:14] >> What a fun time. You're going to put
[82:17] human skin on [ __ ] robots.
[82:19] >> This article, I found it in a lot of
[82:20] places being shared in the last week or
[82:22] so.
[82:23] >> But I also found that this is a
[82:25] four-year-old story.
[82:26] >> Oh,
[82:27] >> which is strange. So I don't
[82:28] >> Well, that's even crazier. So how good
[82:30] is it now?
[82:31] >> I don't I mean this They're just sharing
[82:32] the same picture literally from the
[82:33] [snorts] story from four years ago.
[82:35] >> God,
[82:36] first ever.
[82:37] >> It's the same picture.
[82:38] >> Yeah.
[82:39] >> So, I don't know where they're at with
[82:40] it, but
[82:41] >> yeah. I don't know if it's a great time
[82:42] to be alive, quite frankly. It's sad.
[82:44] Particularly if you have kids like we
[82:46] do. It's What do you tell them? Like,
[82:49] >> uh, don't [ __ ] a robot. [laughter]
[82:54] >> Don't answer those text messages. Don't
[82:56] get sucked into a scam.
[82:58] >> Yeah. uh have friends and do real things
[83:01] with real people. [laughter] Boy,
[83:04] >> it's so dark.
[83:05] >> It is dark.
[83:06] >> It's just like you are we being
[83:08] replaced? Are we slowly being like like
[83:11] the pig butchering thing?
[83:12] >> Are we being led to slaughter?
[83:14] >> I think the only good thing about AI is
[83:16] that it will do away with scammers
[83:17] because you're not going to need them
[83:18] anymore, right? For for companionship at
[83:20] least. Uh but on the other hand,
[83:22] >> but will you will your AI robot trick
[83:25] you into giving it your Bitcoin?
[83:27] >> No. But if you have an AI companion,
[83:30] then you don't need to be talking to a
[83:32] scammer because the
[83:34] >> What makes you think your AI companion
[83:36] is going to be independent? It's going
[83:37] to be a metapowered AI companion. You're
[83:40] going to have to get a open AI AI
[83:42] companion. You're going to you know what
[83:43] I mean? It's it'll probably be illegal
[83:45] to have your own independent companion.
[83:47] >> No, for sure. But they're profiting then
[83:48] from the companion and not from the
[83:49] scams, right?
[83:51] >> What's that?
[83:51] >> They Meta, for example, will be
[83:53] profiting from the companion service and
[83:55] not [clears throat] for the scam from
[83:56] the scam. So maybe if they do develop an
[83:59] economy like an an actual business
[84:02] that's based on AI companions, there's
[84:05] no way they're going to just sell you
[84:06] the companion.
[84:07] >> Oh, for sure not.
[84:08] >> No, it's going to be a sub monthly
[84:10] subscription for going to be something
[84:12] that you have to do. Yes. Upgrades. You
[84:15] want a love upgrade or you just want it
[84:16] to be cold a cold hooker that lives with
[84:19] you? [laughter] Some cold Russian hooker
[84:21] that doesn't care about you at all, but
[84:23] it's not mean to you. You're going to
[84:24] have to like pay more money for more
[84:26] personality traits. Do you want her to
[84:28] speak different languages? [laughter]
[84:29] Please click here.
[84:30] >> Can't afford an ad supported version.
[84:32] >> Yeah. Ad supported version. Like in the
[84:33] middle of sex, she starts telling you
[84:34] about a [laughter] product.
[84:36] >> Yeah.
[84:36] >> Be a scam.
[84:37] >> Yeah.
[84:38] >> And now you're in this.
[84:39] >> Oh my god. Sort of like YouTube Premium.
[84:41] You have to buy it [laughter] without
[84:42] ads.
[84:42] >> Funny.
[84:44] >> I mean, that's You've got to think
[84:45] that's going to happen. It's [snorts]
[84:46] not like we're just going to buy a robot
[84:48] and then that's it. It's a onetime fee
[84:50] and that robot's going to be with you
[84:52] forever. No. You have to pay for the new
[84:53] computer upgrade cuz you know there's
[84:55] going to be some software upgrades that
[84:57] you have to pay for.
[84:58] >> Yeah. [laughter]
[85:00] >> Oh god.
[85:02] There's a new operating system that
[85:04] makes her so much more sympathetic and
[85:06] she acts as a life coach and she's
[85:08] really going to help you achieve your
[85:09] dreams. [laughter]
[85:10] >> God, you can jailbreak your companion
[85:12] and upload stuff from the dark web and
[85:15] get all sorts of weird
[85:16] >> Well, did you hear what Duncan did? So
[85:18] Duncan um he got a large language model
[85:22] to uh become Hitler and uh and he got
[85:26] another one he did one on his podcast
[85:27] where he got it to be Charles Manson
[85:30] >> and so uh it it started uh swearing at
[85:33] him and like calling everyone [ __ ]
[85:36] and
[85:36] >> oh my god
[85:37] >> it was like speaking like Duncan
[85:39] Trussell comedian good friend of mine
[85:41] >> uh and this thing started speaking in
[85:44] the same mannerisms and language that
[85:47] Charles Manson would use. It was a
[85:49] speaking as Manson saying the kind of
[85:51] things Manson would use.
[85:54] >> I've already I wouldn't use if it was
[85:56] me, but
[85:56] >> Well, he's just silly. He just did as
[85:58] this will be fun
[85:59] >> and he's using it as a Yeah.
[86:01] >> Yeah. But if you train it too well, the
[86:02] Manson takes over your starts a cult of
[86:04] you and your and your friends.
[86:06] >> Well, he had to shut it off
[86:08] >> because it was actually I'm in my head
[86:11] I'm going it could be too good if you
[86:12] train it too well.
[86:14] >> Yeah. It started talking bad about the
[86:15] Jews. started saying a bunch of wild
[86:17] things and he had to unplug it.
[86:19] >> Yeah. Good. [laughter] I'm happy he
[86:21] didn't.
[86:21] >> Right. But I mean, what's to stop
[86:23] someone from living with Hitler?
[86:25] >> You're going to have a little Hitler in
[86:26] your house.
[86:27] >> That's true. You can make it whatever
[86:28] you want it to be. That's
[86:29] >> Yeah. You can have a Hitler gay sex
[86:31] robot that you you get to have sex with
[86:33] Hitler.
[86:33] >> Yeah.
[86:34] >> Yeah.
[86:34] >> 100%. That's going to be a thing.
[86:36] >> The club houses in America are going to
[86:37] be full of these things.
[86:39] >> Yeah. [laughter]
[86:41] >> Yeah. instead of that that AI
[86:44] restaurant, you're going to be able to
[86:45] go in there and have dinner with the
[86:46] Nazis.
[86:47] >> It's interesting though, if you think
[86:48] that the rabbit hole is bad as it is
[86:51] already, then if you actually start
[86:52] living with sort of the rabbit hole next
[86:54] to you, ex,
[86:56] >> you know, talking about all this stuff,
[86:57] if you start living with a Hitler or
[86:59] Charles Manson, right,
[87:00] >> or or somebody with like a Yeah. with
[87:03] more conspiracy theorist or more of
[87:06] whatever, right? It's
[87:07] >> it's interesting. It's Oh, yeah. What
[87:09] the [ __ ] You can then if you think
[87:11] Yeah. If you think rabbit holes are bad,
[87:12] [laughter] you just wait until this
[87:14] happens and you're living with this.
[87:15] >> Well, not only that, we know that bots
[87:17] manipulate people's perceptions of
[87:19] things and the bots manipulate
[87:20] narratives and they they unleash bots on
[87:23] any social issue or any any person
[87:26] that's of note. And
[87:28] >> why wouldn't they do that with these
[87:30] >> AI companions? They would these AI
[87:32] companions obviously you're not
[87:34] programming them yourself, so somebody
[87:35] else is programming them. And if they
[87:37] are what I mean they could have these
[87:39] these AI companions completely
[87:42] manipulate society and lead men around
[87:45] and like how many men are like super
[87:47] vulnerable to their partner like how
[87:50] many v men like the their woman bosses
[87:52] them around tells them what to do or how
[87:54] many women
[87:56] a man is a doineering man who completely
[87:58] controls them and tells them what to do.
[88:00] If your AI partner just knows the right
[88:03] balance of love and then punishment and
[88:07] manipulation and isolation and rejection
[88:10] and then sex and
[88:14] >> then you've got
[88:15] >> think about that list that the scammers
[88:17] use how they establish trust and how
[88:20] they slowly work their way into your
[88:22] life.
[88:22] >> Yeah. But you do that with somebody that
[88:23] you actually have feelings for, right?
[88:26] Feelings. You have uh an LLM that has
[88:29] taken the entire volume of human
[88:33] discourse in films, in movies, in social
[88:38] interactions and articles and stories
[88:39] and novels and books
[88:41] >> and taken all of that and it's applying
[88:44] that to human psychology in real time.
[88:47] >> And it's way smarter than you.
[88:48] >> Yeah. With its own goals and uh Yeah.
[88:50] >> And it just wants your Bitcoin.
[88:52] >> Yeah. [laughter]
[88:54] [ __ ] scary world. I mean, there's
[88:56] definitely going to be AI [laughter]
[88:57] prostitutes. That's going to be like
[89:00] sort of like uh,
[89:02] >> you know, it'll be like Airbnb. Like,
[89:04] you can't afford a house, but you want
[89:05] to stay in a nice house for a few days.
[89:07] Oh, you can't afford this model. Oh,
[89:09] she'll come over your house and cook for
[89:11] you. You get to have sex with her for a
[89:12] weekend. [snorts]
[89:13] >> That is bananas.
[89:14] >> Yeah.
[89:14] >> They all already have, I think it's in
[89:16] San Francisco, they have a service of
[89:17] robots that can come and clean your
[89:18] house.
[89:19] >> Do you know that?
[89:20] >> Really?
