## Background
Published by the PowerfulJRE channel on YouTube on June 24, 2026, this episode of the Joe Rogan Experience features comedian and actor Tim Dillon. The video description highlights Dillon's stand-up special, "Tim Dillon: I'm Your Mother," on Netflix, and includes promotional links for his podcast and tour alongside episode sponsors.
## TL;DR
Joe Rogan and Tim Dillon engage in a wide-ranging discussion spanning corporate culture, political disillusionment, and international social friction. They touch upon British free speech crackdowns, mass migration policies, the rise of artificial intelligence, and the rapid erosion of institutional trust. The conversation also detours into wilder topics, including DMT experiences, alien disclosure rumors, media corporate politics, and predictions for the 2028 U.S. presidential election.
## Atmosphere & style
The interaction carries a cynical, dark-comedy dynamic where absurd real-world events are dissected with sharp wit and existential humor. Dillon brings his signature rant-style satire and nihilistic edge, which Rogan balances with wide-eyed curiosity and conversational steering. It feels like an unfiltered, late-night exchange between two veteran commentators watching a chaotic world unfold in real time.
## Key takeaways
- [00:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1s) The cultural aesthetic and psychological appeal of smoking cigarettes persist despite graphic health warnings and severe public health risks.
- [07:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=473s) Los Angeles is experiencing a major decline in film production and cultural influence, driven by economic shifts, wild fires, and non-profit initiatives.
- [14:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=898s) The United Kingdom has intensified policing of online discourse and social media activity, sparking concerns over free speech censorship and legal overreach.
- [17:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1039s) Mass migration policies in Western nations are contributing to cultural friction and political pushback when integration and local economic absorption fail.
- [32:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1941s) The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence and tech corporate power poses structural risks to personal autonomy, governance, and traditional labor markets.
- [43:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2610s) Increasing digital isolation, cold automation, and forced corporate aesthetic politics are fueling public resentment and institutional distrust.
- [01:05:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=3906s) The contrast between Western individualistic lifestyle expectations and traditional, family-oriented cultural norms highlights deep societal fragmentation.
- [01:11:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4307s) Advanced psychedelic research like the DMTX project aims to systematically map non-ordinary states of consciousness and recurring entity encounters.
- [01:27:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5254s) Unexplained aerial phenomena, defense technology, and government secrecy continue to generate skepticism regarding official narratives.
- [01:42:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6138s) High-profile political spectacles, alternative media ecosystems, and viral online campaigns demonstrate the shifting nature of modern political influence.
- [01:51:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6660s) Controversies and rapid leadership shifts in legacy media outlets reflect a broader erosion of public trust in corporate news institutions.
- [02:00:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7233s) Mounting national debt and total surveillance integration are accelerating public disillusionment with globalist and state institutions.
- [02:08:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7693s) Modern urban environments have become sanitized and corporate, stripping cities of the creative tension and grit that historically birthed cultural movements.
- [02:12:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7956s) Future political realignment will likely pit Silicon Valley nationalist-populist tech capital against legacy neoconservative and corporate establishment factions.
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1s) Smoking, Head Rushes, and the Aesthetic of Cigarettes
Joe Rogan and Tim Dillon open the conversation with stories about smoking cigarettes. Joe recalls how his own father commended him as a kid by remarking on how he never smoked cigarettes down to the filter. Joe explains that he hated cigarettes growing up and always questioned why his sister smoked in high school. However, while working on a sketch play alongside stand-up comic Adam Ferrara and others, Joe was cast as a "tortured liberal arts student" who had to smoke continuously on stage. Wanting to look natural holding a cigarette, Joe smoked about 15 cigarettes in a row during rehearsals, which left him with a pounding headache, throwing up, and feeling severely impaired—an experience amplified by his athletic background.
Tim notes that his own body had a very different reaction the first time he tried a cigarette, enjoying the initial "head rush" immediately. While both acknowledge that smoking is horribly destructive, smells foul, ruins clothing, and leads to fatal health conditions, they agree that cigarettes possess a unique cultural aesthetic that never seems to go out of style. Unlike seeing someone sloppy drunk, a person holding a cigarette—whether it's an actor like Timothée Chalamet at the Cannes Film Festival or someone using a 1920s-style long stem or a Hunter S. Thompson cigarette holder—often maintains an air of composure and cool.
- Joe's first heavy smoking experience occurred during a comedy sketch play co-starring Adam Ferrara.
- Tim has been sober from alcohol and drugs for 15 years.
- The hosts joke about cigarette packaging in London and across the UK, which features graphic photos of cancer tumors and dead babies to highlight low birth weights.
---
[03:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=217s) Cultural Shock: Portion Sizes, Buc-ee's, and American Consumerism
The discussion shifts to how European visitors experience the sheer scale of American gluttony and retail culture. Joe notes that while people in the UK smoke heavily and drink more, their food portions are generally smaller and more controlled, outside of traditional feast traditions like Toby Carvery Sunday roasts. Tim and Joe highlight viral videos of European World Cup and soccer teams visiting American staples like Taco Bell or Buc-ee's for the first time. The vastness of Buc-ee's—a massive gas station turned food theme park—completely astounds foreign visitors who find the concept totally alien to their native cultures.
Joe points out that major bulk retail chains like Costco give foreigners the impression that Americans are all survivalist preppers. In Europe, smaller refrigerators and fewer food preservatives mean people shop for a few days at a time rather than buying mayonnaise by the bucket. Tim quips that American grocery runs seem driven by an underlying, paranoid planning for an inevitable race war or crisis. Joe adds that American news media constantly heightens fear, pushing citizens to stockpile gold or prepare for emergency scenarios.
- A viral video of a foreign traveler reacting to a Buc-ee's gas station reached 24 million views.
- European countries utilize much smaller refrigerators and enforce stricter regulations against food preservatives compared to the US.
---
[05:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=333s) Fleeing Los Angeles: Apocalypse Trucks, Fires, and Historical Roots
Recalling his time living in Los Angeles with young children, Joe explains that the persistent cultural paranoia led him to build an "apocalypse truck"—a modified Toyota Land Cruiser designed specifically to drive over mountains and through deserts if he needed to bug out. Joe describes having to evacuate LA three separate times due to wildfires getting close enough to burn his fence down. Tim agrees that fleeing the city is a fundamental part of the Los Angeles experience, sharing how comedian David Spade once called him during the 2020 riots to report that overturned police cars were burning on his block, prompting Tim to drive out to the desert.
The two trace the origins of desert getaways like Palm Springs back to early Hollywood studio contracts. Paramount Pictures used to mandate that contract actors remain within 200 miles of the studio until movie edits were finalized; Palm Springs was built up precisely because it sat right at that 200-mile limit. Similarly, beautiful historic neighborhoods like Pasadena were developed as mid-century modern estates for powerful studio producers. However, both agree that current-day Los Angeles feels less like classic Hollywood and more like a watered-down "sequel" dominated by TikTokers.
- Joe had a custom Toyota Land Cruiser built as a "bugout truck" while living in LA.
- Tim was forced to flee to the desert during the 2020 Los Angeles riots following a heads-up from David Spade.
- Early Hollywood studio contracts required actors to remain within a strict 200-mile radius of Paramount Pictures during post-production editing, spurring the development of Palm Springs.
---
[07:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=473s) The Decline of LA and the "Empathy Industry"
Comparing Los Angeles's trajectory to the decline of Detroit, Joe and Tim discuss how Hollywood's dominant economic and cultural engine has dried up. Production has fled California due to over-regulation and high taxation, dropping local film production from historical peaks of 80–90% down to roughly 25–30%. They criticize figures like Governor Gavin Newsom for relying on broad economic statistics like California's GDP ranking to dismiss genuine structural issues, corporate flight, and population loss. Tim notes that flying into LA recently presented an apocalyptic view: a multi-day blaze at a chemical warehouse holding tens of millions of tons of chemicals visible from the plane window, alongside burning cars on the 405 freeway.
Tim argues that for Los Angeles to recover, it must stop functioning as a "giant scam for non-profits" driven by what he terms the "empathy industry." Drawing a comparison to Atlantic City, Tim shares a conversation he had with a casino owner at Ocean Casino Resort. The owner explained that concentrating massive populations of non-productive individuals and social programs in one tight geographical area breeds crime, vandalism, and disorder, which ultimately destroys the climate necessary for businesses to thrive. They note that Rudy Giuliani successfully turned New York City around in the 1990s by aggressively cleaning up crime—creating a thriving business environment—even though his late-career antics have made him an easy target for satire.
- Film production inside Los Angeles has dropped from 80–90% historically down to an estimated 25–30%.
- Tim describes landing at LAX while observing a multi-day fire at a warehouse containing 85 million tons of chemicals, alongside a car fire on the 405 freeway.
- Tim references a breakdown of urban management given to him by the owner of the Ocean Casino Resort in Atlantic City.
---
[13:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=793s) AI, Free Speech Censorship, and the UK Crackdown
As the conversation turns toward the future, Joe speculates that rapid developments in artificial intelligence might eventually lessen cultural divides by shifting public attention away from culture-war bickering and toward fundamental questions of surveillance, privacy, and personal rights. However, Joe warns that this shift only works if citizens retain a voice to demand autonomy from AI systems.
This leads Joe and Tim to discuss what they view as a dystopian nightmare scenario unfolding in the United Kingdom. Joe highlights how freedom of speech in England has been severely suppressed, pointing out that citizens are being arrested over social media activity. Tim and Joe express disbelief over reports of individuals facing arrest not just for writing tweets, but for simple retweets and likes, warning that such government overreach strips the public of basic civil liberties.
- Joe predicts the next major societal conflict will center on privacy, surveillance, and personal autonomy against AI.
- The hosts express alarm over British authorities arresting citizens over social media likes and retweets.
[14:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=898s) Free Speech Crackdowns and Policing Online Discourse in the UK
Joe Rogan and Tim Dillon discuss how public discontent over high immigration levels is being stifled by European governments, particularly in the United Kingdom. Rogan points out that citizens feel their lived reality is missing from mainstream representation, yet they face severe consequences—including arrest—if they express their grievances online. While acknowledging that some online commentary lacks nuance or eloquence, Rogan argues that citizens in a free society have an absolute right to express concern about national immigration policies.
Dillon elaborates on how UK authorities have tightened control over public discourse by expanding the legal definition of "incitement to violence." He notes that government agencies often fail to account for internet subculture, hyperbole, irony, or dark humor, treating hyperbolic posts as direct threats to public order. The conversation highlights the fundamental clash between American First Amendment protections and European legal frameworks, where speech can be prosecuted if deemed offensive or disruptive.
- On April 1, 2026, news broke that UK police forces scrapped thousands of investigations into non-criminal "legal social media posts" after an official review concluded that police interventions had overreached.
- Dillon notes the sharp contrast between free speech laws in the United States and the United Kingdom, where citizens lack constitutional protections for offensive or controversial speech.
---
[17:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1042s) Cultural Tensions, Integration, and the UK Rape Gang Scandals
Reflecting on a recent 21-day stay in London and Paris, Tim Dillon contrasts the cosmopolitan nature of major global cities with the realities of smaller towns across the UK. While Londoners are accustomed to cultural diversity, Dillon argues that rapid demographic shifts outside major hubs create severe friction, particularly in regions burdened by economic stagnation. The cultural divide is further compounded when incoming migrant populations hold starkly different values regarding women's rights, LGBTQ+ rights, freedom of speech, and religious tolerance.
The discussion turns to the widespread cover-up of grooming and rape gang scandals across various British cities. Rogan and Dillon express outrage over reports revealing that authorities and media outlets suppressed details of these crimes for decades to avoid provoking anti-immigrant sentiment. Dillon emphasizes that in a functioning society, citizens have a right to full transparency regarding organized crime operating within their borders, regardless of the perpetrators' backgrounds.
- An independent report highlighted by MP Rupert Lowe and the Restore Britain party detailed decades of victim testimonies regarding widespread sexual violence and systemic cover-ups by authorities.
- Estimates cited during the discussion suggest that up to 250,000 young girls may have been victimized across the UK over several decades.
- Dillon points out that while the overwhelming majority of migrants are law-abiding, shielding criminal networks under the guise of maintaining community cohesion fundamentally undermines public trust.
---
[19:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1189s) Political Shifts in Dearborn and Globalist Migration Policy
Rogan and Dillon turn their attention to domestic examples of cultural shifts, highlighting Dearborn, Michigan. Rogan recounts how progressive voters initially championed open migration policies, leading to a demographic shift that elected a socially conservative Muslim majority to the city government. Shortly after taking power, the new council voted to ban LGBTQ+ Pride flags on city property—an outcome that left local progressive allies stunned by the collision of their ideals with conservative religious governance.
Expanding to global politics, Dillon argues that mass immigration across Europe and North America is driven by supranational bodies like the European Union rather than local democratic consensus. He asserts that global technocrats view migration through an economic lens—using cheap labor to artificially expand GDP and counter falling birth rates—while remaining entirely indifferent to the preservation of national culture, sovereignty, or public infrastructure.
- Ireland is highlighted as an example of a European nation where citizens feel supranational EU mandates on migration quotas and carbon emissions supersede national sovereignty.
- Dillon argues that economic migrants are seeking better opportunities, but working-class citizens in host countries suffer from inflated housing markets, strained healthcare systems, and diminished economic prospects.
- Rogan observes the political irony wherein progressive advocates of open borders end up importing populations whose social values directly conflict with progressive ideology.
---
[27:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1666s) Elite Intentions, Geo-Political Instability, and Weaponized Empathy
Dillon critiques the ruling class's response to public pushback, noting that legacy media and political elites systematically label concerned citizens as "racists," "jingoists," or "ethnocentric" to evade accountability. He posits that social instability benefits centralized power structures: widespread civil unrest makes populations far more willing to surrender civil liberties and accept militarized policing or algorithmic surveillance in exchange for basic safety.
The conversation touches on how Western foreign policy directly fuels global migration crises. Dillon highlights the military interventions in Libya and Syria, which dismantled stable state structures, destabilized Europe, and created humanitarian disasters including open slave markets in North Africa. He criticizes Western moral posturing, asserting that elite institutions weaponize the genuine empathy of well-meaning citizens while ignoring the economic decay of domestic communities.
- Dillon points out the hypocrisy of urban elites who express deep concern for foreign conflicts while neglecting domestic poverty or remaining alienated from their own family members.
- The destabilization of Syria and the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya are cited as primary catalysts for the European migrant crisis over the past decade.
- Rogan and Dillon argue that an armed citizenry—such as in the United States—provides a structural buffer against government overreach that non-armed European populations lack.
---
[31:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1891s) Economic Reality, Social Friction, and Civil Unrest in Europe
Closing out the discussion, Dillon emphasizes that successful assimilation depends almost entirely on a booming economy. In thriving metropolises like New York City, diverse populations can integrate smoothly because economic opportunities are abundant. However, introducing large numbers of migrants into economically depressed areas creates an explosive environment where both locals and newcomers struggle to survive.
Rogan and Dillon bring up recent violent outbreaks across Europe, including viral footage comparing the relative tranquility of Paris in 1998 to its current state, as well as severe civil unrest in Belfast following high-profile violent crimes involving migrants. They argue that the complete exclusion of working-class voters from decisions regarding national demographics has pushed public frustration to a boiling point.
- Dillon notes that severe civil unrest broke out in Ireland and Northern Ireland after horrific incidents of violence left local residents feeling completely ignored by their government.
- Rogan emphasizes that denying citizens a vote on fundamental questions of national policy guarantees long-term instability and social fragmentation across the West.
[32:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1941s) AI Disruption, the Death of Homeownership, and the Sell-Off of America
Tim Dillon and Joe Rogan dive into how artificial intelligence is on the verge of radically reshaping society, arguing that political leaders have already mentally checked out of fixing long-standing domestic issues because they know what is coming. Dillon points out that homeownership has effectively been abandoned for an entire generation. Millions of people in their thirties and40s live in small apartments, typing away on MacBooks without ever owning a yard to host friends, drink wine, smoke cigars, or watch a game. Instead of building a stable foundation for their lives, they are being told they simply do not need a home, while basic needs like healthcare are systematically ignored or shut down. On one hand, elite technocrats anticipate AI solving complex medical problems and extending lifespans; on the other, they are preparing for massive economic disruption, widespread joblessness, and unprecedented wealth inequality.
Dillon argues that politicians from both major parties are essentially "selling the country off for parts" because they see this transition as inevitable. Rogue tech giants—like Anthropic—are growing creepily powerful while operating with little accountability. Rogan draws a historical parallel, noting that corporate power hasn't been this absolute since the British East India Company ruled entire nations with its own standing army. The key difference today is that tech conglomerates control robot armies and artificial intelligence. They are striving toward a singular goal: creating a literal digital god that will be controlled not by humanity, but by a select group of unelected tech elites.
- **The Lost American Dream:** A huge demographic of adults have forgotten what homeownership feels like and are conditioned to accept living in cramped rentals without a long-term core.
- **Corporate Dominance:** Rogan compares modern tech companies' unchecked authority to the East India Company, which held an enormous private military and conquered entire subcontinents.
- **The AI Threat:** Elon Musk's prediction that AI will soon be a million times smarter than the smartest human ever lived underscores the shift toward a machine-led paradigm.
> "The goal is to create literally a digital god. And it's going to be controlled by not us, not the collective human race. It's going to be controlled by a select few group of people."
---
[35:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2153s) Social Control, Government Trust, and European vs. American Mindsets
As AI and economic changes loom, the conversation shifts to how governments will manage an increasingly anxious population. Dillon warns that under the guise of providing basic security, authority figures will force compliance by offering a simple trade-off: in exchange for safe streets, food, and a modest stipend, citizens will have to conform to specific beliefs and behaviors. He notes that COVID proved how quickly people back down and embrace absurd restrictions when placed in a corner, seeking comfort from whoever claims authority.
This leads to a discussion on public trust in government. Dillon, who loves visiting London, observes that Europeans and Brits tend to have far higher trust in their state because they receive tangible benefits like universal healthcare and social safety nets. Consequently, they operate as a society governed strictly by rules and order, making them far more compliant with grand government plans compared to Americans. Rogan agrees that while socialized systems provide undeniable stability, the trade-off in the United States has always been a baseline of deep-seated skepticism toward authority—a culture that simultaneously produces world-altering geniuses and sociopaths.
- **COVID Compliance:** The pandemic served as a blueprint showing how quickly populations will surrender personal autonomy for a perception of safety.
- **Cultural Differences:** Unlike Americans who inherently question institutional authority, European populations trust their governments more due to socialized healthcare and public safety nets.
- **The American Character:** Rogan describes American culture in three words—"out of balance"—balancing incredible innovation with extreme gluttony and sociopathy across a sprawling population of 350 million.
---
[39:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2345s) Tech Billionaires, the Antichrist, and the Human Obsession with Innovation
Dillon highlights a bizarre cultural trend among Silicon Valley elites who are suddenly embracing Christianity and end-times theology. He singles out Peter Thiel's fascination with the Antichrist—pointing to Thiel delivering entire lectures on the subject—and notes how prominent figures like JD Vance are navigating the intersection of deep religious faith and tech-money backing. Dillon finds it fascinating that people trying to build a digital god are aligning with traditional religious believers to bring both worlds under one political tent.
Rogan speculates on what happens if creating an all-knowing digital entity is simply the ultimate, natural endpoint of human curiosity. Throughout history, every major technological leap—from fashioning stone spears and riding horses to inventing wheels, internal combustion engines, and asphalt roads—dramatically transformed human existence until the past became unrecognizable. Rogan quips that if you showed an *Australopithecus* modern-day Manhattan in 2026, they would scream in terror. When contemplating what an entity a million times smarter than humans would do, Rogan jokes that it certainly wouldn't waste time building bloated infrastructure projects like California's high-speed rail; instead, it might conclude that humans are unnecessary, or simply invent instantaneous wormhole travel to Starbucks.
- **Peter Thiel & Eschatology:** Silicon Valley figures are increasingly fixated on theological concepts like the Antichrist and divine providence while simultaneously engineering superintelligence.
- **Exponential Technological Progress:** Human tools evolved from stone weapons tied to sticks, to bows and arrows, horse-drawn carts, engines, and eventually hyper-complex automated systems.
- **California High-Speed Rail:** Rogan uses the vastly expensive, heavily delayed project as a prime example of human governmental incompetence that superintelligent AI would immediately bypass or cancel.
> "If Elon is correct and there's something that's a million times smarter than human beings... why would we let people govern? Why would we let people build that stupid rail station in California that's cost how much money and produced what?"
---
[43:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2610s) Digital Isolation, Purpose Loss, and the Rise of Institutional Brainwashing
Despite the conveniences of modern technology, Dillon argues that the human experience stopped improving around 2014 or 2015. Since then, digitization has stripped away personal touch, turning everyday life cold, corporate, and sterile. He describes a recent trip to McDonald's where customers order through touchscreen kiosks while a panicked nine-year-old kid is yelled at by customers over a missing McFlurry receipt. Removing human interaction deprives millions of people of purpose, leaving a massive population of underemployed or disengaged adults who spend their lives staring at phones, playing video games, and consuming media without any real connection.
Rogan adds that if humanity possessed an "anxiety meter," it would show baseline stress levels skyrocketing since the advent of the internet and social media. People are now forced to digest global horrors on their phones 24/7, feeling compelled to hold and broadcast an opinion on complex geopolitical issues half a world away. Dillon contrasts this with his childhood, where people excelled at a single craft, lived simply, and built genuine local relationships without being forced to perform political morality. Looking at younger generations, Dillon sees a sharp divide: while Zoomers exhibit a healthy, cynical dose of nihilism and lean into self-starting paths like crypto, adults in their 30s and 40s have become blind "institutionalists" who defer all thinking to approved academic, governmental, or non-profit authority figures.
- **Sterile Modern Living:** Automated ordering systems and online shopping have removed human connection and the healthy friction of navigating the physical world.
- **Information Overload:** Continuous exposure to global tragedy forces individuals to constantly manage cognitive stress and perform moral righteousness online.
- **The Death of Independent Thought:** Dillon criticizes the 30-to-40-year-old demographic for relying on institutions (like NYU or non-profit studies) for their opinions, having been conditioned to view thinking for oneself as dangerous or inherently taboo.
[048:05] Corporate Pride & Aesthetic Politics
Tim Dillon takes aim at corporate identity politics and virtual signaling, questioning why institutions like Citibank, Chase, or Chobani Yogurt feel compelled to align themselves with social movements. Speaking as a gay man, Dillon argues that everyday citizens—regardless of sexual orientation—do not need or request banks or baseball teams (like the San Diego Padres) to parade rainbow uniforms or endorse progressive causes. He points out that this empty "aesthetic politics" fails to improve anyone's material life, such as providing healthcare, and instead fuels public fatigue and resentment. As a result, forced performative support backfires, causing a decline in acceptance and leading to dropping approval numbers for issues like gay marriage.
To illustrate his point, Dillon uses a humorous analogy involving Scientology. He explains that while he has no problem with Scientology—playfully joking about liking cults—he would find it absurd and overwhelming if his local bank branch were plastered in Scientology branding for the entire month of June. The core problem, he emphasizes, is that American culture is being torn apart by people desperate to project their moral superiority and force their personal worldviews onto others instead of embracing a "live and let live" ethos.
- **Drop in Marriage Support:** Public support for gay marriage has fallen by 11 points due to backlash against overbearing corporate optics.