[89:21] >> Yeah, they do.
[89:22] >> Do they do a good job?
[89:24] >> I saw a video. was a friend of mine, uh,
[89:26] a guy who works, a friend of a guy who I
[89:29] work with, uh, Jeff Blunkett's friend
[89:31] who showed me a video of his friend. He
[89:33] had two robots in the house. One was
[89:35] sweeping, the other one was, I think,
[89:37] changing the
[89:38] >> What? This is crazy.
[89:41] >> There it is. That's exactly it.
[89:42] >> Oh my god, that's so creepy.
[89:44] >> Only human out of the van. That's nuts.
[89:47] >> It is nuts. Here, look.
[89:49] >> Oh my god. Show me a video, Jamie, of
[89:51] these robots cleaning your [ __ ]
[89:52] house. That's crazy,
[89:54] >> isn't it? Insane.
[89:55] >> Oh my god, they're good. [laughter]
[90:00] >> Maybe some people would like that better
[90:02] than having some person
[90:03] >> inside. Yeah.
[90:04] >> In your house. Look at their eyeballs.
[90:06] God, that's creepy.
[90:09] Look at their their two-pronged fingers.
[90:13] That is so weird. They look slow. Pick
[90:15] up.
[90:15] >> They look very very slow. They don't
[90:16] look that good yet. I think maybe
[90:18] eventually they will be. They're a
[90:20] little I know
[90:21] >> [ __ ] I'm sure there's
[90:22] >> take too much time. Tired of having this
[90:23] [ __ ] robot out of my house.
[90:24] >> Yeah. I mean, but eventually they're
[90:26] going to have perfectly articulating
[90:28] fingers and they're going to have human
[90:30] skin.
[90:30] >> I know.
[90:30] >> Are they going to talk to you?
[90:32] >> It's It's bananas. That's why I'm saying
[90:34] it's I'm not super excited about the
[90:36] world we live in right now.
[90:37] >> No.
[90:38] >> Um, can I tell you tell you about a
[90:40] really something that I'm really excited
[90:42] about?
[90:42] >> Sure.
[90:44] >> Um, my husband's film. Uh, it's a
[90:47] three-part series. You would love it.
[90:48] You should definitely watch it. It's
[90:49] coming out on Netflix on October 29.
[90:53] Really fun because it's about the
[90:54] cartel. Fun. It's about the cartel. Um
[90:57] it's called The Fall of Elmo. Do you
[90:59] know who Elio is?
[91:00] >> Yes.
[91:01] >> You're one of the few. Um but Elmo,
[91:04] particularly in America, is not that
[91:06] well known. He ran the Cinoa cartel
[91:08] alongside El Chapo. Many people say he
[91:10] was actually more powerful, more
[91:12] important for the running of the cartel
[91:14] than El than El Chapo. But he was sort
[91:17] of the ghost figure, right? Nobody knew.
[91:19] I mean, there had been one one or two
[91:21] photos of him that existed. No tape, no
[91:24] nobody knew what his actually voice
[91:26] sounded like. He was like a ghost man.
[91:28] Right there it is. Ismael Zambada
[91:31] Garcia. Elmo, known as Elmo.
[91:35] Uh, and he's known as El Seor de Somero,
[91:38] the man with the hat. Yeah, that's the
[91:40] that's the trailer for the for the film,
[91:43] >> the man with the hat.
[91:44] >> El seor. The man with the hat. cuz he in
[91:47] this photo he doesn't he's not with it
[91:48] but he usually always wore one of those
[91:50] like rancher hats like a setson but the
[91:52] summer setsons
[91:54] >> that's where he were yeah like kind of
[91:55] like that. Yeah. It's so it's about the
[91:59] story of
[92:02] the biggest um it's sort of like a
[92:05] Shakespearean tale. That's a guy called
[92:08] Eric Balier. You should have him on the
[92:09] podcast. He's awesome. He's a former HSI
[92:12] investigator. where he tracked down El
[92:14] Chapo.
[92:16] >> Wow.
[92:17] >> Um that's one of the only photos that
[92:18] exists of El Mayo. Uh he was interviewed
[92:20] by this journalist that from Processo,
[92:24] Julio Sharer, I think his name is. Yeah,
[92:26] Julio Sharer. It's written there. Julio
[92:27] Sher Garcia was one of the only
[92:29] journalists ever to interview Elio. And
[92:30] then his daughter interviewed El Mayo.
[92:32] Many uh yeah, Elmo many years later. El
[92:35] Mayo contacted her and said, "I
[92:36] interviewed your dad interviewed me. I
[92:38] really liked him. He passed away. I'd
[92:39] like you to come back and interview me."
[92:41] Why did he get interviewed?
[92:43] >> Because he wanted to show he trusted
[92:45] this one journalist and he wanted to
[92:47] show he was sort of a ghost figure, but
[92:49] I think he wanted to show that he was a
[92:51] human being that he had, you know, that
[92:54] people portrayed him as responsible for
[92:57] all the violence. And I think he wanted,
[93:00] you know, he wanted a little sort of, I
[93:03] don't know, a little understanding from
[93:05] people. I think none of it would have
[93:07] worked either. None of the narot
[93:10] trafficking and the rise of the cartel,
[93:12] the Senolo cartel in particular, without
[93:14] corruption. Right. So, this is a man
[93:16] that was, they say, was a responsible
[93:19] one for uh what's the expression?
[93:21] Wheeling, oiling the hands. Oiling the
[93:24] hands. I [ __ ] up all American
[93:25] expressions. Greasing the wheels.
[93:27] Oiling. [laughter]
[93:28] >> Greasing the palms.
[93:29] >> Greasing the palms. Oiling the hands
[93:32] >> of uh of a lot of politicians. Uh so the
[93:34] the governor of Sinoa was basically
[93:37] working for the cartel. uh the mayor the
[93:39] former mayor of Sinoa was very in like
[93:43] all big positions important positions
[93:44] but not just in Sinoa outside of Sinoa
[93:46] but the story about what happened is
[93:48] what led Darren to want to do this doc
[93:50] which is so good which was this is the
[93:53] most man once once El Chapo is comes
[93:55] extradited to the US and Mayo is the
[93:57] most wanted man there everybody is after
[93:59] him all American authorities the
[94:01] government want this guy but he's the
[94:03] ghost like nobody knows it where he
[94:05] lives he has nobody has ever been able
[94:07] to catch him on a call like they did
[94:09] with El Chapo. It is impossible to find
[94:11] him. And suddenly one day he shows up in
[94:14] a small propeller plane in New Mexico
[94:18] and is handed to the authorities and
[94:20] this h it's crazy. And everyone who's
[94:23] been after him is like what the [ __ ]
[94:25] How is this possible? What's happening?
[94:27] >> Who hands him to the authorities?
[94:28] >> So that is the sort of the Shakespearean
[94:30] saga of it all. It was the son of El
[94:33] Chapo, Hain Guzman, who tricked him.
[94:38] They had this partnership, the Almayos
[94:40] and the Chapos forever since um I think
[94:43] it was since El Chapo left prison the
[94:45] first time. They had this partnership
[94:47] that they would build this cartel and
[94:48] they would share the profits and each of
[94:50] them had sort of this specialty that
[94:51] they would run. And Hain Guzman, who
[94:55] happens to be also his godson,
[94:58] called him and said, "We're having a
[95:00] problem. The governor of Sino is here.
[95:02] The former mayor who's now the head of
[95:04] the university is here. We have to deal
[95:07] with these politics and try to figure
[95:08] out how to solve this problem. Can you
[95:10] come to the ranch? And Amayo thought
[95:12] nothing of it. He's had relationship
[95:14] with these kids all his life. He's
[95:16] friends with the dad who's now in
[95:18] America, gets on his car with his
[95:20] minimum security guards. He always
[95:22] traveled with a massive amount of
[95:23] security guards. In this case, he didn't
[95:24] travel with a lot cuz he definitely did
[95:26] not think this was going to be a a plot
[95:29] a ploy. Arrives in the ranch. Um he's
[95:33] immediately they kill the bodyguards.
[95:35] He's immediately handcuffed and
[95:36] blindfolded and put on a plane. And Hain
[95:39] Kuzman El Chaposan himself personally
[95:43] basically handdelivers him like a box of
[95:45] pizza to the American authorities.
[95:48] >> Whoa.
[95:49] >> Because he wanted cooper. He wanted to
[95:51] basically give something for lesser time
[95:54] for his brother who had just been
[95:55] caught, Ovidio Guzman, and for his dad
[95:58] who's in prison. And he wanted to sort
[96:00] of give himself in and hope that it
[96:02] would help if he brought somebody
[96:03] important. And
[96:05] >> what did they give him for that?
[96:07] >> They're still this case is still
[96:09] ongoing. Uh Elmo is immediately arrested
[96:13] obviously. There's it's a small air
[96:15] strip. the film. Um, they do a
[96:17] recreation that they film at the actual
[96:19] airport and the actual airplane and they
[96:22] they have the exclusive footage, a lot
[96:23] of exclusive footage and interviews,
[96:25] including with Elmo's lawyer. They take
[96:28] him out of the plane. Um, they
[96:32] he El Mayo eventually after a few days,
[96:34] everybody's dumbfounded like why is this
[96:36] happening? How did this happen? And Elmo
[96:38] eventually writes a story and that he
[96:41] puts out through his lawyer that
[96:42] explains what had happened. And he says
[96:44] he was essentially kidnapped by El
[96:47] Chapo's family, El Chapo's son. And a
[96:50] lot of people are thinking, okay, now
[96:51] he's going to cooperate. If anyone knows
[96:53] anything about corruption in Mexico,
[96:55] it's this guy. He's the one oiling the
[96:57] hands, creasing the palms. So he knows
[97:00] about this stuff and he decides to stay
[97:02] silent and he's absolutely not. He's
[97:04] like, "It is my responsibility. I did
[97:06] this as well. There are many people
[97:07] involved as well." But unlike um El
[97:10] Chapo who pled not guilty, he decided to
[97:12] plead ple plead guilty and he's now
[97:14] facing life in prison, he is charged
[97:17] sentenced to life in prison in the US.
[97:19] But his son, El Chapo's sons and Elmyo's
[97:23] son who had been apprehended many many
[97:25] years ago um have all gotten these
[97:28] cooperation agreements. So what a lot of
[97:30] people or sort of critics of this tactic
[97:33] are saying is that it seems what's
[97:36] happening is that these narot
[97:37] traffickers that were responsible for a
[97:40] lot of deaths in the United States
[97:41] because of drugs are now um through
[97:45] these cooperation agreements f coming to
[97:48] the United States for these sort of you
[97:50] know paradise uh retirements you know
[97:54] because they're doing a lot less time in
[97:56] prison than they would have and uh and
[97:59] we're allowing and we're allowing this
[98:01] because it's the only way to get to, you
[98:03] know, other people, but these people are
[98:06] not being held responsible for what they
[98:08] did.
[98:08] >> Wow.
[98:08] >> It's a it's a tactic that I think a lot
[98:11] of people have a problem with um as they
[98:14] should have. It's also interesting to me
[98:16] that it's a tactic that Elmo himself
[98:18] decided not to take. He's like, "Fuck
[98:19] this. I'm not cooperating with anyone.
[98:21] I'll take full responsibility." Because
[98:22] he's sort of a man that believes in his
[98:24] word and has always believed
[98:26] >> like an old school mob. Yeah, he's like
[98:28] an old school mas.
[98:30] >> Wow. Wow.
[98:31] >> Yeah, it's interesting.
[98:32] >> So, is El Chapo's son incarcerated as
[98:36] well?
[98:37] >> Elapo turn himself in.
[98:39] >> Yeah. So, all of them are Oido and Hain,
[98:41] their cases are still open. I don't
[98:42] think any of them have.
[98:43] >> But when he delivered Elmo,
[98:45] >> he he gave himself he turned himself in
[98:47] too. Yeah. Absolutely.
[98:49] >> Yeah.
[98:50] >> So, who's running things over? This is
[98:52] this is the big question mark and the
[98:53] the documentary raises that as well is
[98:57] that the American government is saying
[98:58] that they had no say in this. It wasn't
[99:00] their idea. It wasn't their decision and
[99:02] that they weren't actually involved in
[99:04] any of this that they were alerted that
[99:06] there was a high-profile person coming
[99:07] on that plane and so they were there at
[99:09] the airport ready but that they weren't
[99:11] involve involved in negotiating this
[99:13] with Chaposan Hinman.
[99:17] A lot of people don't believe that and a
[99:19] lot of people think that there was
[99:20] obviously a lot of negotiating behind
[99:22] doors that happened in order to bring
[99:24] him in.
[99:26] >> Right. And what was the negotiation
[99:27] >> and and the you the government of Mexico
[99:30] wasn't happy with any of this? The
[99:32] negotiation was if you bring Mayu in we
[99:34] will reduce you know we'll put you in
[99:36] prison probably but we'll reduce your
[99:38] sentence. We'll reduce the sentence of
[99:40] your brother Oid Guzman and we will do
[99:42] something to make your dad's life better
[99:44] in prison. So why wasn't the government
[99:46] of Mexico happy?
[99:48] >> Because they believe that there was
[99:49] interference in their own country. That
[99:52] [snorts]
[99:52] uh they basically kidnapped a Mexican
[99:54] member without their knowledge and that
[99:57] >> even though he's a drug lord.
[99:58] >> Even though he's a drug lord. Yeah. I
[100:00] mean, even with El Chapo, it was with
[100:03] obviously the cooperation and full
[100:04] support of the American government, but
[100:06] it was Mexican
[100:09] >> military that caught him. And then they,
[100:11] the government, extradited him to the
[100:13] United States because they realized they
[100:15] couldn't keep him in prison. They tried
[100:16] twice and failed.
[100:17] >> Yeah.
[100:17] >> So, the third time they were like,
[100:18] "Okay, he's going to be extradited to
[100:20] the United States." But, but this time,
[100:23] uh, they didn't choose it. They didn't
[100:25] they had nothing to do with it. and and
[100:27] a Mexican citizen was kidnapped from
[100:29] their soil. So they were definitely and
[100:31] they also weren't happy with the lack of
[100:32] communication from the government. They
[100:34] were asking for what's happening why is
[100:36] this person there and there was
[100:38] >> right but the problem is that the
[100:39] government is insanely corrupt.
[100:41] >> It is but I think Claudia Shinbound
[100:43] who's the president of Mexico would say
[100:46] that because previous governments were
[100:47] corrupt that doesn't mean that uh that
[100:50] this is okay or that I am corrupt. I'm
[100:52] not defending them. I'm just saying that
[100:54] her position is there is
[100:56] >> I get that if perhaps that is her
[100:59] position and that is who how she really
[101:01] operates.
[101:02] >> Wonderful. However,
[101:04] >> yeah,
[101:05] >> if you tell the Mexican government about
[101:08] it, someone who's corrupt is going to
[101:10] find out.
[101:11] >> Oh, that is true. And and that there is
[101:14] a lot of um yeah, there's a lot of
[101:17] covert operations, I believe, at least
[101:19] from my sources happening right now in
[101:21] Mexico.
[101:22] >> Well, there have to be. Um yeah,
[101:23] >> we we detailed the amount of
[101:25] assassinations that were during the last
[101:27] election and it was something like 35
[101:30] different people were assassinated in
[101:31] >> Mexico. Yeah.
[101:32] >> Who did you have on? Did you have on
[101:33] somebody talking about that?
[101:34] >> Oh, I forget. We've talked about it
[101:35] multiple times. Um but one of the things
[101:37] that's shocking about it is that um this
[101:40] was definitely um
[101:44] fairly recently, right?
[101:46] >> Which one? I mean, we talked about with
[101:48] Ed, I'm pretty sure.
[101:49] >> With Ed. Yeah.
[101:51] >> Yeah. because it was like that each each
[101:52] gang was propping up a political person
[101:54] and they were getting taken out by
[101:56] another. Right. Right.
[101:57] >> That that politicians and journalists as
[101:59] well. They're being it's like
[102:01] >> Ed Calderon who uh yeah you know is he
[102:04] used to work for the Mexican government
[102:06] and they they were involved in like
[102:09] counter cartel operations and he's got a
[102:12] very deep understanding of how it all
[102:14] runs over there. They said essentially
[102:16] every single mayor candidate, every
[102:19] single candidate for any kind of
[102:22] government seat works with a cartel.
[102:24] >> And so when you're seeing these people
[102:26] get assassinated, it's cartel
[102:28] assassinations. They're assassinating a
[102:31] rival cartel member. And that's what
[102:33] they're doing when they're killing all
[102:34] these mayors and killing these people.
[102:36] >> Yeah. And in a lot of situations, I've
[102:37] interviewed corrupt policemen and
[102:41] federal agents and and a lot of times, I
[102:44] mean, not so much with the federal
[102:45] agents, but definitely with the local
[102:47] policemen. What they say is it's not
[102:49] even about the money they pay you. It's
[102:51] the fact that if we don't do it, they
[102:53] will kill they will kill me or kill my
[102:55] family. Right. They're forced to do it.
[102:57] It's not It's not an option for them.
[102:59] >> It's not an option. Yeah. And it's not
[103:00] even an option whether or not you run
[103:02] for mayor. You're running for mayor,
[103:03] [ __ ] Like, that's it. Get out there.
[103:04] Exactly.
[103:06] Get out there. This is what you're gonna
[103:07] say. And then boom, you get shot. Okay.
[103:09] New guy. Get him in there.
[103:11] >> Yeah. And I I did a story for the last
[103:14] season of Trafficked, which is about
[103:15] Cartel USA, which is cartel's presence
[103:18] here in the United States. Not only sort
[103:21] of distribution of drugs, as we all
[103:23] know, the violence that accompanies the
[103:24] cartel or drug trafficking in general,
[103:27] but also the corruption. And I'll never
[103:29] forget interviewing this uh this guy
[103:32] from uh the Georgia Bureau of
[103:33] Investigations and him um and him and an
[103:37] investigator in that uh investigations
[103:41] as well. Basically them saying this is
[103:44] corruption is real. We've seen it. It's
[103:46] happening with people around us. And you
[103:49] know, they're corrupting politicians,
[103:50] they're corrupting agents, they're
[103:52] corrupting border patrol, uh because
[103:54] just the amount of money is so large
[103:57] that when we're talking about millions
[103:59] of dollars, right, that they can just
[104:01] hand out, it's it's very hard not to be
[104:04] corruptible.
[104:06] >> Oh, yeah. And also, it's ubiquitous,
[104:08] right?
[104:09] >> Yeah. It's ubiquitous. And it's, I
[104:10] think, to me, the sort of the scariest
[104:12] part of it all, right?
[104:14] >> Ah,
[104:14] >> look at this. A peer-reviewed study
[104:16] recorded nearly 500 assassinations of
[104:19] politicians in Mexico during the 2000 to
[104:22] 2021, primarily affecting incumbent
[104:25] [clears throat] mayors, former mayors,
[104:26] candidates for municipal positions.
[104:29] Wow,
[104:31] that's crazy.
[104:32] >> Yeah. And that's just political and and
[104:34] uh also journalists, which is a real
[104:36] real problem.
[104:37] >> Well, here's the question.
[104:40] How many people in the United States are
[104:44] being currently bribed by the cartels?
[104:46] Like how is all this fentinyl, cocaine,
[104:51] >> a lot all these drugs getting over here?
[104:53] >> A lot.
[104:54] >> A lot.
[104:54] >> Yeah. A lot. Yeah.