- **Dillon on Scientologist Whistleblowers:** He expresses disdain for ex-Scientologists who speak out against the church after profiting from it for decades: *"If you do something for 30 goddamn years and get rich and famous, shut your mouth... Have the dignity to go to your house and shut your mouth about it."*
- **Tom Cruise Example:** Dillon and Joe Rogan joke that it would be ridiculous if Tom Cruise turned around and complained about Scientology after the church protected him and enabled his megastar career.
- **On Unlikable Friends:** Dillon values entertaining personalities over moral purity, noting that he stays friends with chaotic or deeply flawed people simply because they bring flavor to life: *"Many of my friends are not good people... But they entertain me. And that used to be okay."*
[052:52] Conformity, Cancel Culture, and Armie Hammer
Rogan and Dillon contrast the rigid ideological compliance of the younger generation with the colorful, unvarnished personalities of the past, such as comedian Joey Diaz. Dillon criticizes modern elite institutions and liberal arts colleges for conditioning young adults to follow strict thought patterns. Fearing social excommunication, people become terrified of voicing independent thoughts or stepping outside corporate-approved bounds. This corporate culture acts like a secular cult, demanding complete adherence to avoid harsh social punishment.
The conversation shifts to actor Armie Hammer and the public scandal surrounding his controversial direct messages. Dillon defends Hammer's acting talent and expresses relief that public figures can eventually return after cancellation attempts. The two discuss the nature of Hammer's explicit texts, which detailed extreme cannibalistic fantasies. Dillon quips that even if someone were to actually engage in something so absurd, as long as no one was harmed, society should maintain a pragmatic "live and let live" attitude toward human weirdness.
- **Institutional Dependence:** Young professionals derive their entire self-worth from elite schools, internships, and corporate positions, making them hyper-fragile when their core beliefs are challenged.
- **Armie Hammer Scandal:** Hammer faced severe career consequences after leaked texts detailed explicit fantasies of eating human meat and consuming organ tissue (such as trying a human heart).
[057:27] The Story of General Butt Naked
Rogan introduces the unbelievable story of Joshua Milton Blahyi, better known by his wartime moniker "General Butt Naked." A former warlord during the First Liberian Civil War, Blahyi led the "Naked Base Commandos" (or "Butt Naked Brigade"), a unit composed largely of child soldiers who fought entirely naked except for shoes and charms, believing it granted them immunity from bullets. Rogan details how Blahyi engaged in human sacrifice, drug smuggling, and cannibalism, eating the hearts of victims before battle to gain power.
Following the war, Blahyi underwent a dramatic religious conversion, becoming an evangelical Christian pastor and seeking forgiveness for his past actions. Dillon marvels at the bizarre absurdity of his life trajectory, half-joking that Blahyi should be invited onto the podcast because he has "led a full life." The discussion prompts Rogan to look up the founding history of Liberia, tracing its establishment by the American Colonization Society as a settlement for freed African Americans, which later endured severe civil conflicts.
- **Liberia's Founding:** Established in 1822 by the American Colonization Society as a home for freed enslaved and freeborn Black Americans; roughly 16,000 migrated there over several decades.
- **Wartime Tactics:** General Butt Naked traded locally mined diamonds and gold to Mexican cartels for cocaine and weapons, lacing his child soldiers' food with cocaine and showing them Jean-Claude Van Damme action movies to desensitize them to killing.
- **Casualty Estimates:** Blahyi has publicly claimed responsibility for up to 20,000 deaths during the war, though these figures remain heavily disputed.
[01:01:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=3716s) The Fragility of Western Society & Immigration
Reflecting on the raw chaos of warlords and third-world instability, Rogan and Dillon observe that most Westerners live in an exceptionally privileged bubble, insulated from the harsh realities that govern much of the world. However, that sense of security is rapidly eroding. Dillon points out that while previous generations assumed Western civilization was unbreakable, recent events—including pandemic disruptions, economic shifts, changing warfare, and rapid demographic changes—have exposed just how fragile modern societies truly are.
The conversation turns to the complexities of global migration. Dillon notes that while third-world citizens naturally seek better lives in Western nations and immigration brings clear cultural and economic benefits (such as diverse goods, food, and labor), the pace of change matters immensely. Rapid, uncontrolled demographic shifts without public consensus create severe cultural friction and political backlash, proving that maintaining a stable society requires delicate management.
- **Third-World Chaos:** Dillon references cities like Karachi to illustrate how chaotic daily life is for most of the global population compared to protected Western nations.
- **Erosion of Stability:** Recent years have altered major downtown commercial centers across American cities, proving that economic and social systems can unravel quickly.
- **The Pitfalls of Rapid Change:** Rapid cultural and economic transformations enacted overnight lead to strong societal backlash if the existing population feels excluded from the decision-making process.
<ElicitationsGroup message="Explore related discussions from this episode:">
<Elicitation label="Walkthrough Part 3 (Prior section on media & culture)" query="Give me a detailed walkthrough of part 3 of the transcript for Joe Rogan Experience #2518 with Tim Dillon."/>
<Elicitation label="Walkthrough Part 5 (Next section)" query="Give me a detailed walkthrough of part 5 of the transcript for Joe Rogan Experience #2518 with Tim Dillon."/>
</ElicitationsGroup>
[01:05:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=3906s) Cultural Assimilation, Toxic Masculinity, and the Breakdown of the American Family
The conversation opens with a discussion on the uneven realities of immigration across European nations like Sweden and Ireland. Rogan notes that while cosmopolitan elites praise open borders, people in working-class suburbs and stagnant economies bear the brunt of rising crime rates, drug trade, and grooming scandals. In places like Sweden, citizens used to enjoy a remarkably safe, high-trust society—"riding their fucking bicycles and eating herring"—before an influx of refugees from war-torn regions altered the demographic landscape. Dillon dryly quips that not every refugee turns out like "General Butt Naked," the infamous Liberian warlord Joshua Milton Blahyi who ate human hearts before famously converting to a Christian pastor.
Dillon points out that cultural attitudes toward women, family dynamics, and courtship do not magically evaporate the moment someone steps off a plane. In many source countries, women possess far fewer rights, and male-dominated social structures are deeply ingrained. Dillon highlights the supreme irony of western left-wing activists who fight "toxic masculinity" at home, yet fiercely defend bringing in populations whose core doctrines embody those exact patriarchal norms. When Rogan suggests that proponents believe these cultures can be "tamed," Dillon compares it to the geopolitical version of the "I can fix him" complex:
> "They really believe that once all of these people come to these countries and see how great it is to be a childless 40-year-old woman working in data entry at a large faceless corporation that's gay on Pride Month... when they see how happy she or he or they is living in a society where you don't own anything."
This leads Dillon to reflect on how atomized American society has become compared to traditional cultures like India, where even slum dwellers maintain deep family ties rather than abandoning relatives to the streets or to addiction. In America, individual fulfillment is elevated above all else. Dillon shares a personal anecdote about a political disagreement with his father: when he mentioned attending his cousin's wedding to his therapist of six months, the therapist simply advised, "Well, you don't have to go... if you feel like it's going to make you happy, go." Dillon laments that American therapy often enables people to act like "selfish psychopaths," encouraging them to cut ties with mothers, fathers, or siblings at the slightest friction. With family and community stripped away, corporations, state apparatuses, and online ideologies step in to fill the void.
---
[01:11:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4307s) DMTX, the Eleusis Project, and Mapping the Psychedelic Realm
As Rogan takes a hit of a CBD pen, Dillon briefly panics, thinking Rogan is puffing on DMT to blast off mid-podcast. This sparks a discussion on psychedelics and whether Dillon should finally try DMT. Rogan mentions pioneering researcher Dr. Andrew Gallimore, a neurobiologist and pharmacologist who is co-founding "Eleusis" (named after the ancient Greek Eleusinian Mysteries) on the island of Bequia in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
Rather than a fleeting 15-minute smoked trip or an ayahuasca ceremony, the Eleusis initiative utilizes continuous intravenous DMT infusion (DMTX) to keep subjects in an extended 5-hour psychedelic state. Discussing content from YouTube creator A.J. Gentile of *The Why Files* and guest Danny Jones, Rogan explains that researchers are attempting to systematically chart and map the DMT landscape:
* **Mapping the Realm:** Subjecting explorers to prolonged doses allows them to return to identical locations in the psychedelic space and document consistent, recurring entities.
* **The Jester Archetype:** Rogan details his own encounters with fractal, mocking jesters who flipped him off by the millions to teach him a cosmic lesson: *"I said, 'Oh, I take myself too seriously.' They go, 'Yes!'... It's like little corrections of your psyche."*
* **Physical Origin:** While historically thought to originate purely in the pineal gland, research by Rick Strassman (author of *DMT: The Spirit Molecule*) and the Cottonwood Research Foundation suggests DMT is produced throughout the human brain, lungs, and liver.
* **The Nature of Reality:** Rogan argues against dismissing these trips as mere subjective hallucinations, noting that human perception is already vastly limited: *"The idea that we know what's real and what's not real... 'This is reality: you go to Tim Hortons, you get yourself a donut, you go to work.' No, I have a feeling that experience is you being able to see something that exists around you."*
Dillon jokes that he is terrified of trying DMT only to encounter "fractals of JD Vance yelling at me to learn about AI," but acknowledges how profound these sudden, abrupt shifts in human consciousness can be.
---
[01:19:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4762s) Extraterrestrials, Religion, and Government Disclosure
The conversation pivots to UFOs, interdimensional entities, and the whispers surrounding government disclosure. Rogan brings up a persistent rumor circulating among intelligence insiders regarding why official disclosure has been withheld for decades. Supposedly, top government officials quietly briefed a group of prominent religious leaders and pastors to test how they would react to a world-altering revelation.
According to these leaks, the narrative provided to the religious leaders was that human beings are the product of accelerated genetic evolution conducted by extraterrestrial visitors. Under this theory, organized religion was purposefully engineered by aliens as an ancient origin story—complete with strict moral codes, guidelines, and deities to worship—to keep early human civilization from dissolving into chaotic self-destruction. Dillon laughs at the mind-bending premise and quips that Donald Trump ought to be the president who breaks that news to the public during a live press conference.
<FollowUp label="Want to dive into the rest of Joe Rogan's discussion with Tim Dillon?" query="Provide a detailed walkthrough for Part 6 of Joe Rogan Experience #2518 with Tim Dillon."/>
[01:20:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4821s) Ancient Texts, Alien Gods, and the Book of Enoch
The conversation kicks off with Tim Dillon jokingly riffing on what he would say if he took over the airwaves: reminding everyone that the straits are opening and closing, markets are fluctuating, and that humanity was ultimately created by aliens who told a bunch of lies before telling everyone to just "keep going to work." Joe Rogan pivots to the idea that ancient religious texts aren't necessarily void of truth, but rather formulated in a way for a "tribal primate brain to accept and understand." Rogan points out that much of the Bible is historically verifiable, but notes how certain profound texts were omitted over time.
Rogan recounts how Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna strongly urged him to read the ancient *Book of Enoch*. Following her persistent recommendation, Rogan listened to the audiobook while sitting in a 195°F sauna ("sweating my balls off"). He explains that the text—found among the Dead Sea Scrolls alongside the Book of Isaiah—details how "the Watchers" descended to Earth, mated with human women, and sired the Nephilim, a race of ruling giants. Rabbinic authorities ultimately excluded Enoch from the biblical canon because it contradicted existing Torah and Talmudic narratives, leading both host and guest to ponder who gets to decide what becomes official dogma.
- The *Book of Enoch* was preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls in the exact same collection where the complete Book of Isaiah was discovered.
- Rogan notes that the Dead Sea Scroll version of Isaiah was virtually verbatim identical to versions dated a thousand years later, demonstrating meticulous textual preservation by scribes.
- Rogan mentions his own comedy routine where he reads from the Book of Ezekiel, highlighting how portions sound like encounters with extraterrestrial craft or UFOs, interspersed with wild stories about prostitutes.
---
[01:23:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5031s) Government Secrets and the Jimmy Carter Disclosure Legend
The discussion moves to the classified secrets held within subterranean corridors of government agencies. Rogan brings up the long-circulating lore surrounding former President Jimmy Carter's alleged UFO disclosure briefing. The story goes that Carter—who officially reported seeing a mysterious UFO in 1969 prior to his presidency—requested a full classified briefing on extraterrestrials after taking office, only to be left openly weeping by what was revealed to him.
Tim Dillon brings humor to the subject, poking fun at Carter’s saintly reputation ("He built houses... he was into the peanut stuff") while noting that anyone who reaches the White House is inherently an operator. Podcast producer Jamie Vernon interjects to clarify that the story about Carter crying stems from second- and third-hand anecdotes rather than official records, prompting Dillon to joke that those are his "favorite" kinds of stories. Rogan references UFO researcher Richard Dolan as one of the most balanced, evidence-based authors on UAP history.
- **Jimmy Carter's 1969 Sightings:** Carter filed a report describing a strange light in the sky over Leary, Georgia, but never publicly claimed the subsequent official briefings broke him emotionally.
- **Richard Dolan:** Highlighted by Rogan as a premier UAP historian who meticulously documents bizarre military encounters without blindly accepting baseless claims.
- **Jake Barber & Jesse Michels:** Dillon mentions seeing coverage of Jake Barber, a figure claiming he used a helicopter to transport a recovered UFO; Rogan notes creator Jesse Michels frequently conducts deep-dive longform interviews on these topics.
---
[01:27:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5233s) Swarm Drones, Jellyfish Formations, and the F-15 Incident
The conversation shifts to unexplained atmospheric phenomena and modern military drone incidents, particularly mysterious swarms spotted over military bases in New Jersey and across the East Coast. Rogan and Dillon review a news report that broke 13 hours prior regarding a downed U.S. F-15 pilot who survived a dramatic engagement involving advanced Iranian-deployed drone swarms in the Middle East.
According to pilot accounts, the drones operated in a synchronized "jellyfish formation," featuring larger mother drones carrying smaller interconnected drone units below like tentacle legs. Sources quoted in news coverage described the aerial environment as a "minefield of drones" and "real alien shit." Rogan and Dillon debate whether such capabilities represent breakthrough technology from DARPA, foreign displays of power from China or Russia, or something fundamentally outside conventional human engineering.
- The downed F-15 pilot ejected after encountering a synchronized, multi-tiered swarm described as moving together in a "jellyfish" structure.
- **Eric Weinstein's Hypothesis:** Rogan mentions theoretical physicist Eric Weinstein's belief that top-secret defense programs may be operating on a completely separate, secret branch of physics hidden from mainstream academia.
---
[01:29:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5374s) Quantum Heartbeat Tracking and Government Trolling
The discussion takes an intriguing turn into military recovery capabilities when Rogan brings up news surrounding the rescue of a downed American pilot. Reports alleged that the CIA utilized a non-invasive, ultra-long-range sensor system capable of picking up a human target's unique electromagnetic heartbeat signature from up to 40 or 70 miles away, pairing the data with AI to filter out background environmental noise.
Rogan expresses skepticism over whether "quantum magnetometry" is actual working technology or a clever cover story fed to the media to hide sophisticated high-resolution satellite surveillance. Meanwhile, the hosts touch on a bizarre White House social post that teased an announcement with the phrase "Q-posting," which turned out to be a tongue-in-cheek joke referencing quantum computing ("and by Q, we mean quantum"). Dillon marvels at the persistence of QAnon followers, praising their decade-long commitment to "trusting the plan" as the quintessential, non-stop American spirit.
> "I've never encountered people who are so committed to anything... They're 10 years in going, 'Trust the plan. It's coming.'... That level of commitment is what America is about. It's about not giving up." — **Tim Dillon**
- **Quantum Magnetometry:** A reported CIA tool claiming to isolate a human's unique cardiac electromagnetic signature across dozens of miles using quantum sensors and AI filtering.
- **White House Teaser:** The administration trolled the internet by posting about "Q," later clarifying it referred strictly to upcoming national quantum computing initiatives.
- **Gillespie/Maxwell Aside:** The section concludes with the hosts briefly questioning why such high-tech tracking wasn't deployed in high-profile missing persons or fugitive cases, such as Ghislaine Maxwell before her arrest in New Hampshire.
[01:34:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5674s) Ransom Notes, Crypto Demands, and the Disappearance of Nancy Guthrie
Joe Rogan and Tim Dillon begin by discussing the bewildering updates surrounding the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie. Rogan brings up recent news reports mentioning a second ransom note that claimed she had died following her abduction. Tim Dillon points out the bizarre nature of such a claim, joking that telling someone the victim is already dead is a terrible way to demand ransom. Rogan reads through headlines detailing that while an earlier demand asked for millions in cryptocurrency, a subsequent note sent shortly after her disappearance claimed she was deceased without explicitly naming a new dollar amount or demanding money for her body.
This leads both hosts to speculate whether the abduction was an inside job involving someone close to the family. They use Perplexity on set to search for the specific dollar amounts originally requested by the kidnappers. Rogan guesses $10 million, while Dillon guesses $5 million; the search confirms multi-million dollar demands ranging between $4 million and $6 million paid in Bitcoin, accompanied by strict deadlines and escalating threats.
- **Nancy Guthrie Ransom Details:** Ransom requests ranged from $4 million to $6 million in cryptocurrency (primarily Bitcoin) with strict payment deadlines.
- **Subsequent Note:** A follow-up note disclosed that Nancy Guthrie had died, yet omitted any specific request for payment or ransom for the return of her body.
---
[01:37:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5847s) Crypto Sponsorships, Shadowy Funders, and Political Influence Operations
The discussion pivots from the Guthrie ransom notes to the broader, often shady world of cryptocurrency and political influence. Tim Dillon recounts a personal story about a high-paying podcast sponsorship offer from a secretive crypto group operating between Dubai and London. The group claimed they were keeping their identities hidden out of fear of being kidnapped. However, when Dillon insisted on meeting them in person to sit down over dinner and understand their business before taking their money, the group immediately pulled the offer and refused to meet.
Dillon and Rogan discuss how taking unvetted sponsorship money can compromise creators—pointing out that shadow entities or foreign governments (like Russia) can easily plant money to later expose or discredit public figures. Dillon adds that a friend working in digital media production informed him that Democratic Super PACs and special interest groups are heavily funding long-form YouTube shows. Their strategy is to build or buy access to captive audiences of 5 to 10 million viewers, creating platforms where targeted political messaging can be subtly injected.
- **Tim Dillon's Dubai Crypto Encounter:** A secretive memecoin platform offered a massive sponsorship but abruptly cancelled when Dillon required an in-person meeting.
- **Super PAC Media Funding:** Political Super PACs are increasingly funding long-form social media and YouTube content to secure large, politically influenceable audiences.
---
[01:40:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6040s) "Hawk Tuah Girl" Haliey Welch and the Crypto Craze
Rogan and Dillon turn their attention to meme coins and the sudden monetization of viral internet fame, specifically highlighting "Hawk Tuah Girl" (Haliey Welch). They reflect on how quickly internet celebrities get swept up by crypto promoters looking to launch pump-and-dump token schemes. While acknowledging that Welch made significant money off her viral moment, Dillon notes that promoting speculative tokens often backfires the moment fans lose money and turn on the creator.
Dillon laments the fleeting nature of modern viral fame, observing that despite her instant wealth, navigating the predatory nature of online marketing and crypto promotions at 22 years old is a double-edged sword.
- **Haliey Welch ("Hawk Tuah Girl"):** Discussed as an example of viral overnight fame being immediately leveraged by crypto token promotions.
---
[01:42:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6138s) The White House UFC Event and "The End of MAGA"
The conversation shifts to Tim Dillon's viral commentary regarding a UFC event held on the White House lawn, which he jokingly calls the definitive peak—and logical end—of the MAGA movement's cultural arc. Dillon describes how for a specific segment of the population, political allegiance is less about policy and more about being "along for the ride" and enjoying a non-stop party, complete with boat parades, flag-waving rallies, and high-energy spectacles.
Dillon recounts how during the White House fights, fighter Joaquin Buckley ("Josh Hoit") called out Michelle Obama in his post-fight interview. Dillon argues that a UFC event featuring fighter call-outs on the White House lawn represents the absolute climax of political spectacle: "That is the clock has struck midnight. I don't know what else you could do." Rogan and Dillon compare this cultural peak to famous inflection points in pop culture, such as the infamous celebrity "Imagine" video during the COVID-19 pandemic, where a cultural movement reaches its absolute limit and can go no further.
- **Cultural Inflection Point:** Tim Dillon compares the White House UFC spectacle to Hunter S. Thompson's famous wave speech—a moment where a cultural era reaches its absolute peak.
- **Fighter Post-Fight Interview:** UFC fighter Joaquin Buckley made controversial remarks about Michelle Obama during the post-fight mic moment on the White House lawn.
---
[01:45:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6318s) WWE-Style Entrance Proposals and Political spectacle
Building on the absurd nature of modern political entertainment, Dillon and Rogan improvise a pro-wrestling scenario that should have happened on the White House lawn. Dillon jokes that instead of contemplating lawsuits, Michelle Obama should have made a dramatic, Undertaker-style entrance—descending from the White House balcony on a zipline wearing a cape to body-slam the fighter in the octagon.
"If Michelle Obama had made an Undertaker-like entrance and got on the stage and then body slammed... she would have been president next with no election!" jokes Dillon. Rogan and Dillon lament that American politics has completely transformed into a high-ratings reality show, concluding that political figures should lean into the absurdity and entertainment value rather than defaulting to legal threats and lawsuits.
---
[01:47:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6443s) "Senior Prom" of an Era and Unanswered Questions
Reflecting on the sheer visual scale of the White House fight event—complete with military flyovers and a full card of knockouts—Dillon characterizes it as the political equivalent of "senior prom." It represents that fleeting summer night before everyone goes off to college, knowing that things will never be quite the same again. Rogan agrees, noting the wild trajectory of Donald Trump's political career from the moment he rode down the golden escalator through various scandals, elections, and assassination attempts.
As the segment concludes, Rogan brings up the broader political climate and ongoing national unanswered questions, expressing disbelief over how quickly major news events—such as open investigations into political assassination attempts—fade from public attention and the media cycle.
- **UFC White House Event:** Described as the only UFC card where every single fight on the main card ended in a knockout.
<FollowUp label="Want me to continue with Part 8 of this transcript?" query="Write a detailed, faithful walkthrough of Part 8 of the Joe Rogan Experience #2518 transcript following the same guidelines."/>
[01:49:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6548s) The Butler Rally Shooting and "Faked" Assassinations
Joe Rogan and Tim Dillon dive into the fallout of the attempted assassination of Donald Trump at the Butler, Pennsylvania rally. Dillon jokingly suggests that if the government wants a truly honest and unbiased investigation, they should just put Israel in charge to run the inquiry and handle the conclusions. Switching gears to the actual aftermath, Rogan highlights that two men wounded during the event—James Copenhaver and David Dutch—have filed federal lawsuits against the United States over life-altering physical and emotional injuries, alleging extreme negligence by the U.S. Secret Service.
```
Butler Rally Shooting
│
┌─────────────────────────┴─────────────────────────┐
▼ ▼
[Civil Lawsuits Filed] [Secret Service Failure]
James Copenhaver & David Dutch sue US Government Former Director Kimberly Cheatle
Alleging severe negligence by Secret Service mishandled security & roof slopes
```
The discussion turns to the sheer incompetence of the security detail, recalling former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle and her bizarre explanation that the sloped roof posed a safety hazard for snipers. Dillon cracks up at the absurdity of the narrative, noting how the shooter didn't even roll off the roof after being taken down. He adds that if an assassination attempt were ever faked, he wouldn't even be mad—he would just genuinely love a behind-the-scenes special showing how they pulled it off.