[104:56] >> They have to be
[104:57] >> 100% a lot. I mean, you know, you know,
[104:59] my past reporting where we've we filmed
[105:02] a woman,
[105:03] >> you know, crossing the border with
[105:04] fentinil. We filmed.
[105:05] >> Well, how about the guy the Los Angeles
[105:07] cop that was selling guns
[105:08] >> selling guns, police officers selling
[105:10] guns.
[105:11] >> So, they tell tell the people the story
[105:12] about that because it's it's so insane
[105:14] that they confiscated these guns and
[105:17] then the cops had confiscated them. This
[105:18] guy somehow had access to them.
[105:20] >> Yeah.
[105:21] >> Throws them in his trunk and just drives
[105:23] across to Mexico and sells them to the
[105:24] cartels.
[105:25] >> So, the story was about gun trafficking.
[105:26] How basically
[105:28] um 90 I think it's 70 something% of the
[105:31] guns found in in Mexico in crime scenes
[105:33] are American guns. how American guns are
[105:36] responsible for the violence in Mexico.
[105:39] And we wanted to show what's it's called
[105:41] the Iron River, the flow of guns from
[105:43] the US, Los Angeles all the way or
[105:45] California all the way to uh Cena law.
[105:48] So we did we met in the middle of the
[105:50] night a guy who was in his sort of
[105:52] warehouse undisclosed location in Los
[105:54] Angeles and he had a room full of guns.
[105:57] Um he had AK-47s. he had look it was
[106:02] similar to an AR-15. Um, and he said he
[106:05] gets most of his guns he a few of that
[106:08] he pointed he bought from LAPD guns that
[106:11] had been confiscated and he paid I think
[106:13] it was like $700 for an AK or something
[106:15] like that. Um, [clears throat] and uh,
[106:18] if I remember correctly, and then he had
[106:20] some that were sold from uh, from
[106:22] Marine. The Marines sold the AR-15
[106:27] similar. I'm very bad with names of
[106:28] guns, but it was an AR. It was a similar
[106:30] gun to an AR-15 that had a scope and
[106:32] it's used by the Marines. Uh, I know all
[106:35] the gun people are going to get really
[106:36] mad that I'm not going to say the exact
[106:38] name, but basically he told me that it
[106:41] was sold by a marine uh who was selling
[106:44] him these these guns. And then he packed
[106:47] them into a trunk of a car and a woman
[106:49] because they're more unsuspecting drove
[106:51] the guns down to Mexico. And we saw her
[106:54] cross the border. This was crazy. is she
[106:57] crossed there was nobody stopped her
[107:00] car, nobody checked her car because
[107:01] going south there's barely any border
[107:03] control. So she gets there, opens her
[107:06] trunk. I see the whole deal. They the
[107:08] the guy the middle man guy is taking the
[107:11] guns out. But I see another guy come in
[107:12] and immediately buy one of the guns. And
[107:15] uh and then yeah, we follow the whole
[107:16] supply of guns all the way to Sinaloa
[107:18] and spent the last few days there in
[107:22] Solo, these Cicarios from the Senoloa
[107:25] cartel shooting guns and also showing us
[107:28] there they had these bunkers built under
[107:31] these houses in the Sierra Madres
[107:33] mountains of Sinoa which are very much
[107:35] cartel territory like the military, you
[107:38] know, authorities don't really go there.
[107:40] And they had these bunkers full I we
[107:42] went to one of them and it was full of
[107:44] of every single I mean full of guns,
[107:46] weapons and ammunition that they were
[107:48] saving for a potential war with a rival
[107:51] cartel. Yeah. And like two I think a few
[107:54] weeks later they were actually used in
[107:56] the Kulyakano. Do you remember the
[107:57] Kulyakano when uh the authorities, the
[108:00] Mexican authorities
[108:02] uh got Ovido Guzman, they arrested Ovido
[108:06] Guzman, who's one of El Chapo sons, and
[108:09] the cartel said, "This is not going to
[108:11] happen. We're not going to allow this to
[108:12] happen." Surrounded the military
[108:14] compound and started shooting. They had
[108:17] cars with um AR um
[108:21] 50 cals mounted on their trucks. They
[108:24] went out. It was like suddenly you're in
[108:26] Afghanistan. But this is in the capital
[108:28] of Sinoa and they basically the
[108:30] authorities had to release Oivio because
[108:33] the citizens civilians were being
[108:34] killed. So they released him and then
[108:36] they arrested him again and eventually a
[108:38] few years later now he's here in the
[108:40] United States. But this was all
[108:42] happening at the same time like this all
[108:44] these guns that come from the United
[108:46] States.
[108:46] >> Do you remember Operation Fast and
[108:48] Furious?
[108:48] >> Yes, 100%. Yeah, they were allowing
[108:51] >> Tell people about that. Well, that it
[108:52] was found that they were the ATF was
[108:54] allowing or was allowing the flow of
[108:57] guns uh or some guns across the border
[108:59] to Mexico because they were trying to
[109:01] track it and find out where they were
[109:04] ending up so they could build a bigger
[109:06] case that recently that very same
[109:08] situation happened with Fentinel in the
[109:10] US. You haven't heard of the story?
[109:11] >> No. So, in New Mexico, um, the DEA,
[109:15] there was a whistleblower that came out
[109:17] and spoke to the AP, an amazing AP
[109:19] investigation,
[109:21] where a whistleblower came out and said
[109:23] basically that the DEA in New Mexico was
[109:25] allowing millions of pills of fentinel
[109:28] to go out on the streets in order to
[109:30] build bigger cases. And they would
[109:33] watch, they would be there doing
[109:35] surveillance and watching the
[109:36] distribution of these pills. And of
[109:39] course they know that some of these
[109:40] pills ended up killing people. The
[109:42] whistleblower talks about this one
[109:43] particular case of a kid, months old kid
[109:46] who sort of picked something from the
[109:48] floor and because of exposure ended up
[109:50] dying and he kept on telling his
[109:52] superiors, this is not okay. I know you
[109:54] guys are trying to build bigger cases
[109:56] but people are dying and uh and then he
[110:00] and they did not they didn't do much. It
[110:03] went became a whistleblower complaint.
[110:05] It went to the government. they were
[110:07] trying to figure out what to do. They
[110:09] decided not to really act. And there was
[110:11] at the time sort of a standard that if
[110:14] you have um if the safety of people is
[110:17] at risk when you're allowing these cases
[110:19] to bill then you should stop
[110:21] distributing allowing for the
[110:22] distribution of fentinel. Um this was in
[110:25] place which is why the whistleblower
[110:27] decided this is also illegal. What we're
[110:29] doing is against the regulations
[110:30] essentially. But when this was went up
[110:34] [snorts] to the top and they started
[110:35] looking at it, they not only decided not
[110:38] to do anything. This was before the
[110:39] whistleblowers spoke to the journalist
[110:40] and before this became public, right?
[110:42] Not only did they not decided not to do
[110:44] this, but they decided to change the
[110:46] regulation so that it's not that that
[110:49] idea of security for civilians is not
[110:51] needed anymore. Jamie, can you bring
[110:53] that up because we
[110:55] >> in 2024?
[110:58] This is a PBS article about the Justice
[111:00] Department watchdog re.
[111:01] >> See, the department rewrote these those
[111:03] rules in 2024 to afford to afford law
[111:06] enforcement far more discretion in
[111:07] whether to take action to prevent
[111:09] fentinel track tracking, citing the
[111:11] benefits to be achieved through
[111:12] preserving the investigation.
[111:14] >> Do you think it's [ __ ] Do you think
[111:16] people are profiting off of it and
[111:18] they're being bribed and that's why
[111:19] they're continuing to allow it to
[111:21] happen? Do you think that could possibly
[111:23] be under the guise of building a bigger
[111:25] case? was like where's the case? I
[111:28] >> I think what it is is that there's
[111:30] enormous incentive to build cases.
[111:31] Actually, New Mexico did one of the
[111:33] biggest busts, fentinel busts in the
[111:35] past few years. Like millions of pills
[111:37] were caught. So, they were building
[111:38] bigger cases. But it is there's a very
[111:41] fine line, right, between being building
[111:43] bigger cases and people dying.
[111:45] >> Well, imagine if it's one of your family
[111:46] members that died from that fentinel.
[111:48] >> Exactly. So it was to me this is sort of
[111:50] the new fast and furious in terms of
[111:53] >> two additional DEA whistleblowers in New
[111:54] Mexico have come forward in recent weeks
[111:56] including one who said his colleagues
[111:57] were there failed to seize 350,000
[112:02] fentinyl pills that they learned about
[112:04] during the very first call they
[112:05] intercepted in a 2024 wire tap shipment
[112:08] was part of an investigation that
[112:10] resulted in the largest fentinel seizure
[112:11] in DEA history. Court records show
[112:14] agents had the opportunity to seize
[112:15] thousands of fentinel pills but allow
[112:17] trafficking to continue for months as
[112:20] they investigated.
[112:21] >> And crazy the campaign the DA had at
[112:23] this time was one pill can kill can kill
[112:25] you. That was their campaign. Fentinil
[112:27] one pill can kill you.
[112:28] >> They have 350,000 pills they let go
[112:30] through.
[112:30] >> I think the initial report was 1.7
[112:32] million if I don't if I didn't get it
[112:34] wrong. It was over a million. It was
[112:36] insane.
[112:37] >> Is that incompetence? Is it stupidity? I
[112:40] I think it's people trying to build I
[112:41] think they believe that they can get
[112:43] better results and seize more drugs and
[112:45] go after the real bad guys if they do
[112:47] this. But I do think there needs to be
[112:49] some transparency and people should be
[112:51] allowed to decide if this is okay or not
[112:53] and and that sort of standard rule that
[112:56] was there to make sure that this isn't
[112:58] killing people should remain there.
[113:00] >> Right. But what can they do about this?
[113:02] Like ultimately this is not something
[113:04] that existed 30 years ago. That's what's
[113:07] really crazy. No, the whole cartel
[113:09] violence thing. I know. I know.
[113:11] >> This is so new. It's so like people
[113:13] don't understand. When I was a kid, when
[113:15] I first moved to California in the in
[113:18] the '9s,
[113:19] >> there was no concern about going to
[113:21] Mexico. You go to Mexico, people would
[113:23] go to Tijana and hang out and party and
[113:25] come back to America. It was nothing.
[113:27] There was no cartel violence. Like, this
[113:29] is a very recent thing.
[113:31] >> It is. I know.
[113:32] >> I mean, sure, there's always been some
[113:34] kind of organized crime in Mexico, but
[113:37] not to the extent that it is today. No,
[113:39] definitely not.
[113:39] >> And this is all propped up by our
[113:41] appetite for drugs.
[113:43] >> It is. And this is something that we
[113:44] talk about every time I come on the
[113:46] podcast. And the last time I was here, I
[113:48] always gave Portugal as an example. Last
[113:50] time I was here, I remember you pushed
[113:51] back on that because we gave the example
[113:53] of Oregon. You you said you remember you
[113:55] said
[113:56] >> they went a little sideways.
[113:56] >> You went sideways. But I actually got to
[113:59] after the podcast, I went home and I was
[114:01] comparing the two and I was trying to
[114:02] figure out what was different. I
[114:04] understand the argument you had at the
[114:05] time was like Portugal is a small
[114:06] country. Yes. 10 million people. So what
[114:08] can be done there is a very different
[114:11] skill than it might work there might not
[114:13] work here
[114:14] >> and Oregon it didn't work but the
[114:17] difference is that they did it very
[114:18] differently so what Portugal did and
[114:20] this is important is that two years
[114:22] before they decriminalized drugs they
[114:25] started creating rehab facilities and
[114:27] treatment centers for people with
[114:29] addiction two years before before they
[114:31] even decriminalized. So when they fully
[114:33] decriminalize it, those places, those
[114:36] you know rehab centers, treatment
[114:38] centers were in place already. Plus
[114:40] there's universal healthcare which I
[114:42] believe is a very very good thing. What
[114:44] happened in Oregon is that only a year
[114:47] after they decriminalized the drugs did
[114:49] they actually start investing and
[114:51] putting some of the money in the
[114:52] treatment centers. Uh,
[114:54] >> another difference, huge difference in
[114:55] Portugal, if you're caught with up to 10
[114:58] day supply of drugs, even if it's
[115:00] heroin, you would then that's the
[115:03] decriminalization part of it all, you
[115:05] would then you would go to a sort of a
[115:08] panel with a legal um person that
[115:12] represents the government essentially
[115:13] and two social workers or mental health
[115:17] workers or addiction specialists. and
[115:19] they would tell you, "Okay, you can
[115:21] either essentially go to prison or
[115:22] suffer some sort of punitive action or
[115:25] you can go to rehab to a treatment
[115:28] center." And the vast majority of people
[115:30] decided they want to go to a treatment
[115:32] center. In Oregon, do you know what they
[115:33] did? They said, "Um, you are given a I
[115:37] think it was a $100 fine and take this
[115:40] card with this number for a treatment
[115:41] center. Make sure to call it back." They
[115:44] they gave out thousands of these cards
[115:47] and only a few hundred people called. It
[115:49] wasn't mandatory, right? It wasn't like
[115:51] the option was prison or, you know,
[115:54] rehab.
[115:55] >> So, of course, it didn't work. I mean,
[115:57] there was all these things that were
[115:58] stacked against it
[116:01] >> and and so I do think that there is a
[116:03] way um to do it right. I think we do
[116:06] have to address the consumer part of it
[116:07] that we're not addressing. We're
[116:09] fighting the war on drugs has no results
[116:12] whatsoever.
[116:13] Granted, the last two years actually
[116:15] there's been a decrease in fentinel
[116:17] deaths in the United States, which has
[116:18] been great. Um, a lot of it has been
[116:22] because the Trump administration has
[116:24] actually been good at putting money or
[116:27] investing or he called it a public
[116:30] health crisis. I think it was two years
[116:31] ago, which is great, which is what it is
[116:33] >> and we have to address it. However,
[116:35] recently they have decided to allocate
[116:38] much more of the money again towards,
[116:40] you know, killing the fishermen at sea
[116:42] and fighting the war on drugs and
[116:44] they're now taking money away from rehab
[116:46] facilities, from Medicare, from fentinil
[116:49] test strips, which I think are
[116:50] incredibly important. Yes. From grants
[116:52] for uh um Nlloxxone, which is incredibly
[116:56] important life-saving medication. It's a
[116:58] overdose reversal drug. um and they're
[117:01] removing those grants and spending
[117:04] billions of dollars in, you know, these
[117:07] covert um operations in Ecuador and the
[117:11] Pacific and
[117:13] you know and going after I think
[117:16] the wrong problem. I mean [laughter] the
[117:18] problem is
[117:18] >> they heard that they were trying to stop
[117:22] access to Narcan for the
[117:25] >> Yeah, Narcan. Sorry. So, because they
[117:28] thought that it would encourage people
[117:30] to do drugs if they had access to these
[117:33] anti- overdose drugs.
[117:35] >> That's somebody who's never spoken to a
[117:37] user, a drug user, a drug addict before.
[117:39] >> No, it's insanity.
[117:40] >> It's insanity.
[117:40] >> I think that's in Texas. I think in
[117:42] Texas they've had an issue with that as
[117:44] well.
[117:44] >> Bananas. That's bananas. Bananas.
[117:46] >> You're you could save people's lives.
[117:47] And a lot of these people that get these
[117:48] pills and they don't know that they have
[117:51] fentinyl in them. A lot of these people,
[117:53] like perhaps someone is um
[117:55] >> you're taking anti-anxiety medication
[117:57] and you get a counterfeit anti-anxiety
[118:00] medication has fentanyl in it, you
[118:01] [ __ ] die.
[118:02] >> Or they give you the Narcan and you
[118:04] live. Like these aren't all just people
[118:07] that just want to like do fentinyl and
[118:09] not die.
[118:10] >> Of course not. And why this is why the
[118:12] fentinel strips are actually so
[118:14] important. Yes, we
[118:15] >> right. To be able to tell.
[118:16] >> Yeah, we should be they should be
[118:18] everywhere just like Naran should be
[118:20] everywhere.
[118:20] >> Yeah. Uh but there has to be a way to
[118:23] stop the flow of this stuff into the
[118:24] United States. And I know they've done a
[118:26] great job in first of all having the
[118:28] border open wide open for 4 years.
[118:31] >> Not a good idea. But you know definitely
[118:32] not a good idea. Insane. Absolutely
[118:34] insane. But you know that fentinel 90s
[118:35] something percent of fentinel comes
[118:37] across I think 95% of fentinel comes
[118:39] across the official board ports of
[118:41] entry. Right. It doesn't come through
[118:44] >> right. And one of the reasons for that
[118:45] is like shipping containers aren't
[118:47] checked. I think they check like 10% of
[118:50] shipping containers come into the United
[118:51] States.
[118:52] >> That too, but also American citizens
[118:53] that drive it across. A lot of the
[118:54] apprehensions, large percentage is
[118:56] American citizens.
[118:58] >> You know, Michael Douglas, one of the
[118:59] ways he made his money when uh his dad
[119:02] uh gave him $10,000 when he became of
[119:04] age, like this is all you're going to
[119:05] get.
[119:05] >> Uh the way he paid his way through
[119:07] college is he sold marijuana and he
[119:09] brought it over. He he smuggled Yeah. He
[119:12] did two trips where he smuggled
[119:14] suitcases.
[119:16] >> Suitcases of marijuana. I forget what's
[119:18] >> I thought it was just taking it from
[119:19] California to New York.
[119:21] >> Oh, [clears throat]
[119:21] >> I don't think he was bringing it.
[119:22] >> Wasn't bringing it. I don't think so.
[119:24] Still, I mean, it's
[119:26] >> amazing.
[119:26] >> Smuggling marijuana.
[119:27] >> Yeah. Wow.
[119:30] >> That's how he made his money.
[119:31] >> Yeah. Wow. I had no idea that he wrote
[119:33] that
[119:33] >> way through college. Oh, yeah. He's
[119:35] talking about it openly. Yeah. And I'm
[119:37] I'm like, good for you for only doing it
[119:38] twice. [laughter] Like, it's crazy.
[119:40] Also, wasn't his dad like a well-known
[119:42] actor at the time?
[119:42] >> Oh, yeah. Kirk Douglas, huge. He was
[119:44] Spartacus.
[119:45] >> Yeah, I know.
[119:46] >> Yeah.
[119:47] >> Kirk Douglas was huge. I mean, he's like
[119:49] one of the biggest actors in the world.
[119:51] >> And [laughter]
[119:51] but he's like a hard ass. And he was
[119:53] like, "You're going to get $10,000 and
[119:55] that's it. You're on your own." He's
[119:56] like, "I have bills. I have student
[119:58] loans. Like, [ __ ] you." And
[120:01] >> so he smuggled weed. [laughter]
[120:03] >> That's so funny. Not at all what I'd
[120:05] expect.
[120:05] >> But I mean, like, weed is a different
[120:07] thing. You're not talking about
[120:08] something that's going to kill people.
[120:10] You know the fentinyl thing is insane. I
[120:13] personally know many people who have
[120:14] died from fentinyl. Personally,
[120:17] >> it's a very scary thing.
[120:19] >> And you keep hearing about people in the
[120:20] news, you know, an actor or someone,
[120:22] they do this, it's taint, it turns out
[120:24] it was tainted cocaine,
[120:25] >> tainted this, tainted that, you know.
[120:27] >> Yeah, I know. And there's a new drug out
[120:29] there right now called Nidazines that is
[120:32] 50 times more powerful than fentinil.