- **Victims Sued:** James Copenhaver (shot twice) and David Dutch (shot in the stomach) filed federal lawsuits against the U.S. Secret Service for negligence.
- **Former Secret Service Director:** Kimberly Cheatle was heavily criticized for her handling of the rally security and her comments regarding roof slopes.
---
[01:51:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6660s) Barry Weiss, CBS News, and "Guilt by Association"
Tim Dillon brings up media personality Barry Weiss, claiming she has isolated herself on the sixth floor of CBS News in a "militarized bunker" guarded by security, completely cut off from the rest of the staff. Rogan asks why Weiss seems to dislike Dillon so much, prompting Tim to explain how she turned on him after he refused to fall in line with her views. Weiss texted him accusing him of being part of a "cultural space of anti-Semitism," which Dillon found ridiculous given her previous public stance against guilt-by-association tactics and cancel culture.
> "She texted me and was like, 'You're part of a world in which people are anti-Semitic'... What am I doing? What is this guilt by association?"
The conversation centers on how Weiss previously championed nuance when criticizing gender ideology and woke culture at *The New York Times*, famous for her exchange with Brian Stelter about "the world gone mad." However, Rogan and Dillon point out that when it comes to Israel and foreign policy, she abandons that nuance entirely, treating any critique of Benjamin Netanyahu or the Israeli government as outright anti-Semitism. Rogan notes how legacy media institutions are dying, and that David Ellison’s Skydance buyout of Paramount—which included buying Weiss's media outlet, *The Free Press*, for a reported $150 million—is just ultra-wealthy owners letting things run wild as traditional TV news collapses.
- **The Free Press Acquisition:** Paramount/Skydance reportedly bought Barry Weiss's media outlet for $150 million as she was named Editor-in-Chief at CBS News.
- **Notable Media Figures Mentioned:** Brian Stelter, David Ellison, Mark Levin, Benjamin Netanyahu.
---
[01:58:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7120s) CIA "Blowback" and the CBS Evening News Meltdown
Dillon expands on the foreign policy debate by invoking the CIA concept of **blowback**. He argues that when institutions or governments attempt to silence people, suppress open conversation, or ignore civilian casualties—whether in Gaza or Lebanon—it creates intense, unavoidable resentment. The only way to permanently silence dissent is through extreme wealth or force; otherwise, shutting down dialogue only makes the inevitable backlash far more explosive.
```
THE DYNAMICS OF BLOWBACK
[Suppression / Intervention] ──► [Silencing Open Debate] ──► [Escalating Resistance]
(Military actions or media (Forcing compliance or (Backlash grows stronger
censorship tactics) labeling critics) and more volatile)
```
Shifting focus back to the bizarre state of legacy broadcast networks, Dillon mocks the recent reboot of the *CBS Evening News* anchored by Tony Dokoupil. In an attempt to shake up the traditional desk format, the network sent Dokoupil to Miami to visit his childhood haunts, leading to a viral segment where the news anchor broke down sobbing in a local Cuban restaurant while reflecting on his father's history as a drug dealer.
> "He's crying in some Cuban restaurant about his drug dealer father... and no one believes anything's real anymore. This is a huge problem in our world."
Rogan and Dillon express total disbelief at the clip, arguing that audiences are exhausted by the artificiality of modern media. They contrast the classic era of elite broadcasting and entertainment with today's landscape, where television anchors assigned to cover wars, famine, and global crises are breaking down on air over their own personal childhood grievances.
- **Anchor Featured:** Tony Dokoupil, co-host/anchor on CBS, whose emotional Miami profile segment drew heavy mockery.
- **Core Concept:** *Blowback*—unintended, adverse consequences resulting from coercive force or heavy-handed suppression.
<FollowUp label="Want to dive into the rest of part 9 of this transcript?" query="Summarize part 9 of Joe Rogan Experience #2518 with Tim Dillon."/>
[02:05:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7504s) Tensions at 60 Minutes and the Firing of Catherine Herridge
Joe Rogan and Tim Dillon dive into internal chaos at CBS News, focusing on high-profile departures and controversies within *60 Minutes*. They discuss how news editor Bari Weiss and *60 Minutes* executive producer Nick Bilton fired investigative reporter Catherine Herridge (referred to in the transcript via garbled audio/phonetics). Bilton penned a harsh termination letter published by *The New York Times*, stating that Herridge’s "antipathy to the future of the show" had come through "loud and clear." The following day, Weiss publicly declared that she only wanted to work in a newsroom "built on trust and mutual respect."
The heart of the dispute centered on allegations that CBS executive leadership instructed journalists to insert unverified assertions and falsehoods into political coverage—instructions Herridge refused to follow, citing a collapse of core values at the top of the organization. Specifically, corporate leadership reportedly intervened in a story regarding protests in Minnesota, demanding the broadcast state that protester Renee Good drove her vehicle directly toward the officer who killed her. Herridge resisted, pointing out that video evidence contradicted that claim, showing the driver actually steering away from the officer despite brushing past him.
- Executive producer Nick Bilton terminated Catherine Herridge for cause, effective immediately, after public friction over editorial direction.
- Herridge alleged CBS executives ordered her to insert unverified claims and false narratives into high-profile political reports.
- The disputed Minnesota protest story hinged on whether Renee Good was attempting to run over a police officer or swerving away, with video contradicting the network's pushed narrative.
- Rogan notes that while the car made contact with the officer, the officer had previously been dragged 300 feet in a prior incident, likely suffering from severe trauma and PTSD.
[02:07:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7653s) Institutional Trust and the Political Motives of Media Executives
Dillon questions the fundamental credibility of modern mainstream media, pointing out that billionaire-backed corporate entities routinely appoint figureheads who lack traditional newsroom experience. He takes aim at Bari Weiss, calling her an opinion columnist who sold her blog and YouTube channel for an inflated price, yet was handed the reins of a legacy news brand without ever working her way up the editorial ranks. Dillon argues that corporate media outlets willingly sacrifice long-term journalistic credibility for short-term political narratives because their primary audience consists of elderly, non-digitally savvy viewers who consume broadcast television without cross-checking facts online.
```
"Their main demographic is 70-year-olds who are having strokes on their couch... They have cataracts and they're hearing this, and it allows them to dismiss it as a justifiable shooting."
```
The conversation shifts to the broader foreign policy alignments driving media narratives and political figures. Dillon contends that certain media executives and commentators operate with an explicit ideological agenda, supporting political candidates primarily based on whether they will take a hardline stance against foreign adversaries like Iran. He highlights how domestic political discourse is increasingly hijacked by single-issue foreign policy priorities, often at odds with the average American's concerns.
- Dillon criticizes the trend of hiring op-ed writers and commentators to run major legacy newsrooms over seasoned investigative journalists.
- Legacy networks rely on an aging demographic that rarely verifies broadcast reporting against raw video or primary sources online.
- Foreign policy agendas—particularly concerning Iran, Israel, and Middle Eastern intervention—frequently dictate media framing and political endorsements.
[02:10:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7824s) Foreign Policy, Political Donors, and Foreign Influence
Rogan and Dillon analyze the stark disconnect between Donald Trump’s populist "America First" platform—which explicitly campaigned on repairing domestic infrastructure and avoiding endless foreign entanglements—and the intense pressure from powerful donor networks to drag the United States into a regional war with Iran. They discuss the public retractions and "gaslighting" by political figures like the Secretary of State, who initially suggested the U.S. was forced to strike Iran because Israel was going to attack anyway, before backpedaling under immense pressure to present a unified front.
```
"Is the motive the strength and prosperity of America, or is it the strength and prosperity of Israel? That's a fair question."
```
Dillon stresses that questioning the motives of ultra-wealthy political donors is not a matter of conspiracy theories or falling into a "victim mindset." He expresses disdain for any group that drenches itself in victimhood, noting that viewing oneself as a victim strips away personal autonomy. However, he insists it is entirely legitimate to audit whether foreign lobbying groups like AIPAC and hawkish mega-donors are advancing policies that serve American interests or pushing the country toward catastrophic military escalation.
- The Secretary of State faced backlash after admitting the U.S. felt forced to join military actions against Iran due to impending unilateral strikes by Israel.
- Populist voters favored Trump's promise to avoid costly, unwinnable Middle Eastern conflicts and focus resources domestically.
- Hawkish donor networks continue pushing for military campaigns aimed at destroying or destabilizing Iran, regardless of the cost in American lives and debt.
- Dillon rejects victimhood mentality, calling on commentators to analyze foreign policy lobbying through the clear lens of national interest.
[02:13:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8006s) The Geopolitical Analogy and Attacks on Anti-War Voices
Comparing foreign relations to personal friendships, Dillon offers a vivid analogy: a toxic friend whom you constantly make excuses for, until your spouse eventually steps in and bans them from the house because their home life is entirely chaotic. He argues that the United States' uncritical backing of military campaigns in Southern Lebanon, Gaza, and potentially Turkey has led to the "worst PR ever" on the global stage, making it impossible for average citizens to justify the endless escalation.
```
"It's like a friend you have who you make excuses for... and then your wife eventually goes, 'They're not allowed here. You can't go out with them. They're a problem.'"
```
Rogan points out the absurd dynamic of peace negotiations, noting that key negotiators keep getting assassinated, prompting Trump to publicly urge leaders to "stop killing the negotiators" and cease bombing operations. Both hosts observe that political figures like Vice President JD Vance, Tucker Carlson, and Megyn Kelly face relentless attacks from neoconservative donors specifically because they push back against foreign military intervention. Dillon notes that Vance recognizes a prolonged foreign war would permanently taint his political future and ruin his long-term ambitions.
- Dillon compares endless foreign alliances to enabling a toxic friend whose chaotic behavior eventually forces you to cut ties.
- Peace efforts are repeatedly derailed by targeted assassinations of diplomatic negotiators and ongoing bombing campaigns in Lebanon and Gaza.
- Media commentators and politicians who advocate against foreign intervention—including JD Vance, Tucker Carlson, and Megyn Kelly—face intense, targeted smears from pro-war donor networks.
- Vance is identified as one of the few figures within the executive orbit actively arguing against expanding Middle Eastern wars.
[02:17:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8269s) Human Rights in Gaza, October 7th, and the Suspension of Elections
Addressing the destruction in Gaza, Rogan and Dillon reject the argument made by defenders of the war—such as Gad Saad—who claim military forces are "doing the best they can." Looking at aerial drone footage of total devastation, Dillon argues that spreading nuclear-level destruction over two years rather than a single blast is inhumane and evil, causing immense suffering to innocent women and children. While acknowledging the atrocities of the October 7th attacks, Dillon notes that those killed at the Nova music festival were largely young, anti-Netanyahu Israelis, highlighting the tragedy across all sides.
```
"It looks like the damage of a nuke just spread out over two years instead of one blast. It's inhumane. It's evil."
```
The hosts raise critical questions about the severe intelligence and security failures on October 7th, wondering how a highly militarized state the size of New Jersey failed to respond for hours. They highlight how Benjamin Netanyahu has blocked official independent investigations and made public questioning of the security lapses practically illegal under wartime restrictions. Furthermore, both Israel and Ukraine have suspended democratic elections due to ongoing conflicts, prompting Rogan and Dillon to cite Bill Clinton's observation that leaders like Netanyahu rely on perpetual war to stay in power and evade accountability.
- The physical destruction across Gaza is described as equivalent to a nuclear blast drawn out over a two-year period.
- Questions remain unanswered regarding the multi-hour delay in military and police response during the October 7th border breaches.
- Benjamin Netanyahu's government has delayed national elections and restricted formal investigations into state security failures during wartime.
- Rogan and Dillon conclude by calling for full transparency across all major historical and political events, from Butler, Pennsylvania to the 9/11 classified documents.
Here is the walkthrough of the transcript section.
---
[02:20:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8430s) System Corruption, $40 Trillion Debt, and the AI Race
Joe Rogan and Tim Dillon begin by discussing the breakdown of institutional trust, with Rogan calling for total transparency and the release of hidden government records. Dillon recalls first meeting Rogan around 2018–2019, noting that while small cracks in the official narrative were barely visible back then, full-scale "sinkholes" have now opened in the reality most people accepted their entire lives. Referring to recent press briefings by figures like Tulsi Gabbard regarding Anthony Fauci and government overreach, Rogan observes that incoming information confirms the system has been fundamentally corrupted for decades.
They question how the modern financial and political apparatus can survive under the weight of nearly $40 trillion in U.S. national debt and the potential collapse of the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency. Dillon raises concerns over the "Manhattan Project style race" for artificial intelligence, noting that while the state frame it as a crucial national security battle against China, the U.S. risks becoming like China in the process. He points out the irony of political leaders like JD Vance expressing concern over social credit systems while government agencies align with tech firms like Palantir to merge citizens' health, tax, and criminal justice databases.
- **National Debt:** Mentioned as approaching $40 trillion (having passed $39 trillion), with both agreeing there is no realistic expectation it will ever be paid back.
- **Foreign Funding & AI:** Dillon highlights that massive capital injections from Middle Eastern nations—specifically the UAE and Qatar—fund Silicon Valley AI startups and Hollywood, creating geopolitical leverage amid regional conflicts.
- **Surveillance Integration:** Dillon critiques Palantir's potential role in consolidating disparate government data into a single tracking mechanism.
---
[02:23:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8586s) Elite Bunkers, Political Disillusionment, and Backlash
Dillon argues that globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum no longer care about individual property ownership, small business creation, or middle-class prosperity. Instead, the ultra-wealthy are hoarding capital, heavily investing in AI, and constructing personal survival bunkers. The conversation shifts to the disconnect between the public and the ruling class, highlighted by news of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump purchasing an island. Dillon notes that rising social unrest, riots, and arson seen internationally—from Romania to Belfast—are driven by the growing realization that voting and public political discourse on platforms like X (formerly Twitter) have become ineffective illusions of control.
When Rogan asks if Dillon has received any invitations to elite underground bunkers, Dillon jokes that tech leaders like Peter Thiel would never invite him—especially after Dillon dressed up as South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem's husband with fake breasts on his podcast. He ponders whether surviving an apocalypse alongside political and tech elites would even be enjoyable, imagining a bleak scenario of eating steak in a bunker with Peter Thiel, JD Vance, and his wife Usha while the rest of humanity perishes.
- "They're like, 'If China gets all this stuff, you're all going to... we lose.' And you go, 'Okay.' So, it's almost like China will enslave you. Let us do it first."
- "Is it fun if the whole world dies and I'm just sitting and having dinner with JD Vance and his wife?"
- **Ideal World vs. Reality:** Dillon outlines his best-case scenario for humanity: an era of enlightened spirituality, healthy boundaries with technology, and community-level morality unforced by corporate or military power, though he admits he isn't betting on it.
---
[02:28:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8893s) The Nostalgia Trap: From 1980s Chaos to Corporate Sanitize
Comparing modern life to past eras, Rogan asserts that while the world faces unique existential threats, everyday society in first-world nations is physically safer, kinder, and offers vastly more opportunity due to technology. Dillon agrees that he would far prefer modern conveniences to living in 1976 San Francisco with bad car brakes and no internet access. However, they acknowledge a cultural trade-off: safety and corporate sanitization have stripped cities of their artistic grit and chaos.
They discuss New York City's historical evolution, recalling how Rolling Stone once labeled West 42nd Street in Times Square "the sleaziest block in America" in 1981. While Times Square used to be lawless and fertile ground for counterculture like the Ramones, it has transformed into a bland strip of corporate chain restaurants like T.G.I. Friday's. Dillon adds that modern culture is so decentralized that nothing can stay cool or authentic. He laments that New York has largely turned into a "suburban city" of Pilates classes, toddlers, Wegmans grocery stores, and high-end restaurants serving overpriced comfort food like truffle-infused pizza rolls just because celebrities visited them.
- **Human Constitution:** Dillon remarks that modern populations are no longer built for gritty urban chaos or total war, noting jokingly that people today can barely handle filing a complaint on DoorDash.
- **Historical Comparison:** Rogan and Dillon debate whether urban decay was necessary for great art, concluding that absolute safety eliminates the tension that once fueled vibrant music and comedy scenes.
---
[02:32:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9156s) Political Theater, Fake Populism, and the 2028 Horizon
Dillon breaks down what he views as the performative nature of modern local and national politics, bringing up Zohran Mamdani's political campaign targeted at billionaires like Ken Griffin in New York City. Dillon calls the populist posturing "fake," pointing out that Ken Griffin is building a billion-dollar compound in Palm Beach while local politicians make empty grandstanding videos in front of luxury apartments. He compares this dynamic to Bernie Sanders, whom he describes as a well-meaning politician who ultimately served as a pacifier for left-wing voters, consistently getting "sandbagged" by the Democratic establishment without burning the system down.
Looking ahead to the 2028 presidential election, Dillon analyzes the factional rivalries within the financial and political elite. He suggests that establishment donors prefer traditional neoconservative figures like Marco Rubio, who align closely with legacy central banking cartels and the defense industry. Conversely, figures like JD Vance represent a newer nationalist-populist alignment heavily backed by Silicon Valley tech capital.
- "Ken Griffin's in Palm Beach building a house worth a billion dollars. You're not going to do anything to Ken Griffin. You're a city employee. The mayor is fake."
- **Bernie Sanders:** Dillon notes the irony of Sanders representing a "socialist" political brand while coming from a "lily-white" state like Vermont supported by military-industrial complex jobs, owning multiple homes, and repeatedly endorsing mainstream candidates like Hillary Clinton.
- **2028 Donor Factions:** Dillon outlines the ideological rift between old-money war profiteers backing candidates like Rubio versus the tech-funded isolationist camp represented by Vance.
---
[02:35:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9332s) 2028 Presidential Ticket Predictions and Political Exhaustion
Joe Rogan and Tim Dillon weigh in on the prospective political landscape for the 2028 presidential election. Looking at potential Republican nominees like Marco Rubio and JD Vance, Tim expresses skepticism about Rubio’s presidential prospects, visual aesthetic, and overall aura, joking that he has gotten "too buff" to be taken completely seriously as a commander-in-chief. Looking ahead beyond Donald Trump's current run, Tim predicts that the American public will be unlikely to buy into another consecutive Republican administration. Instead, he anticipates a victory for a Democrat—specifically someone currently under the national radar, such as a relatively obscure governor from a red or purple state who can step into the spotlight with an understated, unflashy presence.
Tim argues that after a decade marked by unrelenting political turbulence, the American electorate will crave a candidate who is straightforward and intentionally boring. Describing Trump’s dominant presence in modern political life as a cultural drug that society desperately needs to detox from, Tim reflects on how surreal the last ten years have felt. He recalls pivotal moments shared with Joe—from watching election night results alongside Alex Jones to surviving a non-stop sequence of historic shockwaves, including assassination attempts and high-profile news events that now feel distant yet overwhelming.
- Tim predicts the 2028 presidential winner will likely be an understated Democrat governor from a purple or red state rather than high-profile figures like Gavin Newsom or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
- Tim characterizes the intense news cycles and political spectacle of the past decade as "a drug" that the country needs to detox from.
---
[02:37:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9426s) Jon Ossoff and the "Boring Candidate" Strategy
Joe highlights Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff as a prime example of the conventional candidate template Tim is describing. Reviewing Ossoff's visual appearance and political bio on screen, both host and guest note how comfortably he fits the traditional "presidential" look. Tim dryly audits Ossoff’s physical metrics, remarking that "his neck is medium" and noting his square jawline as key assets for television broadcast appeal. They banter about how a successful Democratic strategist could posture a candidate like Ossoff as a sensible pragmatic figure to appeal to moderate voters across party lines.
Examining Ossoff's background as a national security staffer and media executive, Tim jokingly refers to him as a "spook" and leans into his characteristic cynicism about modern electoral politics. He quips that at this stage in American political life, the theater of it all is so transparent that voters might as well embrace the performance.
- Joe points out Jon Ossoff, noting his position as a prominent young senator from Georgia.
- Tim highlights how a candidate can win by focusing on universal talking points like basic healthcare while projecting a stable, moderate image.
- "He's a spook. Put him in. Who cares? It's fake at this point. We all know it's fake."
---
[02:38:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9492s) Wrapping Up and Praise for Tim Dillon's Comedy
As the conversation draws to a close, Joe takes a moment to express his genuine appreciation for Tim’s unique voice in comedy and podcasting. He commends Tim for his ability to seamlessly blend accurate real-world observations, sharp political analysis, and dark, nihilistic humor into a hilarious and refreshing escape for listeners. Joe highlights how rare it is for a comedian to maintain such acute societal commentary without losing the fundamental absurdity that makes stand-up compelling.
Tim responds with gratitude for the platform and the brotherhood, keeping the tone light with a final joke promising to keep doing his show until he gets put in jail. The episode wraps with mutual admiration and a warm sign-off to the audience.
- Joe praises *The Tim Dillon Show* as a great escape that masterfully balances nihilist humor with insightful political and social commentary.
- Tim jokes about his future in podcasting: "I'll keep doing it until I'm put in a jail."
## Notable quotes
> [32:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1941s) The goal is to create literally a digital god. And it's going to be controlled by not us, not the collective human race. It's going to be controlled by a select few group of people.
> [39:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2345s) If Elon is correct and there's something that's a million times smarter than human beings... why would we let people govern? Why would we let people build that stupid rail station in California that's cost how much money and produced what? — Joe Rogan
> [48:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2885s) If you do something for 30 goddamn years and get rich and famous, shut your mouth... Have the dignity to go to your house and shut your mouth about it. — Tim Dillon
> [48:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2885s) Many of my friends are not good people... But they entertain me. And that used to be okay. — Tim Dillon
> [01:05:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=3906s) They really believe that once all of these people come to these countries and see how great it is to be a childless 40-year-old woman working in data entry at a large faceless corporation that's gay on Pride Month... when they see how happy she or he or they is living in a society where you don't own anything. — Tim Dillon
> [01:11:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4307s) I said, 'Oh, I take myself too seriously.' They go, 'Yes!'... It's like little corrections of your psyche. — Joe Rogan
> [01:11:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4307s) The idea that we know what's real and what's not real... 'This is reality: you go to Tim Hortons, you get yourself a donut, you go to work.' No, I have a feeling that experience is you being able to see something that exists around you. — Joe Rogan
> [01:29:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5374s) I've never encountered people who are so committed to anything... They're 10 years in going, 'Trust the plan. It's coming.'... That level of commitment is what America is about. It's about not giving up. — Tim Dillon
> [01:51:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6660s) She texted me and was like, 'You're part of a world in which people are anti-Semitic'... What am I doing? What is this guilt by association? — Tim Dillon
> [01:58:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7120s) He's crying in some Cuban restaurant about his drug dealer father... and no one believes anything's real anymore. This is a huge problem in our world. — Tim Dillon
> [02:03:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7386s) They're like, 'If China gets all this stuff, you're all going to... we lose.' And you go, 'Okay.' So, it's almost like China will enslave you. Let us do it first. — Tim Dillon
> [02:03:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7386s) Is it fun if the whole world dies and I'm just sitting and having dinner with JD Vance and his wife? — Tim Dillon
> [02:12:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7956s) Ken Griffin's in Palm Beach building a house worth a billion dollars. You're not going to do anything to Ken Griffin. You're a city employee. The mayor is fake. — Tim Dillon
> [02:17:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8226s) He's a spook. Put him in. Who cares? It's fake at this point. We all know it's fake. — Tim Dillon
> [02:18:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8292s) I'll keep doing it until I'm put in a jail. — Tim Dillon
## Mentioned
Joe Rogan, Tim Dillon, Adam Ferrara, Timothée Chalamet, Hunter S. Thompson, Toby Carvery, Taco Bell, Buc-ee's, Costco, Toyota Land Cruiser, David Spade, Paramount Pictures, Gavin Newsom, Rudy Giuliani, Ocean Casino Resort, Rupert Lowe, Restore Britain, Muammar Gaddafi, Anthropic, British East India Company, Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, JD Vance, Starbucks, McDonald's, Citibank, Chase, Chobani, San Diego Padres, Church of Scientology, Tom Cruise, Joey Diaz, Armie Hammer, Joshua Milton Blahyi, American Colonization Society, General Butt Naked, Dr. Andrew Gallimore, A.J. Gentile, The Why Files, Danny Jones, Rick Strassman, Cottonwood Research Foundation, Donald Trump, Anna Paulina Luna, Jimmy Carter, Jamie Vernon, Richard Dolan, Jake Barber, Jesse Michels, Eric Weinstein, DARPA, CIA, Ghislaine Maxwell, Nancy Guthrie, Perplexity, Haliey Welch, Joaquin Buckley, Michelle Obama, The Undertaker, James Copenhaver, David Dutch, Kimberly Cheatle, U.S. Secret Service, Bari Weiss, Brian Stelter, David Ellison, Skydance, Paramount, The Free Press, Mark Levin, Benjamin Netanyahu, Tony Dokoupil, CBS News, CBS Evening News, 60 Minutes, Nick Bilton, Catherine Herridge, The New York Times, Tulsi Gabbard, Anthony Fauci, Palantir, World Economic Forum, Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Kristi Noem, Usha Vance, The Ramones, Wegmans, DoorDash, Zohran Mamdani, Ken Griffin, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Marco Rubio, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Alex Jones, Jon Ossoff, The Tim Dillon Show
Joe Rogan and Tim Dillon argue that Western societies face deep instability due to unaccountable institutions, rapid demographic shifts, and a political culture prioritizing media spectacle over material governance. They contend that legacy media and ruling elites enforce ideological conformity and promote foreign military entanglements while public infrastructure, economic mobility, and civil liberties steadily erode.