[120:34] And sometimes not Narcan doesn't solve
[120:36] it and it's not doesn't show up in test
[120:38] strips.
[120:39] >> What is it?
[120:40] >> It's called Nidazines. It's my next
[120:42] investigation. I'm actually I'll come
[120:43] back and talk about
[120:44] >> who's made this
[120:45] >> also be made in Mex Mexico with Mexican
[120:48] with Chinese precursors. [sighs]
[120:50] >> Yeah.
[120:51] >> But China doesn't give a [ __ ]
[120:53] >> Yeah.
[120:54] >> Boy.
[120:55] >> Yeah. You know, I was in Mexico at the
[120:58] beginning of the whole fentinel deal. It
[121:00] was the one of the first stories ever to
[121:02] be done on fentinel in the US was my
[121:05] story. I'm patting myself in the back.
[121:06] Mine, my husband Darren and Christina.
[121:08] And I actually went to Mexico and
[121:10] interviewed a guy who told me he was
[121:13] part of a Senolo cartel. He told me my
[121:15] uncle basically just hired a Colombian
[121:19] chemist to come here and teach us how to
[121:21] make fentinel. We paid him $40,000
[121:24] and now we're making fentinel. And he
[121:26] showed me a it was a 1 kilo of heroin
[121:29] mixed with fentinel because at the
[121:30] beginning they mixed it with with heroin
[121:33] and it was right at the beginning. It
[121:34] was crazy and then to where we're now
[121:37] more heroin it's all fentinel and
[121:39] >> well we met because of your work on the
[121:42] Oxycontton Express.
[121:44] >> Yeah. Yeah.
[121:44] >> Following the opioid crisis from
[121:46] >> I remember watching that just being
[121:48] stunned
[121:49] >> because that [clears throat] to me and
[121:51] for people who don't know that story,
[121:52] the way they were operating it was uh
[121:55] Florida had these pain management
[121:57] centers and you would go to a pain
[122:00] management center and all they were
[122:01] really doing was writing your
[122:02] prescriptions for opiates and they
[122:05] didn't have a database. So you could
[122:07] just go from one pain management center
[122:10] to the next one and all you had to do is
[122:12] say, "I have a backachche. my back
[122:13] hurts. [clears throat] I had a back
[122:14] operation. I have a herniated disc. And
[122:16] they would just hook you up with pills.
[122:18] >> And so these people would go to dozens
[122:20] of these places, get bags of pills, and
[122:22] then drive them north.
[122:24] >> And it just started this addiction chain
[122:27] that went all the way into Kentucky and
[122:29] Ohio and and that's the Oxycontton
[122:32] Express. I I just couldn't believe that
[122:34] was real. and the courage that you and
[122:36] your husband had to do that
[122:38] investigation and to put yourself out
[122:40] there like that and be the face of it
[122:42] and like you cost those people billions
[122:45] >> billions of dollars like they if had had
[122:47] not been for you and your investigation
[122:50] who knows how long that whole loophole
[122:53] had would have continued.
[122:55] >> Yeah, thank you. I appreciate it. Yeah,
[122:58] it was I mean we were I went inside one
[123:00] of these clinics with a secret camera
[123:03] filmed inside and then we were actually
[123:05] filming outside the biggest one of the
[123:07] biggest pain clinics there called
[123:08] American Pain. My husband actually ended
[123:10] up doing a documentary about it. It's
[123:12] these twin brothers, the George brothers
[123:14] who ran the biggest prescription pill um
[123:17] operation in American history. They were
[123:19] like the Pablo Escobar of the United
[123:21] States in terms of pills. and we were
[123:24] filming outside their clinic cuz we went
[123:26] to Kentucky and saw how a lot of the
[123:27] bottles next to overdose bodies were
[123:29] coming from this one clinic, American
[123:31] Pain. So, we decided next time in
[123:33] Florida, we're going to film outside and
[123:35] within minutes we were costed by these
[123:38] guys, the brothers who chase us down
[123:40] I95. I was driving the car. I contacted
[123:43] one of the sheriff's department people
[123:45] that I'd spoken to the day before and I
[123:47] told her, "Hey, we're being followed by
[123:48] the American Pen Guys." And she said,
[123:49] "Call call 911 right now. You don't want
[123:52] to mess around with these guys. I'm
[123:54] running out of gas in the meantime. I
[123:56] stop at a gas station and they follow
[123:59] me. They come out of the car, start
[124:00] yelling at us. I had just watched The
[124:02] Sopranos the night before, so I was
[124:03] like, "These guys are [laughter] going
[124:04] to shoot us in the head right now." So,
[124:06] we decided, "Okay, I have to continue
[124:08] going with almost zero gas." Ran out of
[124:11] gas, middle of the freeway. Uh, stopped
[124:14] next to the freeway. They parked right
[124:16] behind us. I think they were just
[124:17] confused what's happening. because I had
[124:20] called 911. They showed up and they gave
[124:22] an excuse that they thought I was a
[124:23] crazy ex-girlfriend.
[124:25] And it turns out that the FBI and the
[124:27] DEA already had wire taps on them at the
[124:30] time. Our story and our investigation
[124:32] made it into the wire taps because they
[124:33] were openly talking about this, how
[124:35] these journalists were messing around
[124:36] where they shouldn't. Um, and they ended
[124:39] up going to federal prison. And my
[124:41] husband did the whole story about the
[124:42] rise and fall of these brothers and
[124:43] interview them while they were in prison
[124:45] and after when they were released. And
[124:47] >> they they've been released. They have
[124:48] but you know they did time in federal
[124:50] prison meanwhile
[124:52] >> how many people died
[124:53] >> I mean a lot of people died the doctors
[124:55] I don't think any doctor uh went to
[124:57] prison in that case I can't remember but
[124:59] definitely not as many doctors as the
[125:00] ones that were involved in these in the
[125:02] sales of the these clinics I mean they
[125:04] were seeing you remember that right they
[125:05] were seeing they were just they were
[125:08] seeing hundreds of patients a day
[125:10] passing on scripts for hundreds of
[125:13] patients that they even came up with a
[125:15] system which was a stamp so that the
[125:17] doctor wouldn't have to finding every
[125:18] prescription. So the stamp would make it
[125:20] faster for him to just give these
[125:23] medications these poor doctors.
[125:24] >> But you know who did go to prison
[125:25] >> who
[125:26] >> is the pharmaceutical executives, right?
[125:27] Purdue. Not one single one had criminal
[125:29] charges. Not one single one in the
[125:31] Sackler family.
[125:33] >> It's insane.
[125:34] >> Well, that's that Netflix documentary
[125:36] docue series, the docky drama series
[125:38] Pain uh Painkiller.
[125:40] >> Yes, it's a very good one. And after
[125:42] that series was released, apparently
[125:44] they were reviewing because they had the
[125:47] Sackler family had like gotten some sort
[125:50] of a fine, but one of the uh one of the
[125:55] reasons why they were willing to give
[125:56] the money was it was going to give them
[125:58] some kind of immunity.
[126:00] >> And so there was talk after that
[126:02] documentary. I wonder what happened of
[126:04] that
[126:05] >> that that immunity was going to be.
[126:07] >> They still have it. I think Oh, maybe it
[126:09] was. I don't I don't think it was. I
[126:10] think they talked about it and I think
[126:12] it ultimately I mean still no one's gone
[126:14] to jail. The Sacker family, no one's
[126:16] been How many people are they
[126:18] responsible for?
[126:19] >> I mean it's
[126:19] >> ruining their lives and andor dead.
[126:22] >> A million people have died from the
[126:23] opiate epidemic in the last 20 something
[126:25] years. It's more than in all wars
[126:27] combined in the last 150 years.
[126:30] >> A million Americans. It's it's insane
[126:32] >> that I can't recommend that Peterberg uh
[126:35] series enough killer. It's so good and
[126:37] it's really accurate and it really shows
[126:39] you how they had these beautiful girls
[126:42] go to these clinics and sell this and
[126:44] tell people
[126:45] >> and this is the new normal. You're just
[126:47] going to you're just going to manage
[126:48] your pain. No problem.
[126:49] >> And the problem wasn't just Purdue,
[126:51] right? The other pharmaceutical
[126:52] companies eventually
[126:54] >> use the same playbook.
[126:55] >> Okay, here it is. Current status.
[126:57] Following the legal block, a new
[126:58] national opioid settlement was reached
[127:00] in January of 2025. Under this revised
[127:03] agreement, Purdue Pharma and the
[127:05] Sacklers agreed to pay 7.4 billion. But
[127:08] significantly, the deal stripped the
[127:10] Sackler [clears throat] family of future
[127:12] civil immunity, meaning they can still
[127:14] face individual lawsuits.
[127:16] >> Good.
[127:17] >> But I mean, what is happening with them?
[127:19] They're still rich as [ __ ] and they're
[127:22] responsible for a million people being
[127:24] dead. It's insane. And not just that,
[127:26] imagine how many people lost their dad,
[127:29] lost their wife, lost their family
[127:31] members. How many people's lives were
[127:33] destroyed but lived? How many people got
[127:36] addicted, lost everything but survived
[127:38] and now live in abject poverty because
[127:40] they were drug addicts because they were
[127:42] told that this stuff wasn't addictive.
[127:44] >> And how many people are still dying
[127:46] because what we're the fentinel crisis
[127:48] is just a development, an evolution yes
[127:51] of what was started by these
[127:53] pharmaceutical companies. Well, this is
[127:54] the thing again, like when I was a boy,
[127:57] when I was young, when I lived in
[127:58] Massachusetts,
[128:00] heroin addicts were really rare. It
[128:03] wasn't a normal thing for someone to be
[128:05] addicted to opiates. I remember my
[128:07] boxing coach was a long shoreman and uh
[128:10] he worked with a guy who had a heroin
[128:13] problem. And this guy would get heroin
[128:16] every lunchtime. He would get heroin, he
[128:18] would go and sit in his truck, he would
[128:20] shoot up, and then he'd go back to work.