Free Speech, Immigration Strains, and Social Fragmentation (14:58)
Rogan and Dillon examine how European authorities, particularly in the United Kingdom, increasingly police public discourse regarding national immigration policies. Dillon notes that legal definitions of incitement have expanded to penalize hyperbole and dark humor, though an April 1, 2026 review eventually prompted UK police forces to scrap thousands of investigations into non-criminal social media posts. Rogan emphasizes that free expression is essential for citizens facing rapid cultural shifts, pointing to decades of systemic cover-ups by authorities concerning UK grooming and rape gang scandals to avoid public backlash.
Expanding to broader policy, Dillon argues that mass immigration is pushed by supranational bodies like the European Union to bolster GDP and offset falling birth rates, rather than being guided by local democratic consensus. Rogan and Dillon observe that working-class citizens in host nations endure inflated housing costs, strained public infrastructure, and social friction, warning that excluding voters from decisions about national demographics inevitably fosters deep civil unrest.
The 'Empathy Industry' and Corporate Virtue Signaling (7:53)
The discussion critiques urban governance and corporate virtue-signaling, using the decline of Los Angeles as a case study. Rogan and Dillon highlight how excessive taxation and over-regulation caused local film production to drop from historical peaks of 80–90% down to roughly 25–30%. Dillon characterizes modern municipal governance as an "empathy industry" and a racket for non-profits that tolerates disorder and crime, arguing that concentrated populations of non-productive individuals ultimately dismantle the economic environment necessary for private businesses to operate.
Dillon applies a similar critique to corporate identity politics, questioning why major financial institutions and brands feel compelled to align with social causes like Pride Month. Speaking as a gay man, Dillon asserts that performative corporate branding offers no tangible material benefits—such as healthcare access—and instead fosters public fatigue. He cites an 11-point decline in public support for gay marriage as evidence of backlash against overbearing, institutional moral posturing.
Digitization, AI Disruption, and Institutional Surveillance (32:21)
Rogan and Dillon address the psychological and economic consequences of modern technology, arguing that personal well-being has plateaued since widespread digitization replaced authentic human interaction with automated kiosks and screens. Rogan notes that non-stop exposure to global crises through smartphones has driven baseline anxiety to unprecedented levels. Dillon points out that younger generations are being priced out of homeownership entirely, living in small apartments while political leadership mentally checks out of domestic issues.
Concurrently, both hosts express alarm over rapid advancements in artificial intelligence and expanding state surveillance. Rogan highlights reports of military-grade tracking systems, such as quantum magnetometry being paired with AI algorithms. Dillon warns that under the pressure of approaching $40 trillion in U.S. national debt and an AI race framed as a national security confrontation with China, domestic agencies risk adopting authoritarian data integration, partnering with tech corporations like Palantir to merge citizens' financial, medical, and legal records.
Foreign Policy Entanglements, Media Narratives, and Political Spectacle (102:18)
Analyzing American governance, Rogan and Dillon argue that national politics has devolved into entertainment and theater. Dillon points to high-profile spectacles, such as a UFC event held on the White House lawn, as the cultural climax of the populist MAGA movement. At the same time, the hosts criticize legacy media outlets for abandoning nuanced journalism in favor of donor-driven foreign policy narratives, referencing Bari Weiss's editorial stances and the controversial acquisitions of digital media properties.
Dillon contends that powerful lobbying groups and hawkish donors exert intense pressure on elected officials to entangle the United States in foreign wars, such as military escalation against Iran, directly contradicting "America First" populist promises. Looking ahead to the 2028 presidential race, Dillon forecasts that a decade of relentless political drama will leave voters completely exhausted, predicting that the electorate will turn away from polarizing figures and favor an understated, conventional candidate like Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff.
Rogan and Dillon portray a governance system captured by donor interests, corporate tech consolidation, and theatrical media narratives that divert attention from domestic economic fragility. While they forecast public exhaustion with perpetual political upheaval ahead of the 2028 elections, they leave unresolved whether traditional democratic processes can realistically reassert control over escalating debt, surveillance capabilities, and foreign policy commitments.
## Background
本期节目由知名播客频道 PowerfulJRE 于 2026 年 6 月 24 日在 YouTube 平台发布。节目嘉宾为单口喜剧演员、播客主播蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon），简介重点推介了他的个人播客频道《蒂姆·狄龙秀》（The Tim Dillon Show）以及其在 Netflix 上线的喜剧特辑《Tim Dillon: I’m Your Mother》。
## TL;DR
乔·罗根与蒂姆·狄龙展开了一场辛辣且充满虚无主义黑色幽默的深度对话。两人剖析了军方量子探测技术传闻、南希·格思里绑架案与加密货币洗钱乱象背后的荒诞现实，并深入探讨了巴里·韦斯主导下的 CBS 媒体审查与舆论极化。他们不仅严厉审视了特朗普政府内部围绕中东战争博弈的新保守派与反战势力撕裂，还畅想了 2028 年大选走向，直言经历了十年政治真人秀狂欢后，美国社会终将回归平庸乏味的建制派常态。
## Atmosphere & style
整场对话弥漫着浓郁的讽刺、虚无主义与黑色幽默气息，在嬉笑怒骂中不断刺穿当代政治与媒体的虚伪表象。罗根与狄龙配合默契，从白宫草坪八角笼决斗等狂放荒诞的脑洞，自然滑入对地缘政治危机、数字极权监控以及文化平庸化的严肃解构。听感上既充满令人捧腹的即兴吐槽，又笼罩着对后真相时代混乱现实的清醒与幻灭感。
## Bulletin
- [01:51:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6660s) 天空之舞传媒以 1.5 亿美元收购巴里·韦斯的《自由媒体》（The Free Press）并任命其主导 CBS 新闻部改革，传统主流媒体因地缘政治议程驱动与“因人定罪”风气面临信任崩塌，甚至导致拒绝篡改抗议事实的资深调查记者遭解雇。
- [02:11:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7868s) 共和党与新保守派主战势力正全力裹挟美国卷入中东战火，JD·万斯与塔克·卡尔森等因主张避免无休止战争而在党内遭遇巨额游说资本的集中政治围攻。
- [02:20:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8425s) 在近 40 万亿美元国债难以为继的数学现实面前，全球精英一边套现中东资本并修建私人末日地堡，一边借地缘对抗之名推动 Palantir 整合公民医疗、税务与司法数据，将美国推向数字监控极权。
- [02:34:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9282s) 经历长达十年的高压政治真人秀狂欢后选民已极度疲惫，2028 年大选民主党或将凭借类似乔恩·奥索夫这类四平八稳的“平庸无聊”建制派政客宣告表演结束并重夺政权。
## Key takeaways
- [01:29:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5374s) 军方宣称用于搜救飞行员的远程量子磁力仪心跳探测技术，极可能是用来掩盖高分辨率天基卫星监控网络的烟雾弹，而 QAnon 等阴谋论则在离奇狂想中彻底异化。
- [01:34:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5670s) 南希·格思里绑架案中绑匪声称人质已死却仍索要数百万美元比特币赎金，反常的索赎逻辑暴露出加密货币匿名勒索背后的伦理崩塌与熟人作案痕迹。
- [01:37:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5845s) 隐秘的加密货币洗钱资本与超级政治行动委员会（Super PAC）正大举渗透播客与 YouTube 娱乐视频，意图在聚集年轻受众后定点实施意识形态灌输与政治抹黑。
- [01:40:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6040s) 加密货币的匿名暴利成为现代情报机构与跨国犯罪的洗钱温床，而底层 MAGA 运动在很大程度上已蜕变为脱离现实政纲的生活方式与纯粹文化狂欢。
- [01:42:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6174s) 美国政治与公共话语的全面娱乐化已逼近午夜退潮临界点，盛大的视听狂欢被用来掩盖地缘政治泥潭与无法获胜的对外战争。
- [01:49:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6542s) 巴特勒集会暗杀未遂案重伤者起诉联邦政府，前特勤局长关于“斜屋顶坡度过陡未部署特工”的荒谬说辞进一步加深了公众对联邦机构渎职的质疑。
- [01:51:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6660s) 巴里·韦斯入主 CBS 标志着新闻界“因人定罪”与丧失讨论细微差别的风气愈演愈烈，强行压制对加沙人道灾难与外国政策的批评只会引发严重的民意反噬。
- [01:59:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7194s) CBS 新闻部因资深记者斯科特·佩利拒绝按要求扭曲明尼苏达抗议报道而将其解雇，显示传统电视新闻甘冒被网络戳穿的风险也要逢迎老龄受众并服务于地缘政治议程。
- [02:11:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7868s) 卷入中东战争严重背离特朗普反战承诺，主战游说集团与新保守派正集中围攻在白宫内部反对扩大战争的 JD·万斯，内塔尼亚胡则借永久战时状态规避大选问责。
- [02:20:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8425s) 面临数学上不可持续的巨额国债，精英阶层加速通过中东资本套现并修建避难地堡，同时利用 Palantir 整合全维度公民数据建立起无死角的数字监控网络。
- [02:29:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8998s) 纽约时代广场等传统文化发源地在过度商业化和治安规训中退化为平庸乏味的“郊区商场”，昔日孕育朋克精神的混乱与艺术土壤被网红式政治表演秀取代。
- [02:34:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9282s) 2028 年共和党面临传统军火金融资本（卢比奥）与新兴科技资本（万斯）的派系竞争，但极度疲惫的美国公众可能更倾向于选择一位毫无表演色彩的“无聊”建制派政客来终结闹剧。
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1s) 抽烟的诱惑与公众形象
节目开场，Tim Dillon 和 Joe Rogan 聊起了各自早年接触香烟的荒唐经历。Tim 回忆自己大约13岁就开始抽烟，当时父亲甚至打趣夸他：“你知道你身上哪点好吗？你从不抽到过滤嘴。” Joe 则提到自己高中时看着妹妹抽烟总觉得愚蠢至极，直到后来他与 Adam Ferrara 等喜剧演员合作排演一出讽刺小品。在戏里，Joe 饰演一名饱受折磨的文科生，角色设定必须全程抽烟。为了在排练时拿烟显得自然，毫无吸烟经验且身为专业运动员的 Joe 一天之内连抽了大约15支烟，结果当场剧烈呕吐、头痛欲裂，甚至身体僵硬到双臂无法正常活动。然而，那最初一支烟带来的短暂“上头感（head rush）”却让他理解了为什么那么多人沉迷其中。
Tim 随后分享了自己对吸烟形象的观察。尽管他已经戒酒戒毒15年，看到烂醉如泥的人只会感到反感，但香烟却始终带有一种奇怪的美学吸引力。看到有人抽烟，人们很少觉得这个人“生活即将彻底失控”，反而觉得“他很酷、很有型，正靠这根烟撑过眼前的难关”。Tim 自嘲普通人拿烟很难好看，唯有像 Timothée Chalamet（提莫西·查拉梅）那样身形纤瘦、宛如一根香烟的演员在戛纳电影节抽烟，才符合法式浪漫的情调。Joe 顺势开玩笑建议 Tim 应该配一个像 Hunter S. Thompson 那样的长烟嘴来搭他的太阳镜，Tim 则调侃那就像20世纪20年代的名媛一样。两人感慨香烟是世界上最神奇的商品之一——即便包装上明确告知“吸烟致死”且连年涨价，也丝毫不影响它的畅销；在英国，烟盒上甚至印有死婴、低出生体重或真实恶性肿瘤的恐怖警示图，但当地人依然抽得比谁都凶。
- 英国等欧洲地区的吸烟率极高，烟盒上印有低出生体重或晚期病变等直观恐怖警示图，但烟民对此基本免疫。
- Tim 戒除毒瘾和酗酒已有15年，指出醉酒者令人不适，而吸烟在视觉文化上却长期被赋予“冷静、酷炫”的滤镜。
---
### [03:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=191s) 欧洲与美国的消费习惯差异与 Buc-ee's 震撼
话题从英美文化差异转向了饮食习惯与消费文化。Tim 指出英国虽然有像 Toby Carvery 那样可以随意盛满周日烤肉（Sunday roast）和约克郡布丁的餐馆，但整体而言，欧洲人的日常分量要小得多，克制得多，不过在烟酒消费上却更为放纵。相比之下，美国充斥着高度加工、富含化学添加剂的食物。两人提到欧洲世界杯球迷来到美国时，对塔可钟（Taco Bell）的农场酱（Ranch）和无限续杯饮料目瞪口呆，甚至因不适应食品添加剂而肠胃不适。
欧洲人初次接触像 Buc-ee's（美式巨型公路加油站便利店）或 Costco 时受到的文化震撼尤为强烈。欧洲足球队到访 Buc-ee's 时几乎被那庞大的规模震慑——它表面上是加油站，实则是一个集美食、野营装备与日用品于一体的疯狂主题公园，相关探店视频在网络上轻易获得数千万播放量。Tim 和 Joe 分析道，欧洲人习惯用容积很小的小冰箱，只买两三天或一周的食材，根本无法理解美国人按“桶”购买蛋黄酱的囤积行为。在很多欧洲人看来，美国人逛大型超市就像是在为末日做准备的“生存主义者（preppers）”；而美国人之所以展现出轻微的囤积妄想症，一方面是因为食品保质期极长，另一方面也是长期受到煽动性新闻媒体的恐慌轰炸。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 欧洲与美国消费与饮食文化对比
accDescr: 对比欧洲小冰箱少量采购与美国仓储式囤积及巨型服务区的文化差异
subgraph Europe["欧洲饮食与零售模式"]
E1["较小冰箱容量 / 采购数日新鲜食材"]
E2["食品添加剂与防腐剂较少"]
E3["烟酒消费较高，但日常餐饮分量更克制"]
end
subgraph US["美国饮食与零售模式"]
U1["仓储式采购 / Buc-ee's & Costco 巨型文化"]
U2["高添加剂 / 极长保质期 / 桶装量贩"]
U3["媒体恐慌刺激末日囤积心理（生存主义倾向）"]
end
Europe -.->|"文化冲击 / 饮食不适"| US
```
---
### [05:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=325s) 逃离洛杉矶：从末日改装车到电影工业外流
Joe 承认美国人的危机意识有时并非空穴来风，媒体的渲染确实会让人不由自主地想囤积黄金和物资。他在洛杉矶带着幼子生活时，曾特意打造了一辆末日逃生车（Toyota Land Cruiser 越野车），专门用来应付突发灾难、穿越沙漠或翻山越岭逃难。在洛杉矶居住期间，Joe 曾经历过三次山火疏散，大火最近时甚至逼近自家围栏。Tim 也回忆起2020年洛杉矶骚乱时的荒谬场景：喜剧演员 David Spade 给他打电话说“你家那条街着火了”，Tim 原以为是开玩笑，走到窗前才发现整条街警车被掀翻焚烧，他只能当场驱车直奔沙漠避难。
聊到前往棕榈泉（Palm Springs）避难的传统，Tim 揭示了该地的历史起因：当年派拉蒙影业（Paramount Pictures）在合同中严格规定，电影未剪辑完成前，签约演员不得离开洛杉矶200英里范围，而棕榈泉距离洛杉矶恰好约200英里，因而演变为好莱坞明星唯一的度假逃难胜地。两人随后谈及洛杉矶昔日的辉煌与当下的衰败，如帕萨迪纳（Pasadena）那些宛如另一时代的经典中世纪现代建筑（Mid-century modern）豪宅。Joe 引用喜剧演员 Andrew Santino 的精妙评价：“现在的洛杉矶已经不是好莱坞，而是‘好莱坞续集’。”如今的洛杉矶就像一座停留在二三十年前的展品博物馆，充斥着 TikTok 网红，更有人直言洛杉矶正在缓慢退化为“底特律”，唯一尚存的优势只剩适宜的气候。由于当地政府的高税收和过度监管，好莱坞的制片核心早已外包至其他州和海外——过去有80%至90%的影视作品在洛杉矶本地拍摄，而如今这一比例已惨跌至25%到30%左右。
- 棕榈泉作为度假胜地的起源：早年好莱坞制片厂为了在后期剪辑期间随时召回演员，要求其离片场不得超过200英里，棕榈泉正好卡在这一规定红线内。
- 影视制作流失严重：洛杉矶本地拍摄的影视剧比例从全盛时期的80%~90%暴跌至约25%~30%。
### [08:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=521s) 加州的衰退与“被自然驱逐”的荒谬现实
加利福尼亚州州长加文·纽森（Gavin Newsom）每当面对针对加州的批评时，总会拿出一副傲慢的姿态，反复背诵那些光鲜亮丽的经济数据，炫耀加州作为“世界第五大经济体”的国内生产总值（GDP）。然而，这种盲目看好加州（bullish on California）的论调完全回避了残酷的现实：加州历史上首次出现迁出人口多于迁入人口的逆差，大型跨国企业纷纷外逃。历史上每一个庞大帝国的统治者在覆灭之前也都坚信自己永垂不朽，正如现代人漫步在罗马斗兽场的废墟中，依然会盲目自信地认为文明崩塌的惨剧绝不会在自己身上重演。
这种幻灭感在蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）最近一次飞抵洛杉矶时被具象化成了一幕荒诞的超现实图景。当飞机正在下降时，他透过右侧舷窗望去，地面上一座存放着数千万吨化学品的巨型仓库正燃起冲天大火，火势连烧数日；随后当他驱车前往自己租住的公寓时，405号州际公路上又有一辆汽车当街自燃。狄龙感叹自己甚至产生了一种“大自然正在驱逐人类”的错觉，而乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）则指出，这根本不是什么自然规律，而是糟糕决策所造就的“人类劣根性”——人类愚蠢走向自我毁灭的机制，与动物走向灭绝的自然法则别无二致。
- 加利福尼亚州常年以“世界第五大经济体”自居，但近年来大型企业外迁与净人口流失问题日益严重。
- 狄龙降落洛杉矶时目睹化工仓库连日大火，并在405号公路上目睹车辆起火，戏称像是被大自然“下达了驱逐令”。
---
### [10:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=624s) 洛杉矶的非营利困局与朱利安尼的纽约治理遗产
洛杉矶若想迎来转机，必须从根本上重塑整座城市的自我认知——它必须被当作一家运作良好的正常企业来经营，而不是沦为一个被庞大非营利组织寄生的提款机。当下的洛杉矶充斥着一大批投身于“同理心产业”（empathy industry）的食利者，数以亿计的公共资金被消耗在虚伪的慈善表演中，却未能解决任何实际问题。狄龙谈及在大西洋城（Atlantic City）的海洋赌场度假村（Ocean Casino Resort）演出时与老板的对话，对方指出大西洋城的问题比洛杉矶更加恶劣：当一个区域过度堆叠社会福利项目，导致大量没有生产力的人群高度聚集时，犯罪、破坏公物与治安混乱就会接踵而至，而唯有彻底重拳整顿治安，才能为商业投资创造生存土壤。
这一逻辑在20世纪90年代的纽约市得到了历史验证。当时鲁迪·朱利安尼（Rudy Giuliani）正是通过严打犯罪，才让企业重拾在纽约投资的信心。虽然如今朱利安尼被主流舆论彻底妖魔化，但罗根与狄龙一致认为，如果他当年在整顿完纽约治安后立刻功成身退，他的政治遗产原本堪称伟大。遗憾的是，许多当权者总是不懂得在巅峰期抽身离场，朱利安尼晚年深陷政治泥潭，甚至在停车场召开荒唐的新闻发布会，期间头上的染发剂顺着汗水流了满脸。这种荒诞不经也折射出美国左右翼政坛的共同困境——真正具备大智慧的人往往不愿涉足市长这种权力机器，最终爬上高位的尽是些滑稽可笑、沉迷于权术与控制的政客。
---
### [13:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=793s) 人工智能、个人自主权与英国言论审查危机
在谈及日益割裂的社会政治格局时，两人将目光转向了人工智能（AI）可能带来的系统性冲击。AI的迅速普及或许会意外淡化当下的文化冲突，因为未来的核心斗争将不再是无休止的党派文化战，而是关于全民监控、数据隐私、个人权利以及人类能否在算法面前维持自我决策的“自主权保卫战”。然而，这场斗争最可怕的隐患在于：当普通人连公开发声的权利都被剥夺殆尽时，反抗便无从谈起。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: AI对社会矛盾焦点的重构路径
accDescr: 展示政治焦点从文化撕裂转向AI带来的监控、隐私与人权争夺的过程
subgraph CultureWar["传统政治困局"]
A["左右翼党派对立"] --> B["无休止的文化战争撕裂"]
end
subgraph AIEra["AI时代的全新冲突"]
C["AI全面渗透与数据监控"] --> D["个人隐私与自主权受到挤压"]
D --> E["反抗前提：言论自由与发声渠道"]
end
B -.->|"焦点转移"| C
E -->|"若言论遭到严厉压制"| F["陷入反乌托邦审查困境"]
```
这种丧失言论自主权的噩梦场景，目前正在英国以惊人的速度演变为现实。在英国，言论自由正受到令人震惊的系统性压制，而公众对此的警惕程度却远远不足。普通公民仅仅因为在社交媒体上“点赞”或“转发”了某些不被官方认可的言论，就会招致警方的直接逮捕。狄龙讽刺道，如果连顺手点个赞都会被扣上犯罪的帽子，那网民还不如干脆直接转发，毕竟连最基本的按键互动都能成为呈堂证供，这说明普通人感知到的现实世界已经被主流语境彻底屏蔽。
---
### [15:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=910s) 社交媒体点赞入罪与移民冲突的现实裂痕
英国当局通过严密监控公众的措辞与表达习惯，将大量批评移民政策的言论直接定性为“煽动暴力”。互联网上的发言天然带有反讽、夸张或黑色幽默的色彩，但当权者却以生硬的标准剥夺了公众笨拙表达担忧的权利。更令人不寒而栗的是，此前曾有英国公民因揭露境内存在的“强奸犯罪团伙”（rape gangs）而遭到警方逮捕，然而事实证明这些犯罪团伙确实广泛存在，官方的捂盖子行径不仅未能消弭矛盾，反而在现实中酿成了巨大的人道灾难。
尽管有审查报告指出警方对合法社交媒体言论的调查存在“反应过度”并叫停了部分过激行为，但英国严苛的言论法令与美国的宪法第一修正案存在本质差异。狄龙近期在伦敦逗留了21天（期间曾短暂前往巴黎），他观察到，伦敦作为一个高度全球化与国际化的大都市，市民早已对多元文化习以为常；但离开伦敦之后，在那些经济长期停滞的英国腹地，失控的移民问题引发了尖锐的文化排斥与生存危机。大量涌入的人口难以在疲软的经济中找到稳定工作，且其携带的原生文化在女性权益、同性恋群体权利、言论自由以及宗教宽容等基本价值观上，与传统英国本土文化爆发了难以调和的深刻冲突。
- 英国警方曾因网民在社交平台点赞或转发涉及移民话题的内容而实施刑事拘捕。
- 围绕英国本土多地被揭露的“强奸犯罪团伙”事件，民间发声曾长期遭遇官方以涉嫌煽动为由的噤声。
- 狄龙指出英国大城市（如伦敦）与经济停滞的中小城镇在接纳移民能力上存在巨大断层，文化价值观与社会资源的冲突日益尖锐。
### [18:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1100s) 文化张力与播客赞助口播
对话伊始，两人谈及移民潮与历史悠久的成熟社会之间难以调和的文化张力。紧接着，乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）切入一段品牌赞助口播，介绍了新鲜狗粮品牌 The Farmer's Dog。他指出有研究显示，保持健康体重的犬只平均寿命比超重犬只长达两年半，并质疑为什么多数宠物主依然在给爱犬喂食成分不明、过度加工的干粮。罗根提到自己家养的两只狗都在吃这种人类食用级别（human-grade）的鲜粮，其配方采用新鲜肉类与蔬菜温和烹制以保留营养，并根据宠物具体需求精准分装，有效避免了过度喂食的问题。
### [19:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1189s) 密歇根州迪尔伯恩的政治讽刺与英国有组织性侵丑闻
话题随后切回当下社会的文化冲突，两人聊起密歇根州迪尔伯恩（Dearborn, Michigan）发生的现实反讽。当地原本聚集了大批推崇包容、呼吁“广开大门欢迎所有人”的进步主义群体，但在当地穆斯林人口增长并成功选出穆斯林市长及地方领导层后，新政府通过决议禁止在公共市政设施上悬挂“骄傲旗（Pride flags）”，甚至在施政理念上逐步靠拢伊斯兰教法（Sharia law）。罗根与蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）指出，西方进步主义者盲目相信多元文化的融合，却完全忽视了部分保守教条与现代自由价值观之间不可弥合的根本冲突。
随后两人将目光转向欧洲，查阅了《国家评论》（National Review）关于英国境内骇人听闻的有组织性侵团伙（Grooming gangs / Rape gangs）的调查报告。该独立调查报告由英国议会议员及“重塑英国党”（Restore Britain）领袖鲁珀特·洛（Rupert Lowe）等人推动发布。尽管调查人员面临无法强制传唤证人或调取所有书面证据的行政权限限制，但该报告依然汇集了大量触目惊心的受害者证词，揭露了数十年间在全英国多地蔓延的针对年轻女性的性犯罪网络，涉案受害少女总数估计多达25万人。最令人发指的是，当地媒体和执法当局长年对该丑闻刻意掩盖，背后的借口竟是“害怕引发公众对特定移民群体的愤怒情绪”。狄龙与罗根直言，在打着“进步与包容”旗号的伪善保护伞下，体制竟然客观上纵容并掩护了此类针对儿童的犯罪网络。
- 密歇根州迪尔伯恩市在穆斯林政治人物当选后，迅速叫停悬挂彩虹旗等自由派象征符号。
- 英国独立调查报告披露全国范围内潜伏数十年的恶性性侵网络，波及受害女孩估计高达25万人。
- 英国媒体与官僚系统因担忧被指责为种族主义，选择将恶性犯罪压制掩盖，牺牲公民知情权与正义。
### [22:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1322s) “目的证明手段”：欧盟超国家治理与本土利益的牺牲
狄龙深入剖析了这种掩盖现象背后的政治心理：当下的意识形态深陷“只要目的正当，就可以不择手段（the ends justify the means）”的泥潭。如果激进派的终极目标是彻底解构所谓“白人父权主导的旧社会架构”，那么过程中谁的权益被侵害、法治如何被践踏，在他们眼中都被视作无足轻重的代价。狄龙强调，这种大范围的社会异动绝非偶然巧合，其背后隐约可见一种自上而下的系统性设计。
以如今陷入严峻移民危机的爱尔兰为例，作为欧盟成员国，其国家政策受到超国家实体（supranational organization）的强力约束。欧盟统筹规定了各国必须强制接收的难民配额、碳排放指标以及统一的货币经济政策，导致爱尔兰等国逐渐丧失决定本国命运的国家主权。欧洲低迷的本土生育率促使那些由官僚掌舵的经济机器倾向于通过输入廉价劳动力来制造虚假繁荣，盲目推高纸面 GDP。然而，掌权者对移民涌入带来的深层文化震荡漠不关心。虽然其中确有真正逃离战乱的难民，但绝大多数属于追求更好生活的经济移民。
面对这种状况，狄龙发出了尖锐的质问：那些世代居住在本土、祖辈曾为保卫自由抛头颅洒热血的当地公民，他们的生活品质是否还能得到提升？下一代是否还能买得起房、享受稳定的医疗和就业？现实却是，本国普通纳税人的利益在跨国官僚机构的优先级列表里被一再靠后排挤。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 欧盟移民政策与主权流失机制
accDescr: 展示超国家机构通过强制配额输入劳动力以刺激经济，导致本土主权受损并引发矛盾的过程。
subgraph Supranational["欧盟超国家机构 (EU)"]
A["制定自上而下政策<br/>(移民配额/碳配额/货币)"]
B["追求虚假经济增长<br/>(弥补本土极低生育率)"]
end
subgraph Impact["成员国本土现实 (如爱尔兰/英国)"]
C["国家主权与自主治理权丧失"]
D["公共资源紧张<br/>(住房/医疗/社会福利)"]
E["本土世代公民权益被忽视"]
end
subgraph SocialOutcome["社会后果"]
F["严重文化隔阂与社会张力激化"]
G["合法异议被污名化与言论压制"]
end
A --> C
B --> D
C --> E
D --> F
E --> G
```
### [25:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1514s) 全球主义议程、街头混乱与自相矛盾的政治联盟
谈及这套体制的操盘手与受益者，狄龙认为其核心是一个只关注冷酷经济算计的极少数精英集团。这群人打心底否定拥有独立文化、悠久历史与传统习俗的“民族国家（nation state）”理念，试图将其解构为一个均质化、去中心化的全球大市场。任何敢于质疑这种政策的本土民众，都会被迅速扣上“种族主义者”、“沙文主义者”或“反移民极端分子”的帽子以封杀言论。如果民众在社交媒体上表达异议，便会面临封号禁言；如果走上街头抗议，政府便动用防暴水炮与催泪瓦斯强行清场；一旦民间出现有组织的抵抗运动，权力机构甚至会对其进行渗透和极端化包装，以此在舆论上彻底抹黑反抗者。
狄龙自嘲这听起来像“偏执狂阴谋论”，但他坚信西方当下的困境是一场蓄意安排的恶性循环：西方帝国主义先是对外入侵干预、策划政变、掠夺资源，随后反手在本土社会制造深刻的道德负罪感，声称“必须把战乱地区的人全盘接纳进来”，迫使本土普通民众吞下苦果。罗根补充道，统治阶级往往热衷于在街头制造混乱，因为民众之间的内耗会分散对政府滥权的注意力。狄龙深表赞同，指出街头秩序越混乱，民众在筋疲力尽之余越容易向权力妥协，甚至会主动哭求“无论用什么手段，我只要和平”，从而心甘情愿让渡自由，接受更严苛的法律、监控技术与集权管制。
对话在最后触及了当代左翼政治中最荒诞的悖论：西方倡导开放边境的全球主义蓝图，试图将“美国佛蒙特州拥护非二元性别的先锋艺术生”与“来自北非极度保守虔诚的宗教移民”强行塞进同一个大一统的标准框架中。狄龙讽刺道：“祝你们好运。”现实中最具戏剧性的悲剧在于，那些最狂热推动无边界政策、高唱“大爱包容”的极左翼自由派，恰恰正是他们所全力引入的极端保守群体在价值观上最仇视、最无法容忍的对象。
- 精英阶层通过抹黑异议（扣上种族主义帽子）、社交媒体审查、武力清场和渗透运动来压制民间反抗。
- 制造战乱、掠夺资源再利用道德负罪感倒逼开放移民，形成恶性闭环政策链条。
- 街头治安与文化冲突的加剧为政府推行高压管制法案和大规模监控提供了绝佳借口。
- 西方激进自由主义者与极保守移民群体之间的结盟，存在根本性、不可调和的逻辑硬伤。
### [28:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1735s) 自杀式同理心与西方地缘政治的自食其果
蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）与乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）就当前的移民危机与西方社会的心理机制展开了辛辣的讨论。狄龙指出，那些高呼“没有人是非法的”并极力主张开放边境的人，其本质上是在被幕后推手利用，他们的善意被转化成了一种“自杀式同理心”（suicidal empathy）。这种同理心被当作武器操弄，形成了一种讽刺的现实：许多人对千里之外乌克兰或叙利亚的难民倾注了极大的热情与泪水，却对自己隔壁州同胞失去医保熟视无睹，甚至已经整整两年没和自己的亲生姐妹说过一句话。
谈及难民潮的根源，两人直言西方阵营根本无法推卸责任。中东与北非的溃败正是西方强权干涉的直接恶果：推翻了卡扎菲（Muammar Gaddafi）政权后，利比亚沦落到出现公开的人口奴隶市场；对叙利亚内战的介入更是制造了大规模的人道灾难。美国、英国、法国等西方盟友与相关势力联手颠覆了这些国家的稳定，随之而来的百万难民如潮水般涌入欧洲。罗根感慨，如果对比1998年巴黎的街头影像与当下的现实，会发现整个社会结构已面目全非。爱尔兰近期发生的恶性街头袭击事件（一名移民试图对当地人斩首）更是在贝尔法斯特引发了焚烧建筑的激烈暴动。当地民众愤怒的核心在于，建制派政客从未就国家的人口结构转型征求过民众的投票同意，整个过程是在剥夺公众知情权与选择权的情况下被强行推进的。
- 西方对利比亚和叙利亚等国的军事干预直接摧毁了当地社会秩序，导致利比亚重新出现奴隶交易市场，并引发席卷整个欧洲的难民危机。
- 罗根指出民众对人口急速剧变的愤怒爆发，关键在于“我们从未对此进行过投票，没有人问过普通人到底希望接受多大程度、多快速度的人口结构变动”。
- 两人对比了英美民意反抗工具的差异，强调在英国和爱尔兰等严格控枪的国家，赤手空拳的民众更难抵抗自上而下的政策强加。
### [31:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1889s) 经济停滞下的同化困境与 AI 剧变阴影
狄龙进一步从经济现实的角度剖析了移民与同化问题。他认为，多元文化（Diversity）要想行得通，高度依赖于一个生产力极其旺盛、充满增量的繁荣经济体。例如纽约之所以能在一定程度上接纳源源不断的外来人口，是因为庞大的城市经济网络依然能为底层提供工作机会；但在英国的许多经济停滞地区，原住民自己都已深陷贫困、前途暗淡、对生活丧失希望。在缺乏增量岗位的环境下强行引入大量新移民，只会让新旧群体陷入零和博弈与工作匮乏的泥潭，同化过程必然走向彻底崩溃。
面对这一混乱局面，罗根抛出了一个深层问题：西方精英阶层放任甚至加速这种社会重构，是否是一项早就计算好的既定战略，因为他们深知人工智能（AI）即将彻底颠覆整个人类社会的生产方式？
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 移民同化与经济基础关系逻辑图
accDescr: 展示经济增长或停滞如何决定多元文化社会的走向
subgraph Growth["高生产力/繁荣经济（如纽约）"]
A["外来人口涌入"] --> B["充足的新增工作岗位"]
B --> C["经济具备承载力与同化空间"]
end
subgraph Stagnation["经济停滞地区（如英国部分城镇）"]
D["外来人口涌入"] --> E["本土居民生活困顿/缺乏前景"]
E --> F["新增人口无工可做"]
F --> G["社会矛盾激化/同化彻底失败"]
end
```
### [32:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=1946s) 被剥夺的房屋所有权与被“拆解出售”的国家
狄龙对罗根的推测表示完全赞同。他直言，无论是住房还是医疗，上层精英早已在暗中放弃了普通民众。如今不仅没有任何政策在真正帮助年轻人买房，社会甚至在有意识地抹去人们对“拥有房产”的集体记忆。狄龙同龄的整整一代人正逐渐沦为终身租房客，他们甚至已经忘记了拥有一个带后院的房子、在院子里邀请朋友喝葡萄酒、抽雪茄、看球赛是什么感觉。这代年轻人被迫困在逼仄的公寓里，整日对着 MacBook 电脑，在社交软件的虚无和左右极端思潮的煽动中度日，生活失去了稳固的物质基石。
这种阶层剥夺的背后，是掌权者对即将到来的 AI 冲击做出的提前清算。狄龙指出，虽然 AI 在乐观层面可能推动医疗进步、延长人类寿命，但在经济层面却是一场彻头彻尾的毁灭性重构。精英层心里清楚，未来的经济系统将无法再支撑大众普遍拥有房产、汽车和稳定的全职薪资；社会将演变为极少数资本巨鳄坐拥天文数字般的财富，而底层则是大面积的永久性失业与贫困。狄龙痛批如今美国的两党建制派根本不在乎未来，他们正在像变卖破产资产一样，“将这个国家拆成零件打包出售”（selling the country off for parts）。像 Anthropic 这样的顶尖 AI 公司，在他看来散发着令人极度不安的诡异气息。
- 年轻一代正系统性地失去拥有固定资产（房产、车辆）的希望，生存空间被压缩为出租屋与电子屏幕。
- 全美医疗改革的停滞并非无能，而是建制派默认无需为大众提供兜底福利，寄希望于技术替代而非公共投入。
- 狄龙与罗根认为两党精英早已达成默契，提前为 AI 带来的超级不平等、技术垄断与去就业化社会做好资产切割。
### [35:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2101s) 科技巨头的“数字神明”与后疫情时代的社会控制
罗根回顾历史指出，当今硅谷科技巨头所拥有的权力已经彻底超越了人类历史上的任何商业组织。即便是昔日拥有私人陆海军、武力殖民印度和巴基斯坦的英国东印度公司（East India Company），也无法与今天的科技寡头相提并论。现代科技寡头不仅在开发机器人军团，更在全力打造超越人类智慧边界的终极大脑。正如埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）所预测的，超级 AI 的智能水平可能会达到人类历史上最聪明个体的数百万倍。
两人的共识在于，科技巨头的终极目标是创造一个真正的“数字神明”（digital god）。可怕之处在于，这个“神明”根本不受全人类共同利益的监管，而是被极少数科技寡头和深层资本牢牢握在手中，全社会却在毫无防备地盲目信任他们。狄龙指出，这就是为什么公众永远无法在移民政策或技术变革上获得投票权。未来的控制逻辑已初露端倪：统治阶级会以安全和基本生存为筹码向大众开出条件——“想要安全的街道吗？想要基本的食物配给吗？想要一点维持生计的零钱吗？那你必须严格遵守 X、Y、Z 的指令，并信奉我们指定的价值观。”新冠疫情（COVID-19）已经给统治精英上了生动的一课：只要将普通人逼入恐惧的墙角，绝大多数人都会主动放弃自由、低头妥协，顺从最荒谬的管制。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 现代科技垄断与社会控制路径
accDescr: 从集中开发超级AI到利用恐惧实现社会资源分配控制的演变过程
subgraph TechConcentration["科技权力集中"]
A["寡头掌控核心算力与数据"] --> B["构建'数字神明' (超级 AI)"]
B --> C["垄断生产力与暴力工具 (机器人军团)"]
end
subgraph ControlModel["后危机控制模式"]
C --> D["制造焦虑与生存危机"]
D --> E["以基础生存 (食物/安全/津贴) 换取服从"]
E --> F["大众妥协并交出公民权利"]
end
```
### [36:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2197s) 制度信任之别与“失衡”的美国社会
狄龙对比了英国与美国的国民心态差异。虽然他很喜欢伦敦人的幽默与活力，但他观察到英国人对政府的服从度和信任度要远高于美国人。其核心原因在于欧洲民众确实从体制中得到了某些切实的回报，例如国家医疗服务体系（NHS）与相对普惠的福利保障。这种长期依赖社会契约的传统，使英国社会更加讲求规则、秩序与传统，但也导致他们面对政府推行的宏大议程时更容易顺从配合；相比之下，美国社会则保留着深入骨髓的怀疑主义与反抗本能。
罗根赞同福利体系对社会稳定的价值，直言美国不愿为民众提供全民医保和免费高等教育是极度愚蠢的短视行为——受教育人口越多，社会的“失败者”就越少。但在另一方面，两人也承认美国文化的残酷性造就了一种极端撕裂的生态：这个国家既能批量制造科技天才，也能大量催生出冷血的反社会人格者（sociopaths）与精神变态。当全社会的放纵、贪婪与极端的贫富分化被公开炫耀时，“吃掉富人”（Eat the Rich）的仇恨思潮便不可避免地野蛮生长。