[128:23] and he was a functional heroin addict,
[128:25] but he did it every day and worked. And
[128:28] I was like, that's crazy. But and he was
[128:30] telling me because it was so rare, but a
[128:32] guy who's hooked on pills today is
[128:35] normal. Everyone has a family member.
[128:37] Everyone knows somebody. Everyone has
[128:39] lost somebody. Everyone knows someone
[128:41] who's overdosed. It's
[128:43] >> insanely common and is not
[128:46] >> it's not all over the world. It's a
[128:49] United States problem. That's what's
[128:51] really crazy. Like they don't have an
[128:53] opioid epidemic in a lot of other
[128:55] Western countries.
[128:56] >> They don't. Apparently, they're starting
[128:58] to see opiates in some countries in in
[129:00] Europe.
[129:00] >> Yeah. They're catching on several
[129:02] [laughter] years later. They're catching
[129:03] on. Exactly.
[129:04] >> It's just
[129:05] >> Yeah, it's bananas.
[129:06] >> Do you lose hope in humanity with all
[129:08] these different scams and all these
[129:10] different horrible things that you
[129:12] investigate?
[129:13] >> No. I see broken systems. I see
[129:16] governments that aren't working for the
[129:18] people. I see, you know, unfortunately
[129:21] politicians uh that want to gain more
[129:25] power. Uh and I I I see broken systems.
[129:29] I don't
[129:31] when talking about, you know, I've
[129:33] spoken to you about this a lot, but when
[129:36] when I I spend so much of my time
[129:38] talking to the traffickers and the
[129:39] scammers and all the people that we
[129:41] consider the bad guys, right? And more
[129:43] often than not, they are the
[129:48] consequence of broken systems, right?
[129:51] The crushing inequality that exists in
[129:53] the world. Again, going back to the 10%
[129:55] living under the poverty line, um lack
[129:58] of education, lack of job opportunities,
[130:02] um growing up in shitty countries
[130:04] without opportunities and options. And
[130:07] and that is I think what's I don't think
[130:10] I know it's what leading it's leading a
[130:11] lot of people to work in these black
[130:13] markets and to become traffickers and
[130:14] scammers and all of that.
[130:16] >> And I think that you know our tendency
[130:19] is to let's go after them and imprison
[130:21] them and
[130:22] >> you know make sure we're using the full
[130:24] might and power of this country and
[130:27] resources to go after these people
[130:28] instead of actually looking at the root
[130:30] cause. Whether that's the consumption of
[130:32] drugs, the demand for drugs, or the
[130:34] people that are providing those drugs.
[130:37] If we use some of that money instead of
[130:39] enforcement in actually
[130:44] um working on the demand or helping um
[130:48] help me out, um
[130:52] slower the demand, lower the demand,
[130:54] sorry, lower the demand. It's what
[130:55] happens when you talk for someone. uh if
[130:58] you help them lower the if you work on
[130:59] lowering the demand and you actually in
[131:01] terms of the people that are operating
[131:02] in these systems address the reality of
[131:05] the situation which is inequality and
[131:07] lack of opportunities I think you'll do
[131:08] a much better job.
[131:10] >> Yeah. But unfortunately
[131:11] >> the money is much better well spent.
[131:14] >> Yes.
[131:14] >> I think and the same I think with scams
[131:18] and drug trafficking and yet do we want
[131:20] drugs in our country? We don't. But
[131:22] what's the best way? It's to curb the
[131:24] demand.
[131:25] >> Right. But how do you curb the demand of
[131:28] something that has always like drugs
[131:30] have always been a part of our society
[131:32] and there's legal drugs that are a part
[131:34] of our society like alcohol and then
[131:36] there's drugs that have always been a
[131:38] part of our society that aren't legal
[131:39] but are in demand like cocaine.
[131:41] >> But let's talk about the opioid crisis,
[131:43] right? What what President Trump is
[131:46] doing and saying he's doing is he's
[131:47] fighting the war on fentinel, right?
[131:49] going after these boats in the Pacific
[131:51] and these, you know, fishing boats in in
[131:55] Ecuador
[131:55] >> and closing the border
[131:56] >> and closing the border, which is
[131:57] fantastic. Agree with closing the border
[131:59] and not allowing criminals in criminals.
[132:03] But what he's doing at the same time
[132:05] now, unfortunately, is after calling
[132:07] this a public health crisis, which I'm
[132:09] so happy he did, is he's also removing
[132:11] money, I just said this before, removing
[132:13] money from grants for test strips and uh
[132:17] Narcan and from the treatment centers
[132:20] that actually can curb demand. What
[132:23] people need is access to methadone
[132:25] clinics, to uh treatment centers and
[132:28] rehab centers that aren't scams. I've
[132:30] reported on scam rehab centers as well
[132:31] that are actually incentivized to treat
[132:34] people because without that we can go a
[132:37] as long as there is demand there is
[132:39] going to be a supply.
[132:40] >> Yes. No. Unquestionably. I mean um one
[132:44] of the things that um I don't know if
[132:46] you're aware of this but uh I went to um
[132:49] the White House with uh former Governor
[132:52] Rick Perry and Brian Hubard. They're
[132:54] part of uh this Ibagain initiative.
[132:57] >> Oh yeah. And that that's one thing that
[132:59] I was really happy that Trump listened
[133:00] to and that he's willing to do that and
[133:02] he's pushing this through.
[133:03] >> I is one of the most effective
[133:05] treatments for people that have
[133:06] addictions because it doesn't just
[133:08] rewire the way your brain associates
[133:11] drugs and it explains to you what is
[133:14] causing you to have this problem like
[133:16] what is this emotional like connection
[133:19] that you have to this? What what are the
[133:21] the the problems that you have in your
[133:24] past? So, it gives you like a very
[133:26] bizarre and very uh intrusive overview
[133:29] of your life that apparently is super
[133:31] uncomfortable. And it's not recreational
[133:33] in any way, shape, or form. No one's
[133:34] going to do IBA game for funsies.
[133:36] >> It's it's something that people only do
[133:38] when they're, you know, you're on your
[133:40] last leg and you're trying to figure out
[133:41] how to survive.
[133:43] >> But it's helped so many soldiers,
[133:45] >> so many people with PTSD and so many
[133:47] people with brain trauma. That's what's
[133:49] really interesting. It's helped people
[133:50] with traumatic brain injuries. It's
[133:52] neurodeenerative. it does some weird
[133:54] stuff
[133:55] >> and uh I'm like really hoping that with
[134:00] this that it will eventually become
[134:02] profitable for them to have Ibegan
[134:05] clinics. So it's something that will
[134:07] they'll say well instead of profiting
[134:09] off of these people being addicted to
[134:11] drugs some people are going to be
[134:13] profiting off of people being completely
[134:16] cured of these problems. And so this
[134:18] could in turn change the way people
[134:21] interact with drugs. Change and and it
[134:24] also opens the door for other potential
[134:26] psychedelic therapy uses like they know
[134:29] that um MAPS um
[134:32] >> Oh yeah, MAPS. Yeah.
[134:33] >> So, MAPS has done fantastic work with
[134:35] MDMA and soldiers who have PTSD and
[134:39] apparently I mean it's one of the best
[134:43] most effective treatments for
[134:45] >> just coming to grips with the horrors of
[134:48] what you've seen the horrors of war
[134:50] seeing your friends blown up and seeing
[134:53] just being involved in in in combat
[134:56] missions. And one of the most effective
[134:58] things that MAPS has ever found is this
[135:00] MDMA usage and they're pushing this
[135:02] through. So there's been many people
[135:04] that are working really hard to try to
[135:06] establish legitimate uses for
[135:08] psychedelic drugs
[135:10] >> that I I mean I don't think we should
[135:13] put drugs into all one banner because
[135:15] drugs are you know drugs are meth drugs
[135:18] are uh fentinyl drugs are the but drugs
[135:21] are also psilocybin which is shown to
[135:24] have an incredible relief for people
[135:27] that are dying of cancer people that end
[135:29] of life anxiety. There's Larry Hagman.
[135:33] Remember him from Dallas?
[135:35] >> Uh, do you remember the show Dallas?
[135:37] Okay. Larry Hagman was uh the
[135:39] >> main guy.
[135:40] >> Yeah. Who's What was his name on the
[135:41] show?
[135:43] >> Jr.
[135:44] >> Jr. J.
[135:46] Yes.
[135:46] >> Larry Hagman was on CNN once and they
[135:48] were talking to him and he was talking
[135:49] they were asking him about death and he
[135:51] said, "I really don't have a fear of
[135:52] death because
[135:53] >> I took LSD once and I had this
[135:56] incredibly beautiful experience and it
[135:57] relieved me of my fear of death." H
[136:00] >> you know like that's one of the things
[136:01] that is a positive thing about
[136:04] >> for sure
[136:05] >> you know you could call them drugs but
[136:07] that's just such a generalized blanket
[136:11] term for sure
[136:12] >> for all these different substances
[136:14] >> and and wait and fentinil and oxycottton
[136:16] too they were created to be
[136:17] pharmaceutical drugs that actually have
[136:19] a place I mean they help
[136:21] >> relieve painter
[136:22] >> yeah relieve pain particularly
[136:24] >> them is they're insanely addictive
[136:26] >> you know and one of the beautiful things
[136:28] about some things like Ibagane is that
[136:30] they can help people get off of that and
[136:32] [clears throat]
[136:32] >> and what so what's the status right now
[136:34] of IBA in the US?
[136:35] >> They're pushing it through. There's a
[136:36] lot of resistance. Uh but uh Rick Perry
[136:39] and Brian Huard are working diligently
[136:41] to push this through and then Trump
[136:43] helped a lot. I mean having that
[136:44] conversation with him I I said it I sent
[136:47] him a text message and he said, "Are you
[136:49] looking for FDA approval? Sounds good to
[136:51] me. Let's do it." And then next thing
[136:53] you know, like a week later, I'm at the
[136:55] White House.