在狄龙看来，如果用三个词来概括当下的美国，那就是“失去平衡”（out of balance）。把加州门洛帕克（Menlo Park）的科技精英、路易斯安那州巴吞鲁日（Baton Rouge）的南方传统居民，以及纽约布鲁克林卡纳西（Canarsie）的蓝领街区硬塞进一个拥有3.5亿人口、地理与利益高度割裂的超级大国之中，其治理难度本身就是超现实的。然而，面对这一地缘与阶层的深刻裂痕，两人在对话最后半开玩笑地提出：或许席卷一切的 AI，反倒会成为抹平差异、将所有人强制绑定在一起的最终力量。
### [38:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2315s) 硅谷大佬的宗教狂热：造神、敌基督与彼得·蒂尔
乔·罗根与蒂姆·狄龙探讨了科技作为一股庞大而不可逆的力量，如果人类始终对其缺乏清醒认知且不加以监管，未来的走向将变得极其诡异，甚至在接下来的二十年里，没有任何人能真正预判局势的发展。蒂姆敏锐地注意到，当前硅谷许多顶尖科技精英正呈现出一种不同寻常的转向——纷纷拥抱基督教与宗教神学。乔立刻提到了彼得·蒂尔（Peter Thiel）对“敌基督”（Antichrist）这一概念的狂热痴迷，指出蒂尔甚至专门就敌基督发表了多场学术讲座。蒂姆附和道，这些科技巨头正踏入一个奇特的认知领域，深信科技的飞跃“正是上帝的旨意”。
话题随即延伸至当时的副总统 JD·万斯（JD Vance）。蒂姆评价万斯在针对伊朗战争的议题上是整个政府班子中最清醒、最克制的声音之一，是少数几位主张“大家冷静下来”的人，正因如此，万斯遭到了许多大金主的抹黑与抨击。与此同时，万斯刚刚出版了一本关于重拾信仰的畅销书，虽然蒂姆打趣说自己还没来得及读、只把它当作轻松的“沙滩读物”，但他指出了背后更深层的讽刺与交织：万斯背后的核心金主正是这群狂热的硅谷科技寡头。整个社会生态正出现一种匪夷所思的奇观——一边是试图通过通用人工智能“亲手创造一个上帝”的科技极客，另一边是固守古老传统的虔诚宗教信徒，而政客与资本家正试图将这两拨南辕北辙的人塞进同一个政治阵营的帐篷里。
乔顺着这个逻辑推演了一个极具科幻色彩的假设：人类源源不断的好奇心以及对技术创新的永恒饥渴，或许本身就是一种自然的演化进程；人类的终极使命可能就是孕育出真正的“机械之神”。当乔抛出“一旦我们把这个神制造出来，接下来会发生什么”的疑问时，蒂姆幽默地回答道：“涅槃（Nirvana）。”乔接着调侃：“我们所有人都与机器融为一体，从此万物归一，变得完美无缺。”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 硅谷科技与宗教信仰的奇特交汇
accDescr: 展示硅谷造神派与传统信仰派在资本与政治推动下融合并引发对未来的不可知推演
subgraph TechVsFaith ["意识形态的奇异结合"]
A["硅谷极客与资本巨头<br/>（制造数字之神 / 探索终极AI）"]
B["传统保守信仰群体<br/>（笃信上帝 / 重构宗教叙事）"]
C["政治代理与大金主契合<br/>（如彼得·蒂尔讲座、JD·万斯重拾信仰）"]
A --> C
B --> C
end
subgraph Singularity ["终极奇点假设"]
D["技术自我演化成为超级智慧"]
E["'涅槃'：人类与机器融为一体"]
C --> D
D --> E
end
```
---
### [41:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2464s) 从石器轮子到内燃机：不可预测的科技狂飙
乔·罗根回顾了整个人类技术史的颠覆性历程。他生动地模拟远古穴居人的视角：当年某个原始人看着圆滚滚的轮子，心里肯定也在犯嘀咕，心想这玩意儿绝对要砸了自己的饭碗。当时人类唯一的行当就是打磨石器，用兽筋将尖石绑在木棍上制成长矛，然后拼命追赶野兽完成捕杀。然而弓箭的发明颠覆了一切，驯服野马又带来了速度革命，接着轮子被安上了木车，使得运输负荷远超单匹马匹所能承载的极限；再后来，有人捣鼓出了内燃机，马匹彻底退场，为了让机器顺畅奔驰，人类索性将整片大地用沥青硬化。
这种狂飙突进是指数级且不可逆的。乔指出，如果把南方古猿（Australopithecus）直接扔到 2026 年的曼哈顿街头，它们绝对会吓得失声尖叫、彻底精神崩溃。蒂姆随即反问：“那你觉得如果把彼得·蒂尔直接带到 2050 年，他会欣然认可‘对，这就是我想要的未来’吗？如今执掌硅谷的这帮人，真的能看清未来的全貌吗？”乔果断否定，他认为当下所有的言论本质上都只是盲目猜测，当真正具备自我意识的人工智能降临时，人类根本无法预知其行为。
如果埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）的预言成真，未来诞生了比人类聪明百万倍甚至十亿倍的超级超级智慧，人类社会现存的治理体系将彻底丧失合理性。乔辛辣地嘲讽道：“如果存在比我们聪明数百万倍的存在，我们凭什么还让平庸的人类去制定法规？凭什么还让这群蠢材去修建加州那条耗费了天文数字纳税人资金、却连一寸像样轨道都没建成的烂尾高铁？”蒂姆接梗笑道，如果超级 AI 真的比人类聪明十亿倍，它只会在俯瞰人类后冷冷地说：“我们才不给这群烂醉如泥、成天斗殴的肥佬修什么火车站。”乔进一步开玩笑说，到那时 AI 甚至连轨道都不屑于铺设，它会在全国撕开微型虫洞，让你按下按钮就瞬间传送到底特律的星巴克。
- **远古工具演进**：绑着兽筋的石矛、弓箭发明、驯马骑行、带轮马车、内燃机汽车，每一次跨越都彻底埋葬旧的生活方式。
- **加州高铁项目讽刺**：投入海量公帑却进展荒诞，被用作人类官僚治理无能与低效的典型负面教材。
---
### [43:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2610s) 冰冷数字化的代价：从麦当劳点餐机到圣诞购物的消失
尽管科技在许多方面改善了生活，但蒂姆与乔一致认为，技术带来的正面红利大约在 2014 年或 2015 年前后陷入了停滞。随之而来的技术泛滥非但没有提升幸福感，反而使整个世界变得极度冷漠、去人性化、充满企业式的冰冷与无菌感。实体生活中的人际温情被程序与触摸屏全面取代。
蒂姆分享了自己最近去麦当劳的一次荒唐经历：如今点餐只能在巨大的触摸屏前操作，前台空无一人；店里一个九岁大的小男孩懵懂地站在出餐台前小声说“我点了一杯麦旋风”，结果一名女店员冲他尖叫质问“你的小票呢？小票在哪个地方？”，吓得那个完全不懂小票是什么概念的九岁孩子手足无措。蒂姆感慨，当所有环节都把“人”剔除出去后，一种莫名的诡异感油然而生。乔补充道，把人从日常生产与服务中剥离，不仅破坏了交互体验，更彻底剥夺了海量普通人的存在价值与生活目标。现代社会充斥着大量处于失业、半躺平或与个人热情完全脱节的劳动者，他们下班后唯一的寄托就是瘫坐在沙发上刷手机、玩电子游戏、机械地消耗时间，内心陷入了无根的虚无。
蒂姆对比了数字化购物对传统仪式感的毁灭。虽然坐在沙发上动动手指就能在亚马逊上下单极为便捷，但过去在十二月严寒的圣诞季，人们走上喧闹的大街小巷，穿梭于形形色色的实体店铺，在熙熙攘攘的人流中辛苦寻觅礼物的过程，蕴含着一种无可替代的生命力。人们走累了买杯热咖啡，在真实世界中与形形色色的人目光交汇、产生互动。当这套支撑人类社交数千年的生活框架被算法与物流彻底拆解摧毁后，人类的深层心理机制正在承受无可挽回的代偿与扭曲。
---
### [45:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2708s) 焦虑激增与代际思维转变：被迫表态的千禧一代与虚无主义的 Z 世代
乔·罗根提出了一个假想的“焦虑测量仪”：如果人类历史上有一台能够精准量化焦虑值的仪器，那么从 1994 年互联网普及初露端倪开始，全球整体焦虑指数便呈现线性上升；而随着智能手机与社交媒体的全面爆发，在没有任何迫切肉体生存威胁的和平年代，人类的神经系统却承受着前所未有的超高负荷。这种焦虑完全由屏幕上的碎片信息以及虚拟网络交互凭空制造。
蒂姆深入剖析了当今社会的心理创伤机制：
- **无休止的道德表态压力**：现代人似乎被无形枷锁捆绑，认为自己必须对地球另一端发生的每一桩苦难与复杂事件发表看法，并形成一套自圆其说的坚定立场。
- **认知过载与自我审判**：人们被迫目睹满屏惨烈的世界灾难，不仅遭受着持续的心理创伤，还得反复进行内部道德审查，焦虑地自省：“我是一个好人吗？我对这件事的看法是否政治正确？我的思想是否属于正统？”
- **与过去宁静生活的割裂**：在蒂姆成长的年代，许多工匠或技术工人一辈子只需要专注于精通自己手头的本领，他们既不了解万里之外的纷争，也绝不会被迫在公众面前表态站队，因而能够维持简单、笃定且拥有真实人际联结的幸福生活。
谈到代际更迭时，蒂姆对比了 Gen Z（Z 世代）与千禧一代之间的显著差异。他意外地对 Z 世代年轻人抱有积极态度，认为他们反而更加健康自洽。由于亲眼目睹了主流建制派机构（高校、官方智库、传统媒体）炮制出的海量谎言与废话，年轻的 Z 世代普遍自带一层健康的虚无主义底色：他们具备讽刺的幽默感、强烈的怀疑精神与犬儒气质，乐于投身加密货币，热衷于成为依靠自己的自驱型行动者（self-starters）。
相反，令蒂姆感到窒息的是比他稍年轻、目前正处于三四十岁黄金年龄的千禧一代。蒂姆尖锐地批评他们是彻头彻尾的“机构盲从者”（institutionalists）。这代人脑海中刻骨铭心地信奉着一套教条：唯有经过纽约大学（NYU）、国务院、官方委员会或某家非营利智库赞助认可的学术报告，才配称之为真理。蒂姆直言不讳地指出，这批早已步入中年的群体完全丧失了独立思考的能力与勇气，因为他们在成长过程中接受的规训就是：独立思考是危险的、是具有歧视性的，是一种会把你引向万劫不复深渊的负面恶习。
### [48:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2882s) 企业虚伪的美德绑架与“觉醒”营销的反噬
Tim Dillon 探讨了当下企业对“觉醒文化”（Woke Culture）和骄傲月象征符号的过度迎合。他以圣地亚哥教士队（San Diego Padres）穿戴彩虹 Pride 元素球衣为例，直言作为一个同性恋者，自己从未觉得棒球队必须展现同性恋色彩。Joe Rogan 也好奇追问教士队的球衣到底被改成了什么样，Tim 调侃说虽不至于在头上顶个假阳具，但这套营销在密歇根州迪尔伯恩（Dearborn，穆斯林人口密集的城市）肯定行不通。Tim 随即把矛头对准金融与消费巨头：花旗银行（Citibank）、摩根大通（Chase）以及乔巴尼酸奶（Chobani Yogurt）为什么非要展现出自己支持跨性别或酷儿群体？这种营销究竟让谁的生活变好了？是否有助于人们获得更好的医疗保健？
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 企业美德表态的反噬循环
accDescr: 展示企业强推审美政治导致公众反弹及同性婚姻支持率下降的因果逻辑链条。
subgraph Corporate["企业端表态"]
A["大企业与体育队<br/>（Chase、Citibank、Padres）"] --> B["强推 Pride 符号与觉醒人设<br/>（审美政治 / 美德表态）"]
end
subgraph Backlash["社会反弹与后果"]
B --> C["过度灌输引发大众厌烦<br/>'把意识形态硬塞进嘴里'"]
C --> D["民意倒退<br/>同性婚姻支持率下降 11%"]
end
```
Tim 强调，尽管一些人感到满意，但绝大多数普通人感到反感与困惑，人们普遍的态度是“随你怎么生活都行”，但不能理解为什么连自己存钱的银行都要出柜。这种“美德表态”（virtue signaling）非但没有促进社会包容，反而适得其反。Tim 指出，数据表明同性婚姻的支持率甚至因此下滑了 11 个百分点，因为把某种世界观强行塞进别人喉咙里的做法，只会激起更多人的抵触情绪。
- 质疑对象涵盖金融机构（花旗银行、摩根大通）、体育球队（教士队）和快消品（乔巴尼希腊酸奶）。
- 核心论点：过度的企业政治立场表态正在摧毁原本包容的社会氛围，并导致同性婚姻支持率出现 11% 的下滑。
---
### [49:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=2994s) 科学教、叛徒与“活出自我”的荒诞友谊哲学
在谈到强制灌输观念时，Tim 抛出了一个看似荒谬却极具讽刺意味的比喻：山达基教（Scientology）。他直言不讳地调侃自己公开“喜欢邪教”，还戏谑说“小孩子权力太多了，应该把他们送上海洋机构（Sea Org）的船上去刷甲板”。他特别看不起那些靠山达基教获得了三十年荣华富贵和电影角色、成名后却反咬一口出面当告密者（rats）的叛徒。Tim 认为，既然你靠这个组织获得了名利，退出了就该有尊严地闭嘴回豪宅待着，而不是开启所谓“揭秘告密”的新人设。
Tim 与 Joe 借此赞赏了汤姆·克鲁斯（Tom Cruise）的处事风格。Tim 嘲弄道，如果汤姆·克鲁斯也跑出来哭诉“山达基教虐待我”，那简直恶心透顶，“闭上你的嘴，你可是拍《壮志凌云》（Top Gun）的人”。该组织帮你掩盖了一切丑闻，无论真假，安排了审计（Audit）、把你关进盒子里测验、住豪宅，事情就摆平了。但 Tim 话锋一转指出，如果他去银行办事，整个六月银行都在大肆宣传山达基教，他也一样受不了。
Tim 剖析了现代人热衷于通过“审美政治”（aesthetic politics）给自己佩戴美德勋章的虚伪心理。整个社会正在被那些急于证明自己是“好人”的群体撕裂。Tim 认为真正的社会包容应当是“自己活也让别人活”（Live and let live）。他坦言自己很多要好的朋友在根本观念上与自己截然相反，甚至有些朋友按世俗标准就是进过监狱、涉嫌把别人推下楼梯的“坏人”，但这不妨碍他们有趣、能带来欢乐。Joe 对此深表赞同，认为社会需要 Joey Diaz 这样充满棱角与江湖气的狂人，正是这种“粗糙的质感”（texture）构成了真实世界，而不是强求所有人达成毫无生气的统一意见。
---
### [53:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=3186s) 思想禁锢的年轻一代与逃避惩罚的心理枷锁
Tim 严肃审视了比自己年轻的一代人。他指出，许多年轻人毕业于相同的文理学院，被灌输了一套僵化的思维处理模式，导致他们极端恐惧独立思考。面对现实中诸如“强奸帮派”等残酷社会治安议题时，这些年轻人往往不敢正视事实，反而吞吞吐吐地用“尚未被证实”或“这涉及种族主义”来回避。Tim 指出，这一代人从小被程序化定型，他们的自我价值完全依附在名校学历、实习经历以及讨好大公司体制之上，一旦核心观念受到一丝挑战，其整个精神世界就会彻底瓦解。
Joe 指出，这种现象本质上如同一场宗教或狂热邪教：你必须无条件服从教义的每一个细节，否则就会被直接逐出教会（excommunicated），导致整个生活陷入冰冷、刻板、充满体制化说教的乏味状态。年轻人不仅害怕公开发表独立见解，甚至在私人脑海里连产生异端想法的念头都不敢有，因为他们极度恐惧来自体制的严厉惩罚。
- 批判现代文理学院教育将年轻人塑造成同质化、不敢独立思考的群体。
- 年轻人的自我价值感被学历、实习和大公司雇主的认可深度绑定。
- 异见惩罚机制类似于邪教的“驱逐出教”。
---
### [55:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=3346s) 艾米·汉莫食人丑闻与利比里亚“光屁股将军”的极度荒诞
两人由“害怕惩罚与取消文化”的话题转到了好莱坞影星艾米·汉莫（Armie Hammer）。Joe 提及汉莫主演了一部新上映的义警题材电影，Tim 随即表示自己依然是汉莫的忠实粉丝，并乐见那些被“取消”的人重返公众视野。谈及汉莫当年被曝光的“食人幻想”短信，Joe 提出疑问：这究竟是网络上的疯言疯语，还是某种非自愿的恶行？Tim 戏谑地分析道，吃人确实是汉莫内心深处的性癖好与幻想，虽说短信里只是嘴上说说，但如果汉莫真有足够的财富和渠道去暗中安排，“他绝对会切一块心脏尝尝”。
Tim 随即以其招牌式的黑色幽默调侃道，就算汉莫真吃了死人的心脏，只要不是谋杀所得，自己也不会因此恨他，这正说明自己对人性的包容度有多高。这一极其离奇的话题引发了 Joe 的联想，Joe 向 Tim 讲述了利比里亚内战中臭名昭著的军阀——“光屁股将军”（General Butt Naked，本名 Milton Blahyi）。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 荒诞暴力与救赎的反差对照
accDescr: 展现从好莱坞食人幻想联想到非洲军阀残酷历史的讨论路径。
subgraph Hammer["艾米·汉莫争议"]
H1["好莱坞食人幻想短信丑闻"] --> H2["被好莱坞全面'取消'"]
H2 --> H3["出演义警电影尝试复出"]
end
subgraph ButtNaked["利比里亚内战极端现实"]
B1["军阀：光屁股将军<br/>（Milton Blahyi）"] --> B2["残暴巫术行径：<br/>裸体参战、活摘儿童心脏食用"]
B2 --> B3["战后彻底转变：<br/>皈依基督教成为布道牧师"]
end
H1 -. 荒诞食人话题联想.-> B1
```
Joe 简要回顾了利比里亚由美国解放黑奴建立的历史背景，随后提到 Vice 对这位将军的深度采访：在极其残酷的内战中，该军阀坚信巫术保护，经常全裸冲入战场，并绑架敌方儿童切出心脏分食作为“护身符”；而令人讽刺的是，内战结束后，这位双手沾满鲜血的军阀声称自己找到了耶稣基督并获得救赎，摇身一变成了基督教布道传教士。Tim 对此感叹这种做法确实走向了不可思议的极端。
- **艾米·汉莫（Armie Hammer）**：因被曝光具有食人幻想短信而被好莱坞雪藏，近期尝试通过小成本电影复出。
- **光屁股将军（General Butt Naked / Milton Blahyi）**：利比里亚内战军阀，曾裸体作战并实行活人祭祀食用敌方儿童心脏，战后转变为基督教牧师。
### [58:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=3509s) 利比里亚的建立与“光屁股将军”的残暴传说
话题从玛雅人和阿兹特克人的活人祭祀转向了西非国家利比里亚的历史。乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）调出资料回顾该国的起源：利比里亚由美国殖民协会（American Colonization Society）于 1822 年建立，初衷是为美国获释的黑奴和自由出生的黑人提供重返非洲的庇护所。在接下来的数十年里，大约 1.6 万名美洲裔利比里亚人迁徙至此。然而，这个原本被寄予乌托邦厚望的国家，后来却爆发了强迫劳动与严酷的人口剥削丑闻，最终陷入长达数十年的残酷动荡。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 利比里亚童兵武装的狂热控制逻辑
accDescr: 展示光屁股将军如何通过药物、通俗文化与迷信建立对童兵的精神控制与战斗驱动。
subgraph Indoctrination["武装与精神控制"]
A["招募童兵<br>（年仅9岁）"] --> B["毒品控制<br>（可卡因拌饭）"]
B --> C["感官重塑<br>（观看尚格·云顿电影）"]
C --> D["迷信洗脑<br>（裸体战符刀枪不入）"]
end
subgraph Operations["军火与暴行"]
D --> E["资源走私<br>（钻石/黄金换取军火毒品）"]
E --> F["残暴清洗与人祭<br>（致死约两万人）"]
end
```
谈到利比里亚内战，罗根和蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）提到了臭名昭著的军阀——“光屁股将军”（General Butt Naked，本名乔舒亚·米尔顿·布拉希 / Joshua Milton Blahyi）。布拉希组建了一支名为“裸体基地突击队”（Butt Naked Brigade）的民兵部队，手下绝大多数是年仅九岁的童兵。作战时，布拉希和童兵们浑身赤裸，仅穿鞋子、佩戴魔法护身符，笃信一种扭曲的万物有灵论传统，认为赤身作战可以刀枪不入。为了维持军队并获取毒品，他将当地开采的钻石与黄金走私给墨西哥贩毒集团，以换取枪支和可卡因；他甚至把可卡因拌在饭里喂给童兵，并强迫他们反复观看尚格·云顿（Jean-Claude Van Damme）的动作电影，给孩子们灌输“杀人只是一场游戏”的概念，以此彻底抹杀他们对死亡的恐惧。
据估计，布拉希的部队对约两万人的死亡负有直接责任，其罪行充斥着屠杀、人祭与食人等野蛮行径。然而如今，这位昔日魔头不仅依然健在，还公开皈依了基督教，摇身一变成为一名身穿耶稣印花 T 恤的传道人。狄龙和罗根对此爆发出荒诞的黑色幽默，罗根调侃说真想请他上播客：“这哥们儿的一生过得真叫充实（He's led a full life）。”罗根笑着形容当年战场上的恐怖画面——一个光着屁股、下体甩动、脸上涂满鲜血的家伙端着 AK-47 向你狂奔而来；狄龙则冷冷地讽刺道，这种极端画面如果放在今天，美国某些超级富豪恐怕愿意掏大把银子买前排门票去观赏。
- **利比里亚建立年份**：1822 年由美国殖民协会建立，约 1.6 万名获释黑奴移民至此。
- **光屁股将军罪行记录**：自称对约 20,000 人的死亡负责，手段包括食人、砍杀与活人祭祀。
- **童兵控制手段**：配发掺有可卡因的食物、观看暴力动作片、利用巫术护身符灌输“刀枪不入”的迷信。
---
### [01:01:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=3716s) 脆弱的文明泡沫：当外部混乱涌入西方社会
两位嘉宾聊起录制前在走廊里的讨论：当今世界的大部分地区依然充斥着难以想象的混乱与动荡，比如巴基斯坦的卡拉奇等地，混乱本就是日常现实。西方人生活在一个高度特权、秩序井然的温室泡沫中，哪怕是西方社会底层的穷人，其生存条件与战乱贫困国家相比也是天壤之别。正因如此，第三世界的人们极度渴望离开故土、前往西方寻找机遇，这种动机完全合情合理。然而，当这些外部世界的混乱与人口极速涌入原本平静的西方社会时，脆弱的文明秩序开始遭受前所未有的剧烈震荡。
狄龙指出，这并非简单的“移民是好是坏”的二元对立，而在于社会结构的脆弱性远远超出了人们过去的认知。在老一辈的成长记忆中，西方社会的制度被视为坚不可摧，似乎没有什么力量能够打破这种稳定。但过去数年的现实狠狠打破了这一神话：一场全球疫情让美国几乎所有主要城市的市中心陷入衰退，商业生态发生剧变；旷日持久的中东战事也表明，现代战争形态的演变让西方顶尖的军事机器也难以取得决定性胜利，没有人能自欺欺人地将这些军事行动称之为胜利。
面对内外脆弱性的暴露，极速的人口结构变化成为最猛烈的冲击波。历史上的人口变迁往往伴随着漫长战争或数代人的缓慢融合，但如今这种巨变却在朝夕之间发生。狄龙强调，不同阶层对这种变化的感知截然相反：大城市的精英阶层往往极度支持移民，因为他们能切实享受廉价外卖、多元商品与全球化服务带来的便利；但在经济停滞的近郊和乡村社区，普通民众不仅享受不到这些红利，反而要承受犯罪率飙升与社会失序的恶果——比如瑞典在接收大量战乱地区难民后，帮派枪击与毒品犯罪激增，打破了当地原本骑着自行车、吃着鲱鱼的安逸生活。
---
### [01:06:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=3960s) 文化惯性与左翼的“我能改变他”心理悖论
罗根和狄龙进一步剖析了文化融合中掩耳盗铃的理想主义。人本质上是其生长环境的产物，指望所有人来到西方后都能像“光屁股将军”那样变成面目和善的基督徒，无异于痴人说梦——狄龙调侃道：“你总不可能在德州当地的 H-E-B 超市偶遇他，然后感叹‘这人真是个甜心，虽说他当年可能吃过几个人，但现在变好了’。”在许多战乱或极度父权制的国家，女性地位极低，恋爱追求规则、家庭伦理体系与西方文明有着云泥之别，而且当地许多人完全认同并维护这种秩序。
狄龙反问，一个人仅仅因为肉体移动到了爱尔兰或英国，其根深蒂固的世界观、对女性的蔑视态度又怎么可能凭空蒸发？尽管伊斯兰世界内部具有极大的多样性，部分伊斯兰国家女性的安全程度甚至不亚于美国，但不可否认的是，有些地区对待女性的法规和习俗依然极度野蛮。如果仅仅换了个地理坐标，就想当然地认为他们会对西方女性产生天然的尊重，这在逻辑上根本站不住脚。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 西方进步派对待移民文化的心理矛盾
accDescr: 对比西方左翼在国内反对有毒男子气概，却在移民问题上采取自我麻痹的圣母心态。
subgraph Domestic["国内意识形态诉求"]
A["激烈批判<br>'有毒男子气概'"]
B["解构男权至上社会架构"]
end
subgraph Importation["移民政策心态"]
C["无节制引入<br>具有极端父权教条的群体"]
D["救世主心态：<br>'我能感化他' (I can fix him)"]
end
Domestic -.->|"认知失调与逻辑冲突"| Importation
```
罗根随即指出了当代左翼政治最为讽刺的盲区：那些平时在西方社会内部最激进、最不遗余力声讨“有毒男子气概”（toxic masculinity）和男性主导社会的进步派人士，如今却在以最热情的姿态，张开双臂欢迎那些在教条上赤裸裸奉行极端男权、压制女性权利的意识形态进入本土。狄龙一针见血地将这种心态定性为典型的“我能改变他”（I can fix him）救世主情结：左翼精英热衷于接受道德挑战，天真地深信一旦这些人踏上西方自由的土地，亲眼见证现代文明的美好，就会立刻抛弃千百年来形成的文化烙印，被西方价值观彻底驯化。
### [01:08:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4098s) 美国家庭纽带的瓦解与心理治疗对自私的纵容
蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）以一贯辛辣的讽刺开场，调侃现代企业文化与个人主义神话：宣传机器总在鼓吹一个年近四十、未婚未育的女性在大企业做数据录入有多么幸福，尤其当大公司在“骄傲月”（Pride Month）披上彩虹外衣时，所有人都在赞美那种“你将一无所有，但你会很快乐”的生活。随后，蒂姆将话题转向了家庭概念的消亡。他提到一位刚完成全球巡演的喜剧演员朋友聊起印度的见闻：在印度，哪怕极度贫困的人往往也住在贫民窟而非露宿街头，因为家人彼此守望，绝不会轻易将亲人扫地出门。而在美国，“家庭”的意义几乎荡然无存，一切都被极致的个人追求所取代。
蒂姆分享了自己的亲身经历：他与父亲因为继母的政治立场分歧而陷入冷战，已有很长一段时间没有联络。正逢堂亲举办婚礼，蒂姆十分疼爱这位堂亲，非常想出席以示支持，但深知父亲和继母也会到场。为此，他咨询了自己看了六个月的心理咨询师。当蒂姆表达了既想去支持亲人又顾虑家庭冲突的纠结时，咨询师却轻描淡写地回应：“你没必要去，除非你觉得去了会让你开心。”
蒂姆对此深感荒谬与愤怒，直言美国的心理咨询行业已经沦为一种“将病人纵容成自私精神变态”的温床（"enable sick people to just become selfish psychopaths"）。在主流医疗和心理话语体系中，专业人士动辄劝人与家庭切割：“去他的，他是你爸又怎样？谁在乎呢？”如果姐妹意见不合就跟她断绝往来，母亲观点不一致就把她拉黑。蒂姆指出，这种将自我感受置于一切之上的文化在许多传统国家是难以想象且闻所未闻的。
- **印度的家庭兜底机制**：巡演喜剧演员观察到，印度贫困人口多聚集于贫民区共同生活，家族纽带阻止了成员彻底沦落街头。
- **美国的“断联文化”**：个人主义与意识形态分歧导致亲情极度脆弱，遇到家庭矛盾时社会普遍鼓励直接切断联系（拉黑、绝交）。
- **心理咨询的异化**：过度强调“个人快乐至上”的咨询导向，往往在无形中消解了家庭责任与妥协精神。
---
### [01:10:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4246s) 社区缺位下的替代品：意识形态侵蚀与社交网络
蒂姆继续引用那位巡演喜剧演员的见解：在印度的许多贫困区域，毒品泛滥程度远低于人们的预期。究其原因，是因为当地人极度看重家族声誉，即使是底层穷人也不愿沾染毒品让家族蒙羞（"disgrace their family"）。而在美国，文化早已滑向另一个极端，瘾君子甚至会毫无顾忌地当着父母的面注射毒品。伴随着生育率暴跌和家庭结构的瓦解，原属于家庭与传统社区的位置被庞大的国家机器、跨国大企业和极端的意识形态所填补。乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）随即补充道，如今“意识形态就是你的社区”，因为现代人绝大部分时间都生活在互联网上，绝大多数人际交往都在社交媒体平台中完成。
在交谈间隙，蒂姆突然注意到罗根正在使用某种滴剂或吸入装置，不禁好奇地打断提问。当罗根澄清这只是普通的 CBD（大麻二酚）时，蒂姆调侃道，自己刚才还以为罗根是在吸食强效迷幻药 DMT（二甲基色胺），“我以为你对我感到厌倦了，打算直接肉身飞升、离开这个维度几分钟呢”。这番插曲引发了两人对 DMT 的兴趣，蒂姆坦承自己最近也一直在考虑是否该亲自尝试一次。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 现代社会原子化与共同体替代机制
accDescr: 展示传统家庭纽带解体后，个体如何转向国家、企业和网络意识形态寻求认同的过程
subgraph Traditional["传统社会支撑网络"]
A["紧密家庭关系"] --> B["传统地缘社区"]
B --> C["家族荣誉与道德约束"]
end
subgraph Modern["现代原子化社会"]
D["极端个人主义 / 亲情淡漠"] --> E["现实社交真空"]
E --> F["线上社交网络替代现实"]
end
subgraph Replacement["填补真空的现代实体"]
F --> G["跨国企业文化"]
F --> H["政治意识形态社群"]
F --> I["国家机器托管"]
end
```
---
### [01:12:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4333s) DMTX 与延伸迷幻体验：系统性测绘未知的实体维度
话题顺势转向迷幻科学的前沿进展。罗根提到了著名神经生物学家、化学生理学家兼作家安德鲁·加利莫尔（Dr. Andrew Gallimore）。加利莫尔正筹备于2026年3月在加勒比海的贝基亚岛（Bequia）建立一个名为“厄琉息斯”（Eleusis，得名于古希腊厄琉息斯秘仪）的合法研究中心。该中心旨在利用静脉注射泵技术，开展长达5小时的连续 DMT 延伸体验（被称为 DMTX）。
罗根解释说，口服活性版本的 DMT（如死藤水 Ayahuasca）或普通吸食 DMT 往往只能维持15分钟左右的短促高潮，体验转瞬即逝且难以精准控量。而加利莫尔团队采用的静脉靶控输注方案，能够稳定维持血液中的药物浓度，将体验者长时间固定在深层的超空间维度中。罗根提到了油管频道《The Why Files》的创作者 AJ Gentile 对此的深入探讨：研究人员并不是在“创造”幻觉，而是试图绘制那个空间的系统地图。令人惊骇的是，不同受试者在长时间体验中反复进入的是同一个结构高度一致的环境，并且能够与特定实体进行稳定互动。
- **厄琉息斯（Eleusis）研究计划**：由神经生物学家安德鲁·加利莫尔主导，定于2026年3月在贝基亚岛启动。
- **DMTX（延伸态 DMT）技术**：通过医疗级静脉恒速滴注，将原本仅有约15分钟的体验延长至5小时以上，使系统性科研记录与跨维度“制图”成为可能。
- **实体通信与空间一致性**：多位受试者报告在连续实验中反复回访同一维度，并遭遇具有独立意识特征的实体。
---
### [01:14:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4494s) 迷幻小丑的嘲弄、人格重塑与内源性 DMT 的谜团
罗根分享了自己多次吸食 DMT 时的亲身见闻，其中最典型的遭遇就是遇到超现实的“迷幻小丑”（jesters）。这些小丑头戴挂满晃荡饰物的奇异冠冕，神情诡异莫测。罗根甚至怀疑，人类历史上宫廷弄臣的服饰起源，或许正是古代巫师从深层迷幻体验中带回的视觉残影。罗根描述道，在一次体验中，虚空中浮现出数以百万计的分形小丑，齐刷刷地对着他竖起中指。当时他在心中自省：“我是不是把自己太当回事了？”所有小丑立刻同步点头回应，以一种近乎粗暴的嘲弄打碎了他的自我中心（Ego）。罗根认为，这类体验本质上是对人类精神世界的一种底层代码校准。
蒂姆对此既着迷又恐惧，开玩笑自嘲说：“我不敢尝试，我怕我一进去，眼前全是分形复刻的 J.D. 万斯（JD Vance）在那里对我狂吼：‘你必须去学人工智能！’”
罗根进一步援引近期嘉宾、行为分析专家切斯·休斯（Chase Hughes）的经历指出，高剂量的长时间 DMT 体验具有不可逆的人格重塑力量。普通人在漫长的岁月流逝中逐渐变老、性格缓慢改变，但这类体验能在短短数小时内瞬间摧毁旧人格，让人脱胎换骨。针对大众对不明飞行物（UFO）、外星生物、恶魔及未知维度的讨论，罗根认为它们很可能与迷幻体验通向的是同一现实：人类并非通过化学物质看到了“不存在的东西”，而是通过调整脑部神经化学频率，接收到了那些本来就存在于周围、但平时受限于感知带宽而看不见的信息。最令人费解的在于，DMT 并非外来异物，而是人体内源性自产的分子（在大脑、肝脏及肺部均有合成痕迹）。正如里克·斯特拉斯曼（Dr. Rick Strassman）在里程碑式的著作《DMT：精神分子》（*DMT: The Spirit Molecule*）中所揭示的那样，这门连接意识与存在的科学至今仍笼罩在巨大的未知迷雾中。
### [01:17:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4644s) 内源性 DMT 与对“现实”的傲慢认知
乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）向蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）讲述了里克·斯特拉斯曼（Rick Strassman）当年是如何“智取”政府资金开展致幻剂研究的。斯特拉斯曼向美国食品药品监督管理局（FDA）申请研究许可时，打着“探索这些违禁药物对人体究竟有多大危害”的旗号，才顺利拿到了官方批准与全额研究资助；然而实验结束后，他写出的报告与著作却惊叹道：“这玩意简直太神了。”随后，棉白杨研究基金会（Cottonwood Research Foundation）开始深入探究二甲基色胺（DMT）在体内的来源。最初学界普遍推测它是由被称为大脑中“第三只眼”的松果体分泌，但现在的研究发现它可能源自整个大脑区域。罗根强调，最震撼的事实是人体自身就会合成这种自然界中最强效的致幻物质，能直接将人的意识传送到另一个维度。
罗根进一步探讨了幻觉与现实的界限。许多人习惯将这种体验轻描淡写地斥为“那只是你看到了不存在的东西，全是大脑的幻觉”，但在体验者看来，其感知真实度与物理现实别无二致。罗根指出，人类往往极为傲慢，自以为凭借对细菌、分子、细胞、线粒体以及亚原子粒子的观察就洞悉了宇宙的全部存在。物理现实本身就已经荒谬离奇，把“现实”狭隘地定义为“去 Tim Hortons 买个甜甜圈然后打卡上班”是极其可笑的。罗根认为，致幻体验很可能不是病理性的虚构，而是揭开了人类日常感知系统的过滤网，让人得以瞥见一直环绕在我们周围的未知维度。
- **致幻剂研究套路**：研究人员以“调查药物潜在危害”为掩护申请 FDA 许可和资金，最终反向证实了致幻剂在扩展意识方面的惊人效应。
- **内源性 DMT**：人体自身具备合成极高浓度致幻物质的能力，打破了传统医学对其仅为“外来毒素”的刻板定性。
- **现实的感知局限**：无法用尺子测量或放在天平上称重的事物，并不意味着其客观上不存在。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 感知机制与隐藏现实的理解模型
accDescr: 对比传统唯物视角与意识拓展视角的认知框架
subgraph Conventional ["日常受限认知"]
A["生理过滤器 / 灵长类大脑"] --> B["日常规范现实"]
B --> C["打卡上班 / 消费生活"]
D["异常体验"] -->|"被斥为"| E["无意义幻觉"]
end
subgraph Expanded ["意识拓展认知"]
F["内源性 DMT 分泌 / 意识转变"] --> G["抑制日常感官过滤"]
G --> H["窥见未被度量的多维现实"]
H -->|"包含"| I["亚原子粒子与未知高维存在"]
end
```
---
### [01:19:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4762s) 外星人“创世论”传闻与宗教的演化管理
随着公众对不明飞行物（UFO）信息公开的期待升温，坊间流传着各种关于政府推迟“全面大解密”（Disclosure）的离奇传言。罗根提到其中最令人背脊发凉的一个说法：军方和情报系统曾秘密召集一批牧师与宗教领袖进行闭门吹风，原因是即将公开的真相会彻底撕裂整个人类社会的道德基石。据圈内知情人士透露，军方在简报中告诉这些神职人员，地球上的传统宗教实际上是由外星文明一手编造的，目的是为了约束并驯化人类；人类本身是外星人“加速基因演化”的试验产物，必须被灌输一套包含创世起源、伦理道德、行为戒律和顶礼膜拜对象的宏大叙事，否则没有信仰约束的灵长类种群很快就会走向自相残杀与自我毁灭。
听闻此言，蒂姆·狄龙立刻用标志性的讽刺口吻开启了黑色幽默连珠炮。他调侃称，真希望唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）能在白宫新闻发布会上亲口宣布这个事实：“听着大伙儿，霍尔木兹海峡到底是开是关谁他妈在乎啊？反正上帝根本不存在，你们全都是外星人造出来的，圣经全是谎言！祝各位好运，明天继续准时打卡上班，股市今天大涨！”
罗根对此补充道，这并不一定代表“宇宙中绝对没有上帝”，而是指流传至今的宗教版本是经过精密包装的，专门为了让人类原始的“部族灵长类大脑”能够理解和消化。如果溯源到极古老的历史源头，神话传说背后很可能记载着某种被误读的高维外星实体降临的真实物理事件。
- **宗教功能外星假说**：假定道德戒律与神祇崇拜是地外文明植入的社会控制机制，用于防止加速演化的人类心智自我崩溃。
- **狄龙式讽刺**：哪怕政府宣布人是由外星异形创造的无意义耗材，现代资本主义社会的底层逻辑依旧是“股市上涨，明天继续去工厂打螺丝”。
---
### [01:21:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=4877s) 《以诺书》、看守者神话与被隐匿的古籍真相
罗根与狄龙将话题转向古代文献的编纂与删减过程。罗根提到，女众议员安娜·保利娜·卢纳（Anna Paulina Luna）曾极力推荐他去读《以诺书》（Book of Enoch）。罗根在一个高达 195 华氏度（约 90.5 摄氏度）的桑拿房里汗流浃背地听完了这部有声书，直呼里面的记载“彻底颠覆认知”。该文本与在死海古卷中发现的《以赛亚书》处于同一时期，记录了一群被称为“看守者”（Watchers）的高等存有降临地球，与人类女子交配并生下统治大地的巨人族——“拿非利人”（Nephilim）。
尽管正统圣经中保留了对以诺的提及以及关于拿非利人的只言片语，但详述这套奇异外星式接触的《以诺书》全文却被剔除在正典之外。罗根解释道，这仅仅是因为当年的一群拉比在编纂托拉（Torah）或塔木德（Talmud）时，判定其内容与现存其他文本存在冲突，便人为将其封杀。古代修士在羊皮纸上千百次地反复传抄，例如死海古卷中的《以赛亚书》与一千年后流传的版本几乎一字不差，证明文本记载具有惊人的传承精度。这让罗根更加确信，在政府某些极深的地底秘密部门中，绝对有人掌握着足以颠覆人类文明认知的上古或地外档案，但绝不可能轻易公之于众。
- **《以诺书》的核心记载**：记录神圣守望者降临人间、传授禁忌知识，以及诞下畸形巨人统治地球的超自然异闻。
- **正典过滤机制**：古代宗教精英根据意识形态需要筛选、裁撤文献；不符合当时统治逻辑的记录被彻底边缘化。
- **死海古卷的一致性**：证明古代抄写员拥有极高保真度的记录传统，神话叙事往往保留了历史事件最初的原始映射。
---
### [01:24:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5043s) 吉米·卡特的 UFO 简报传闻与黑金深层政府
谈到知情者对真相的反应，罗根提到了关于前总统吉米·卡特（Jimmy Carter）著名的 UFO 传闻。卡特曾在 1969 年亲眼目睹过一起极具冲击力的未知飞行物事件。当选总统后，他要求情报部门向他全面汇报军方掌握的 UFO 核心内幕。传说卡特在听完关于不明飞行物本质的真实简报后，世界观彻底崩塌，当场失声痛哭。
狄龙与罗根随即调侃起卡特的为人。狄龙讽刺道：“卡特确实是个老好人，退休后去搞‘仁人家园’（Habitat for Humanity）给穷人盖房子，从来不借机发大财，但他本质上依然是个圆滑的花生农和冷战政客，不可能单纯像个圣人一样脆弱。”谈及到底是谁在向历任总统隐瞒实情，狄龙点名了那些深藏于夏延山综合设施（Cheyenne Mountain Complex）或雷文罗克（Raven Rock）深层地堡的黑衣人官僚。
罗根则指出了一个更现实、更肮脏的政治可能性：所谓的“外星终极秘密”，很可能只是情报军工复合体为了掩盖半个世纪以来对国会的公然欺瞒和巨额黑金贪腐所编造的挡箭牌。数十年来，数以千亿计的资金以“绝密黑预算”名义被肆意挪用，军方高层根本无法在不面临严厉叛国与欺诈指控的前提下向公众自白。此时制作人杰米（Young Jamie）调出事实核查，指出卡特听取简报后痛哭的说法仅源于二三手传闻，从未得到官方或卡特本人的证实。狄龙立刻笑着制止杰米：“杰米，别当扫兴的告密警察（narc），二三手地摊八卦正是我的最爱，我相信这绝对是真的！”
- **卡特 1969 目击事件**：卡特是少数公开签署官方目击报告的美国总统，其当选后的“痛哭传说”成为不明飞行物学界经久不衰的都市传说。
- **深层地堡与特权官僚**：雷文罗克与夏延山等高度戒备的军事避难所，被视作独立于文官政府监督之外的深层情报节点。
- **黑预算洗钱假说**：UFO 迷雾背后可能隐藏着军方为了掩饰违宪贪腐、逃避国会追责而故意维系的虚假信息网。
### [01:25:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5159s) UFO 研究者、长篇访谈与难以解释的空中现象
关于美国前总统吉米·卡特（Jimmy Carter）当年在听取 UFO 简报后精神崩溃落泪的传闻，两人澄清这并非因为他亲眼目睹了诡异亮光，而是简报中披露的真相彻底击碎了他的世界观——一个人一旦掌握了这种真相，就不得不背负着这层认知继续生活。乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）特别推崇 UFO/UAP 领域作家理查德·多兰（Richard Dolan），称赞他是该领域最严谨、最讲求实据的学者之一。多兰虽然记录了大量离奇的案例，但他始终保持客观克制，从不轻信盲从。
蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）问起那个声称曾驾驶直升机运送过外星飞船的杰克·巴伯（Jake Barber），并感叹如今 UFO 领域的访谈视频动辄三四个小时，实在冗长得让人看不下去。罗根则为这类长视频辩护，提到杰西·米歇尔斯（Jesse Michels）主持的长篇深度访谈。他认为超长对谈的最大好处在于“试金石效应”：如果一个人满嘴谎话（"full of shit"），在两三个小时的高压审视下必然会露出破绽，观众很容易察觉出对方夸大其词、凭空编造或刻意隐瞒细节的倾向。但不可否认的是，频繁出现的雷达追踪数据和无法用现有常理解释的影像记录，都证明空中确实在发生某种异乎寻常的现象。
---
### [01:27:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5233s) 伊朗“水母型”无人机蜂群击落美军战机疑云
话题转向了此前在新泽西军事基地上空盘旋的神秘无人机事件。当时那些无人机引发了极度恐慌，公众甚至害怕搭乘民航客机。外界猜测这可能是美军国内秘密测试，也可能是外国力量在耀武扬威。更耐人寻味的是这些飞行器的技术指标：它们能在空中持续飞行数小时，其动力来源显然超越了常规电池的范畴。
随后，罗根注意到一则刚曝光的新闻报道：一名在执行任务时被击落的美军 F-15 飞行员声称，遭遇了以“水母阵型”协同移动的伊朗无人机蜂群。这些多架无人机彼此互联、浑然一体地悬停机动，大无人机下方连接着若干小型无人机，形态宛如水母的触须与步足。知情人士对 CNN 惊呼这简直是“货真价实的外星玩意（Real alien shit）”，空中犹如布设了无人机雷区，飞行员被迫弹射逃生。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 水母型无人机蜂群结构示意图
accDescr: 展示伊朗神秘无人机蜂群的多层互联悬停架构及飞行员报告特征
subgraph Swarm["水母型机动蜂群 (Jellyfish Formation)"]
Top["母机核心层<br/>（大尺寸主无人机协同编队）"]
Bottom["下挂战术单元<br/>（小型无人机如触须/步足般垂挂）"]
Top --> Bottom
end
Tech["未知长效动力与联动协同系统"] --> Swarm
Swarm --> Encounter["战区空中封锁：形成空中雷区"]
Encounter --> Incident["美军 F-15 战机坠毁 / 飞行员弹射逃生"]
```
围绕这场发生在 4 月的交火事件，两人探讨了这究竟是来自中俄的尖端军工支持，还是五角大楼黑预算秘密防御项目（Black Projects）的产物。物理学家埃里克·韦恩斯坦（Eric Weinstein）曾推测，军方极可能暗中掌握着一套常人一无所知的独立物理学体系。
- **报道时效**：该机密目击报告在对谈录制前约 13 小时由媒体公开披露，实际交火坠机事件发生于当年 4 月。
- **阵型特征**：多个飞行器呈几何级协同，大小无人机上下嵌套联动，构成极度规整的“水母”悬浮形态。
- **战术后果**：美军主力 F-15 战机遭逼入绝境坠毁，促使美军随后发起高危越境搜救行动。
---
### [01:29:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5374s) 量子心跳探测黑科技与 QAnon 阴谋论狂想
在搜救被击落飞行员的过程中，军方宣称动用了一项被称为“量子心跳检测”的尖端搜救工具。恰逢白宫官方账号当天在社交媒体上发布了一条调侃推文，称准备进行“Qosting”（恶搞 QAnon 信徒的暗号“Q-posting”），正文划到底部才揭晓谜底：“我们所说的 Q 是指量子计算（Quantum），敬请期待”。狄龙借此辛辣讽刺了 QAnon 信徒群体十年来坚信“相信计划（Trust the plan）”的魔幻执念。无论现实如何打脸，他们总能把阴谋论迭代出新花样，甚至将全美的数据中心解读为“专为接种新冠疫苗者准备的秘密集中营”。狄龙调侃这种哪怕撞南墙也绝不回头的病态坚持，恰恰是“美国精神”的某种写照，戏谑地建议这些信徒千万别重返残酷的现实世界，索性将这种狂想进行到底。
两人接着调出《纽约邮报》（New York Post）的报道，深入剖析了军方在搜救行动中声称使用的神级技术——“远程量子磁力仪”（Long-range Quantum Magnetometry）。官方宣称该设备能够探测人体心脏搏动所产生的独特电磁特征，并通过 AI 降噪算法从复杂背景杂波中精准剥离出这一心跳信号。据官方与川普等人的公开发言，该系统在深山中成功锁定了 40 英里（一说有效侦测距离达 70 英里）外隐匿的飞行员，并打出“只要你心跳尚存，我们就能找到你”的口号。
罗根对此提出了深层怀疑：这套看似科幻的量子心跳仪器，极有可能是军方放出的战略烟雾弹，用以掩盖真正见不得光的绝密侦察能力——比如分辨率能看清地面一粒沙子的超大规模天基卫星监控网。军方若想隐瞒天眼系统的存在，随便捏造一个“量子心跳磁力仪”的说辞最为管用。狄龙则抛出了致命讽刺：“既然你们几十英里外靠心跳就能找人，当年吉丝兰·马克斯韦尔（Ghislaine Maxwell）大摇大摆躲在新罕布什尔州时，你们那台神奇的量子心跳探测仪怎么就失灵了？”