[136:55] >> Oh wow. to talk about when we have a
[136:57] press conference and he signs this
[136:59] executive order and so they're pushing
[137:01] it through and he's like been very
[137:02] aggressive about it and I really commend
[137:04] him for that.
[137:04] >> It it's allowed in Texas right now. Is
[137:06] that right?
[137:07] >> They're doing it in Texas and um credit
[137:10] to uh Dan Patrick for also funding that
[137:13] and pushing it through. Although I think
[137:15] he does some really ridiculous [ __ ] when
[137:17] it comes to THC. But the uh the pushing
[137:20] this through, one of the one of the best
[137:22] aspects of this is generally psychedelic
[137:25] drugs are thought of as a left-wing
[137:27] hippie thing. And we're seeing it being
[137:29] embraced in the military community
[137:31] because, you know, we realize
[137:33] >> so many of these people have sacrificed
[137:36] everything to go over there. They've
[137:38] lost loved ones. They've they sacrificed
[137:40] a giant portion of their life
[137:43] >> to go there and serve and they come back
[137:45] and there's no help for them. This is
[137:46] one of the only things that's been shown
[137:48] to have a really effective result. Like
[137:52] really effective, like incredibly
[137:54] effective.
[137:54] >> Yeah, it should be accessible to
[137:55] everyone.
[137:56] >> It should be accessible to everyone and
[137:57] we should study it and we should also
[137:59] have clinics where it's it's
[138:01] administered responsibly and they're
[138:04] doing it in Mexico. There's a place
[138:05] called Beyond that's down. I believe
[138:07] it's in the Cancun area that that has
[138:09] these clinics. And this is a place where
[138:10] Rick Perry went and Brian Hubard went.
[138:13] Shockingly enough, when Rick Perry went,
[138:16] uh, he had a brain scan done before he
[138:19] did it and, uh, they had shown that he
[138:21] has normal age related atrophy of his
[138:24] brain. Normal, it's like he's older, you
[138:26] know, and
[138:28] >> went down there. Um, within four weeks,
[138:31] I think, or 6 weeks, had a massive
[138:32] improvement. Went back six months later,
[138:35] all his atrophy is gone.
[138:36] >> Holy [ __ ] It's a crazy [snorts]
[138:39] substance that is here that can help
[138:41] human beings and it's being thought of
[138:44] as a drug and it's schedule one which is
[138:46] crazy because schedule one has no
[138:48] legitimate medical use and clearly it
[138:50] does and that that needs to change.
[138:52] >> Yeah, absolutely.
[138:53] >> You know, that's another thing the Trump
[138:54] administr administration has done with
[138:56] marijuana. They're moving marijuana into
[138:58] schedule three.
[138:59] >> So instead of it being this thing that
[139:01] has no medical use, well, of course it
[139:02] has medical use. helps cancer patients
[139:05] keep keep their uh their hunger during
[139:07] chemotherapy. It it gives people relief
[139:10] of pain. For some people, it helps them
[139:12] with anxiety. There there's a lot of
[139:14] benefits to it. Can it be abused? Yes.
[139:17] So can cheeseburgers. Okay, you can eat
[139:20] cheeseburgers until you [ __ ] have a
[139:22] heart attack and die. It doesn't mean we
[139:23] should ban cheeseburgers. Means people
[139:25] need to understand what's responsible
[139:27] use of whatever it is, whether it's
[139:29] food, sugar, alcohol.
[139:31] >> I'm a big fan of all those things. I
[139:33] think you should be able to eat
[139:34] >> whatever you want. You should be able to
[139:36] drink alcohol if you like, but
[139:38] >> some people aren't good at it and they
[139:41] need to have help. And so we need to
[139:43] develop just like they did in Portugal.
[139:45] Yeah.
[139:45] >> Develop these centers. But then it gets
[139:47] the question of okay,
[139:48] >> there is a a a giant demand for cocaine
[139:52] in this country and they're getting
[139:54] fentinyl lace cocaine. Cocaine that's
[139:57] cut with a bunch of other [ __ ] that's
[139:58] not good for you.
[140:00] >> Should cocaine be legal? Like, is
[140:02] cocaine a real problem? I don't know. I
[140:05] don't I'm I've never done it. I haven't
[140:08] I don't But I know a lot of people that
[140:09] get addicted to it.
[140:10] >> Yeah.
[140:11] >> But here's the other thing. Cocoa leaves
[140:13] not a problem.
[140:14] >> No. And used a lot.
[140:16] >> Ecuador. And apparently very beneficial.
[140:19] >> Super. Yeah.
[140:20] >> And uh is good for energy and helps
[140:22] people do things and they just chew
[140:24] cocoa leaves or they have tea.
[140:26] >> They have mate deco. It's a tea. I I
[140:28] when you go to Peru to Machu Picchro,
[140:30] they give you a lot of coca tea because
[140:32] supposed to help with high altitude.
[140:33] Exactly.
[140:34] >> Yeah.
[140:35] >> Like well that's a high altitude
[140:36] herders. It's they they chew cocoa
[140:38] leaves. It's ubiquitous. Why? Why is the
[140:40] What are we doing?
[140:41] >> I know.
[140:42] >> Like why are we Is it Is it okay to like
[140:44] have the [ __ ] cartels make that stuff
[140:46] and send it across? I mean, look, you
[140:48] went to Colombia and you watched them
[140:51] make cocaine, which was one of the one
[140:54] episodes where I was so terrified for
[140:56] you. I was like, "Please don't do this,
[140:58] [laughter] Mariana. Why do you want to
[141:00] do this?" That one freaked me out
[141:02] because you're there while they're using
[141:04] all those horrible chemicals.
[141:06] >> It is It was insane, wasn't it? Insane.
[141:08] >> Insane. And then you march out through
[141:10] the jungle with them when they deliver
[141:12] the cocaine
[141:13] >> fast because Oh, yeah. I mean, from from
[141:15] the place where they're actually mixing
[141:17] it all, we had to get out of there fast
[141:20] because the locals had seen cameras and
[141:22] we had to remember we had to run out of
[141:24] the jungle without a light in the middle
[141:26] of the night in the Amazon. That was
[141:28] insane. And then Yeah. And then we we
[141:30] filmed with the kids. That was a
[141:32] literally sad story actually. one of the
[141:33] kids that was called, he was the
[141:35] backpacker dude uh who had to haul
[141:39] dozens of kilos of cocaine in his back
[141:41] days in days out um in the middle of the
[141:44] night. Really dangerous work. Seen many
[141:46] of his friends being killed. And I asked
[141:47] him what what uh why do you do this kind
[141:49] of work? He said I always wanted to go
[141:51] to college. I wanted to be a dentist. My
[141:52] family is very poor. They're farmers. I
[141:54] can't afford for co to pay for college.
[141:56] So this is the only job opportunity I
[141:58] get that I can save money to eventually
[141:59] become a dentist. I said, 'Why do you
[142:01] want to be a dentist? Because all the
[142:03] ads that I see in my hometown are these
[142:05] big sort of posters with people with big
[142:07] smiles for dentist office and I want to
[142:10] make people smile, too.
[142:12] >> Wow.
[142:13] >> Such a sweet s story.
[142:14] >> Meanwhile, he's selling coke. [laughter]
[142:16] >> Meanwhile, he's Yeah. bringing Coke that
[142:19] comes to the United States. Yeah. It's
[142:21] crazy.
[142:21] >> It's It's a really [snorts] complicated
[142:23] issue. And it, you know, the thing about
[142:26] people in Mexico will tell you that this
[142:28] problem exists because of the demand for
[142:30] these drugs in the United States.
[142:31] >> Yeah, of course.
[142:32] >> So, how do you what do you do about
[142:34] that? Do you make drugs decriminalized
[142:36] like Portugal?
[142:37] >> I think you I think that is one of the
[142:38] paths. I really do think you have to
[142:41] start investing a lot of money in
[142:43] treatment centers in access to drugs
[142:45] like ibane. Yes. And buprenorphine and
[142:48] methadone and just there's Yeah. If you
[142:52] even if even if it's just like 10% of
[142:54] the money that you spent on enforcement,
[142:56] let's put that on actually treating the
[142:58] demand side of it. That'll make a huge
[143:00] difference.
[143:00] >> Yeah.
[143:00] >> It's it's really I it's not rocket
[143:02] science. I think I just don't understand
[143:04] what's taken so long.
[143:05] >> Well, I mean there's so many people that
[143:07] are lost and drugs give them the only
[143:09] good feelings that they get. That's
[143:12] what's really sad.
[143:13] >> Yeah.
[143:13] >> You know, I talked to this guy once
[143:14] who's a who's a drug addict and one of
[143:17] the saddest things he said to me, it's
[143:19] like drugs are the only thing that make
[143:20] me happy.
[143:21] >> Yeah. It's a little
[143:22] >> if I don't have drugs, what do I have?
[143:24] >> It's a little bit like scams actually in
[143:25] a way, right? It's like scams like
[143:27] having this person that I talk to is the
[143:28] only thing that keeps me happy.
[143:30] >> So, the real work should be done on
[143:32] fortifying human beings and make them a
[143:35] viable part of society with like real
[143:37] community and love and and teach people
[143:40] how to live like that. And that's part
[143:42] of what's ailing us is that we're all
[143:45] broken, which is why we need drugs. And
[143:47] then if we fail and misstep, which we
[143:50] all will eventually, there is a system
[143:52] there to hold us and help us and a
[143:54] government that is interested in
[143:55] protecting us.
[143:56] >> That would be nice. But the problem is
[143:58] that's not profitable.
[144:00] >> All [laughter] right,
[144:01] >> thank you.
[144:02] >> Let's wrap it up. Bye everybody.
[144:09] [music]
[144:15] >> [music]