### [01:34:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5670s) 南希·格思里绑架案与加密货币勒索信
乔·罗根与蒂姆·狄龙由先进监控追踪技术的话题顺势聊到了现实中的失踪悬案。狄龙提及南希·格思里（Nancy Guthrie）至今仍下落不明，并感叹如果那些尖端科技真的如此神通广大，社会上根本就不该存在失踪人口。两人谈到案件近期的进展与扑朔迷离的线索：新闻披露绑匪寄出过勒索信，甚至在第二封信中声称格思里在遭绑架后已经死亡。这种“肉票已死却依然索要赎金”的操作让两人忍不住讽刺，这简直是世界上最糟糕的勒索信。狄龙打趣道，这语气就像教堂募捐一样，“我们很遗憾她过世了，但您看着给点就行，随缘捐赠”。
随后罗根让导播在屏幕上调出资料并使用 Perplexity 等 AI 工具核实细节。两人在搜索前打赌绑匪到底索要了多少赎金——罗根猜测是五百万美元，狄龙则押注一千万美元。搜索结果证实，绑匪索要了价值四百万至六百万美元的加密货币（主要是比特币），并附带严苛的截止期限与升级威胁。结合勒索信提到受害者死亡却未提及归还遗体等反常细节，两人探讨了这是否为熟人作案甚至家庭内部人员卷入的可能性，感叹整起案件既病态又令人毛骨悚然。
- 绑匪通过加密货币索要了约 400 万至 600 万美元的比特币赎金，并设置了逐步升级的截止期限。
- 绑架案发生数天后寄出的信件透露受害者已死，但未要求支付赎金以换取遗体，信息此前曾被保密。
---
### [01:37:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=5845s) 诡异的加密货币赞助与幕后政治黑钱
谈到比特币洗钱与资金转移的隐秘性，蒂姆·狄龙分享了一段发生在自己播客身上的真实经历。曾有一家涉及迷因币（Memecoin）的平台试图高薪赞助他的节目，其背后团队身份极度隐秘，常年往返穿梭于迪拜和伦敦之间，声称之所以隐蔽行踪是害怕遭到绑架。经纪公司 CAA（在对话中被戏谑调侃）找上门称对方愿出一大笔赞助费。面对这笔来路不明的横财，狄龙坚持必须与创始团队面对面坐下来吃顿饭，像正常人一样交流，弄清楚这家公司到底是干什么的。然而，就在他提出线下会面要求后，对方先是推脱要在迪拜碰头，随后直接撤回了赞助意向并拒绝露面，这让他坚信对方绝对有猫腻。
罗根对此深表认同，并指出如今媒体和网红圈充斥着各类精心设计的陷阱——毁掉一个人最隐蔽的手段，就是给其播客投广告赞助，事后再曝光这笔钱其实来自外国情报机构（例如俄罗斯），让当事人百口莫辩地陷入“被通敌”的污名之中。狄龙进一步透露，他一位在内容制作公司工作的朋友表示，目前大量民主党超级政治行动委员会（Super PAC）以及特定议题的资助基金正疯狂给 YouTube 长视频创作者砸钱。其核心策略是通过扶植娱乐内容聚集五百万到一千万规模的年轻受众，进而在潜移默化中向他们灌输政治倾向，并植入定制化的政治广告。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 播客与数字媒体幕后资金渗透路径
accDescr: 展示政治行动委员会和匿名加密资本如何通过赞助与制作内容渗透受众。
subgraph 资金与幕后推手
A["超级政治行动委员会 (Super PAC)"]
B["隐秘加密货币项目 / 境外势力"]
end
subgraph 传播渠道
C["网红与播客主广告位"]
D["定制化长视频娱乐内容"]
end
subgraph 最终目标
E["俘获数百万年轻受众"]
F["舆论洗脑与政治定点投送"]
end
A --> D
B --> C
C --> E
D --> E
E --> F
```
- 某些隐秘加密货币团队以“防绑架”为由常年居于迪拜与伦敦，在被要求面对面背调时迅速撤回赞助邀约。
- 政治 Super PAC 正在转向资助 YouTube 平台长篇娱乐内容，意图在聚集数百万年轻粉丝后将其转化为受政治操纵的“定向受众”。
---
### [01:40:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6040s) 币圈乱象、网红代币暴雷与 MAGA 的狂欢本质
罗根和狄龙随后剖析了加密货币、情报圈子与跨国犯罪集团之间的灰色交集。罗根直言，在加密货币领域能够赚到的钱往往“多得反常且毫无逻辑”，正如当年的“伊朗门事件”利用毒品资金一样，只要任何领域充斥着监管之外的暴利，情报机构和犯罪集团就一定会插手分一杯羹。两人调侃了当前政治背景下的荒诞发币潮，从川普家族周边代币一路戏谑到“梅拉尼娅币”（Melaniacoin）。尽管技术上发币是自由的，但现实中极易沦为洗钱、贿赂以及向狂热粉丝割韭菜的工具。
对话谈及了因发行迷因币遭到舆论反噬而迅速陨落的网红现象（暗示前不久卷入发币暴雷的年轻网红）。两人唏嘘她虽然通过互联网流量赚到了远超普通人甚至顶级影星的财富，但在不懂游戏规则的情况下踏错一步便瞬间失去大众宠爱。话题随后跳跃到狄龙近期对政治文化现象的犀利吐槽——特别是关于一场 UFC 比赛如何被演绎为“MAGA 阵营的终局狂欢”，以及现场有人高喊“米歇尔·奥巴马是个男人”的滑稽名场面。狄龙笑道，很多底层铁杆 MAGA 支持者其实根本不在乎所谓的政治哲学或“美国优先”纲领，他们纯粹是来享受狂欢派对的；就像佛罗里达下午四点就已经喝得酩酊大醉的游艇巡游爱好者一样，那不过是一场热闹非凡的群体狂欢。
- 加密货币由于匿名性，成为了情报机构、犯罪网络和政治势力进行利益输送与洗钱的天然温床。
- 面对短命且暴利的网红发币潮，两人指出缺乏护城河的新晋名人在资本裹挟下一旦触雷，便会迅速被公众与平台抛弃。
- 许多极度狂热的 MAGA 群体在本质上并非出于严肃的政治诉求，而是将其当作一种类似“下午四点在佛州喝醉开游艇派对”的生活方式与文化狂欢。
### [01:42:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6174s) 白宫草坪上的UFC狂想曲与文化狂欢的顶峰
乔·罗根与蒂姆·狄龙探讨了当下美国文化景观中那种光怪陆离、令人瞠目结舌的狂热时刻。蒂姆形容，当佛罗里达州圣奥古斯丁、坦帕或西棕榈滩的观众在家里收看比赛，看到选手在八角笼里突然对着麦克风大喊“米歇尔·奥巴马是个男人”时，整个佛罗里达的酒吧和居民区甚至能听到爆发出的欢呼声。蒂姆借用亨特·S·汤普森（Hunter S. Thompson）关于文化浪潮达到顶峰后退潮的名言指出，每一种文化现象都会迎来一个爆炸并彻底走向终结的临界点。这就像疫情期间好莱坞明星集体录制《Imagine》翻唱视频，或者黑人的命也是命（BLM）运动期间明星们录制“为自己身为白人而道歉”的视频一样，公众在那一瞬间彻底厌倦并开始反感，心里只剩下“闭嘴吧，受够了”。
在蒂姆看来，整套政治娱乐化浪潮也已逼近午夜钟声敲响的时刻——当综合格斗选手在白宫草坪搭起的八角笼中大放厥词时，荒诞感已经升到了极致。针对这种如同职业摔角（WWE）反派角色的挑衅，蒂姆与罗根脑洞大开地构想了一出绝妙的反击戏码：他们认为米歇尔·奥巴马根本不该去打官司，而是应该像WWE传奇选手送葬者（The Undertaker）那样出场。
想象一下现场灯光骤降，特朗普在场边跳起标志性的舞蹈，聚光灯打在白宫阳台上，米歇尔身披斗篷吊着钢丝从高空滑翔而下突入八角笼。接着，她与挑衅的选手展开精心编排的假打，送上一记漂亮的勾拳将对手打飞出八角笼。蒂姆调侃道，如果米歇尔真这么干，这个国家根本不需要再举行大选，因为万斯（JD Vance）无论如何也无法与这样的场面抗衡，米歇尔将凭借收视率直接坐上总统宝座。两人感叹如今的美国在很大程度上就是为了“收视率”而存在，与其整天没完没了地提起诉讼，不如彻底把娱乐精神推向顶峰。
### [01:47:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6443s) 狂欢落幕与地缘政治的残酷现实
谈到类似白宫赛事的夸张奇观，罗根提及活动中战机从头顶掠过、整张对阵表上的每场比赛全部以KO终结的戏剧性场面，让人恍惚觉得现实本身就像一场梦幻大戏。蒂姆将这种群体狂欢比作高中毕业舞会（Senior Prom）或高三毕业那个夏天的狂欢派对：大家在派对上抽大麻、喝得酩酊大醉，但凡有点清醒意识的人环顾四周，心中都会升起一种预感——“一切再也不可能像现在这样了”。人们未来再也不可能聚在白宫草坪上一边玩越野摩托、一边看UFC拳赛、一边高呼离奇的政治阴谋论。
蒂姆进一步感慨，从特朗普当年走下金色手扶梯宣布参选开始，这一段历程经历了暗杀、下台与重返巅峰等数不清的迭代，堪称人类近代史上最引人入胜的跌宕大戏。而这场盛大的视听狂欢，在某种意义上成了掩盖残酷现实的避难所。面对地缘政治泥潭与无法取得决定性胜利的对外战争隐忧，人们无法在现实战局中收获胜利，便转而投向这种极致宏大、光彩夺目的感官庆典。
### [01:49:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6542s) 巴特勒刺杀未遂事件的法律诉讼与阴谋论调侃
话题随后转向特朗普在宾夕法尼亚州巴特勒遭遇的暗杀未遂事件。罗根疑惑为何针对这起事件没有更公开透明的调查，并提到有人此前透露调查工作似乎被要求叫停。蒂姆随即开启黑色幽默，调侃称如果真想得到一个客观、公正且彻查到底的结果，干脆全权委托给以色列方面去查，他绝对相信他们的调查结论。
随后，两人浏览了当天的一则重磅新闻：两名在巴特勒集会枪击事件中身受重伤的宾州男子——大卫·达奇（David Dutch，腹部中弹）和詹姆斯·科普哈弗（James Copenhaver，身中两枪）——已正式通过律师向美国联邦政府提起诉讼。诉状指控特勤局存在严重玩忽职守，直接导致他们遭受了改变一生的身体与心理创伤。
- 针对该诉讼，罗根指出原告认为特勤局严重失职的论点确实完全站得住脚。
- 两人回顾了时任特勤局局长金伯莉·齐特尔（Kimberly Cheatle）离谱的公开辩解，当时她声称枪手所在的斜屋顶“坡度太陡”存在安全风险，因而未在屋顶部署特工，但实际上特勤局狙击手所在建筑的屋顶坡度更陡。
- 蒂姆调侃，如今社会上充斥着暗杀事件是“摆拍自导”的阴谋论；他戏称如果这真是一场精心编排的假戏，公众甚至不介意，反而会非常想知道他们到底是如何做到的，甚至建议媒体专门制作一期深度专访，揭秘整个策划细节。
### [01:51:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6660s) 芭莉·魏斯与媒体帝国高层的幽默调侃
蒂姆顺着制作电视特别节目的设想，将调侃的矛头指向知名媒体人芭莉·魏斯（Bari Weiss）。他半开玩笑地构想让芭莉·魏斯在CBS为特朗普制作一档专访特辑，随后又聊起业界关于芭莉·魏斯与主流媒体高层变动的八卦传闻。
蒂姆绘声绘色地描述，传闻称魏斯在媒体大楼的第六层将自己高度戒备起来，不仅普通员工根本无法接近她，周围还配备了大量安保人员严密把守。蒂姆将这种夸张的排场戏称为“宛如切尼在9/11事件期间的地下掩体”，整个办公区域俨然变成了一处戒备森严的军事化防区，形成了“魏斯在掩体中，埃里森（David Ellison）在门前坐镇”的荒诞画面。罗根好奇询问这些传闻的真伪，并追问为何芭莉·魏斯会对蒂姆心存芥蒂；蒂姆笑着承认自己在节目中经常模仿并调侃她，惹得她对自己极为不满，但蒂姆随即表示，正因为这些荒诞的做派，自己现在反倒觉得她更有意思了。
### [01:52:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6726s) 所谓“因人定罪”：巴里·韦斯与蒂姆·狄龙的短信交恶
蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）向乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）透露，媒体人巴里·韦斯（Bari Weiss）前段时间突然对他反唇相讥。韦斯曾直接给狄龙发短信指责：“你所处的那个圈子里，充斥着反犹分子。”狄龙对此感到莫名其妙，追问自己究竟做了什么，韦斯却坚称他属于“反犹太主义文化空间”的一部分。罗根指出，这纯粹是在搞株连与“因人定罪”（guilt by association），将狄龙同形形色色的反犹人士强行捆绑。
两人感叹韦斯的立场转变之讽刺：韦斯过去曾发起声势浩大的运动，批判主流舆论中“只要你愿意和某人坐下对话，就代表你全盘认同其观点”的荒谬逻辑；然而如今，她却将同一套双重标准用在了以色列问题上——只要有人对以色列的政策提出丁点质疑，就会被扣上“仇视以色列”或“痛恨犹太人”的帽子。过去韦斯一直高呼应在跨性别议题和性别意识形态讨论中“保留细微差别的空间”（nuance），但轮到以色列议题时，曾经坚守的理性与思辨却荡然无存。
- 韦斯指控狄龙身处反犹太主义的文化语境中，狄龙反驳这纯属毫无根据的牵连定罪。
- 罗根批评这种思维定式：与特定人士交谈并不等同于为其所有观点背书，质疑外交政策更不等于种族仇恨。
---
### [01:53:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6798s) 空降掌舵传统媒体：天空之舞收购案与一亿五千万美元的天价估值
屏幕上显示出关于巴里·韦斯执掌 CBS 新闻部并可能统领 CNN 采编业务的报道。狄龙语带讽刺地调侃，韦斯现在可以说是“活出了自我”（living her best life），“她本就该呆在有军队重兵把守的地堡里，有条不紊地拆解摧毁 CBS”。在狄龙看来，传统电视新闻机构本就日薄西山，早已无法吸引观众重新守在电视机前收看晚间新闻。像埃里森家族（The Ellisons）这样的大财阀绝非傻子，他们很清楚传统媒体已无力回天，索性让韦斯放手去折腾，看看能掀起什么风浪。
根据报道，大卫·埃里森（David Ellison）旗下天空之舞传媒（Skydance Media）于 2024 年主导收购了 CBS 母公司派拉蒙（Paramount），随后韦斯出任 CBS 新闻部主编，并带着重组机构的使命走马上任。值得注意的是，派拉蒙/天空之舞以高达 1.5 亿美元的天价收购了韦斯创办的在线媒体《自由媒体》（The Free Press）。狄龙和罗根对此讥讽道，比起罗根常年稳坐全美第一的播客热度，《自由媒体》部分视频在 YouTube 上甚至只有区区 7000 次播放量，却能换取如此令人咋舌的估值。
- 派拉蒙/天空之舞以 1.5 亿美元收购巴里·韦斯的《自由媒体》（The Free Press）。
- 韦斯受命在 CBS 新闻部推行大刀阔斧的改革，但遭遇传统媒体收视率不可逆衰退的现实。
---
### [01:55:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=6909s) 曾经的反觉醒斗士与中东死结：失去的理智与“反噬效应”
罗根回忆起巴里·韦斯当年在反击《纽约时报》内部觉醒文化（woke ideology）时的清醒姿态。她曾在接受布莱恩·斯特尔特（Brian Stelter）采访时留下一段名场面，精准剖析了“世界如何陷入疯狂”——当社会将“沉默即是暴力”（silence is violence）奉为教条，却对真正的现实暴力视而不见时，常识便已崩塌。韦斯曾有力主张区分和平抗议与暴乱、探讨未成年人接触激进理念的界限，逻辑严密而克制。然而，一旦触及中东地缘政治，她便彻底放弃了一切灰色地带与复杂性。
罗根与狄龙强调，谴责 10 月 7 日哈马斯的暴行固然毫无争议，但这绝不意味着外界不能正视加沙地带的大规模杀戮与人道灾难，也不代表不能批评内塔尼亚胡政府或其向黎巴嫩南部乃至北约盟国土耳其延伸的冲突威胁。像马克·莱文（Mark Levin）这样的鹰派评论员，在总统扬言对付伊朗时吹捧其为“史上最伟大领袖”，在寻求和谈时又怒斥为“战略灾难”；但正如狄龙所言，这究竟是谁的灾难？中东区域霸权诉求不能凌驾于美国国家利益之上，更不能将任何理性质疑打成反犹阴谋论。强行钳制言论只会招致中情局术语中的“反噬”（blowback）——“你想堵住大众的嘴，要么给够封口费，要么把人除掉；若两者都不是，过度压制只会激起更剧烈的民意反弹。”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 舆论压制与反噬机制示意图
accDescr: 展现从正当批评遭遇污名化封杀，最终引发更强烈社会反弹与信任崩塌的逻辑链条。
subgraph Suppression["压制阶段"]
A["质疑内塔尼亚胡政策 / 军费开支"] --> B["扣上'反犹'与'极端分子'帽子"]
B --> C["媒体与建制派强行封杀对话"]
end
subgraph Blowback["反噬阶段"]
C --> D["民间信任度彻底崩塌"]
D --> E["激化更强烈的社会愤怒 (Blowback)"]
end
```
---
### [01:59:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7167s) CBS 的动荡转型与晚间新闻主播迈阿密落泪风波
谈及 CBS 内部的混乱现状，狄龙大方表示自己愿意上他们的节目，对韦斯本人也并无私怨。罗根则提及前不久网络上流传的假消息，谣传 CBS 要邀请狄龙加盟《60分钟》（60 Minutes），甚至不少朋友信以为真纷纷发短信求证。狄龙直言如今 CBS 人心涣散，大批资深采编骨干相继出走，连高层人员也纷纷离职避险。
狄龙还聊起了接任《CBS 晚间新闻》（CBS Evening News）的新晋主播托尼·多库皮尔（Tony Dokoupil）。韦斯为了彻底打破演播室严肃读稿的老套形式，推行所谓的“重塑风格”，特意安排多库皮尔离开主播台飞赴迈阿密出外景、寻访其童年生活旧址。结果多库皮尔在一家餐馆录制时情绪失控、哽咽啜泣，大谈自己童年生活的不易。狄龙和罗根直呼这一幕尴尬至极，堂堂国家级晚间新闻主播在首播中痛哭流涕，显得极度违和且不专业。现场屏幕随即展示了相关新闻报道，媒体同行与内部员工毫不留情地讽刺其开局表现如同“国家电视台宣传片”，甚至提及皮特·赫格塞斯（Pete Hegseth）在广告间隙接受多库皮尔采访时的互动花絮。
- 网络虚传蒂姆·狄龙将加盟 CBS 著名深度报道节目《60分钟》。
- 《CBS 晚间新闻》试图推行去传统化的叙事模式，却因多库皮尔在首播中面对镜头啜泣而在业界与社交平台引发巨大非议。
### [02:01:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7281s) 哥伦比亚广播公司主播的真情流露与乔·罗根两人的辛辣嘲讽
节目现场调出了一段关于《哥伦比亚广播公司晚间新闻》（CBS Evening News）主播托尼·多库皮尔（Tony Dokoupil）的采访视频。视频中，多库皮尔坐在迈阿密的一家古巴餐厅里，情绪崩溃落泪。罗根和蒂姆·迪伦（Tim Dillon）一边手忙脚乱地调试 Facebook 播放器，一边好奇他到底在哭什么。视频中，多库皮尔被问及为何南佛罗里达和迈阿密是他全世界最喜欢的地方，他突然哽咽表示自己有些情绪失控，并解释称人的一生只有一次童年，这里是他成长的地方，承载着祖母、父母及整个家族的记忆。然而，他们一家当年被迫离开迈阿密，是因为他的父亲卷入了非法生意——多库皮尔甚至笑着自嘲道，虽然现在大家拿这当笑话讲，但他的父亲当年确实是个贩毒分子，最终身陷囹圄。他直言，之所以情绪如此激动，是因为他觉得自己珍贵的童年“被彻底剥夺了”（"I feel like I was robbed"）。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 媒体公信力崩塌与叙事操控逻辑
accDescr: 展示从管理层人事任命到虚假报道指令及目标受众反应的完整链条
subgraph 决策层与人事 ["高层运作与人事布局"]
A["资本注入与非专业掌舵<br/>（巴里·韦斯 / 亿万富翁资本）"] --> B["启用情绪化面孔<br/>（托尼·多库皮尔任晚间新闻主播）"]
A --> C["解雇异见资深记者<br/>（斯科特·佩利拒绝插入虚假叙事）"]
end
subgraph 叙事加工 ["新闻叙事操控"]
C --> D["明尼苏达抗议事件报道<br/>要求定性为'抗议者驾车冲撞警察'"]
D -.->|与现场视频事实相悖| E["资深记者抵制并被解雇"]
end
subgraph 受众消费 ["受众心理与地缘动机"]
D --> F["面向核心老龄受众<br/>（依赖电视、不核实网络多机位）"]
F --> G["得出'开枪合理合法'的预设结论"]
A --> H["服务单一同盟外交议题<br/>（推翻伊朗政权 / 游说集团利益）"]
end
```
多库皮尔一边说着“现在这成了大家哈哈大笑的谈资”（"It's kind of a haha thing"），一边在镜头前抽泣的模样，立刻遭到了蒂姆·迪伦极尽辛辣的狂轰滥炸。迪伦直言，这正是当今世界最令人抓狂的地方——一切都假得令人作呕。这样一个对着镜头因毒贩父亲而落泪的人，居然被选为哥伦比亚广播公司当家新闻主播，成了行业里所谓的“最佳人选”。迪伦打趣道，当年人们去看惠特尼·休斯顿（Whitney Houston）演出，会被她的天籁之音折服，即便她吸食快克可卡因，大家也觉得她配得上那份声誉；而如今的新闻主播本该严肃报道谋杀、战争、饥荒等人间惨剧，多库皮尔却在古巴餐馆里为了自己贩毒坐牢的父亲哭天抹泪。迪伦犀利地指出，普通大众看到这一幕只会觉得荒唐绝伦，也彻底不再相信任何传统体制所传达的真实性。
- 视频采访地点为美国迈阿密的一家古巴餐厅，受访者多库皮尔因回忆在南佛罗里达被中断的童年而当场落泪。
- 多库皮尔在采访中公开透露，其家庭当年逃离佛罗里达的直接原因是父亲从事毒品贩运并最终被捕入狱。
- 蒂姆·迪伦批评传统新闻业选拔标准的严重滑坡，将多库皮尔情绪化的公开表现形容为“让所有人都快被逼疯的虚伪现实”。
---
### [02:04:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7484s) 哥伦比亚广播公司内乱：斯科特·佩利被解雇与虚假报道争议
罗根与迪伦随后将话题转向哥伦比亚广播公司内部爆发的剧烈人事震荡，重点提到了资深记者斯科特·佩利（Scott Pelley）的高调离职风波。现场调出了《纽约时报》获取的高管信件，信件显示《60分钟》（60 Minutes）执行制片人尼克·比尔顿（Nick Bilton）在开除信中明确写道：“你对本节目未来方向的强烈抵触已经表现得非常明确”，因此代表公司以“有正当理由”（for cause）为由立即解除其聘用合同。次日，新闻编辑巴里·韦斯（Bari Weiss）亦公开表态，坚称自己“只愿意在建立于信任与相互尊重的新闻编辑室工作”。迪伦在一旁讥讽称，韦斯在内部会议上的发言总是缺乏专业常识、令人难堪。
这场人事海啸的核心在于新闻诚信的原则之争。佩利公开指责管理层要求他在一则关于2026年明尼苏达抗议活动的政治报道中强行塞入虚假陈述与未经核实的指控，佩利因拒绝执行而遭遇清洗。佩利痛斥高层价值观的崩溃已经到了无法容忍的地步，原则荡然无存。具体到新闻细节，公司管理层要求将抗议者蕾妮·古德（Renee Good）中枪身亡的事件描述为“她驾驶汽车冲向开枪击毙她的警察”；然而佩利指出，现场录像清晰地证明古德当时实际上在打方向盘试图避开该名警官。罗根回顾该事件指出，尽管车辆确实擦碰到了警察，且该名涉事警官此前曾被车辆拖行长达300英尺（约91米）而患有严重的创伤后应激障碍（PTSD），但现场录像绝不支持“故意开车碾压警察”的结论。两人质疑，在存在公开视频证据的情况下，管理层为何会不惜牺牲新闻机构的长期信誉，执意做出如此短视且违背事实的篡改。
- 斯科特·佩利因拒绝在明尼苏达抗议报道中违背现场视频事实、拒绝指控抗议者蓄意驾车冲撞警察而遭到即刻解雇。
- 涉事警察此前曾遭遇汽车拖行近300英尺的极度创伤，自身承受巨大的创伤后应激障碍（PTSD）。
- 哥伦比亚广播公司高层尼克·比尔顿与巴里·韦斯在解雇信与公开声明中，反指佩利对节目的发展方向怀有“强烈抵触”。
---
### [02:07:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7653s) 媒体公信力的崩塌、受众老龄化与巴里·韦斯的单一同盟立场
面对主流新闻机构公信力的彻底破产，蒂姆·迪伦发出了根本性质疑：“现在的媒体到底算什么？”他直言，巴里·韦斯依靠亿万富翁的资本支持，以严重虚高的高价出售了自己的独立博客和自媒体频道，但她从未有过实际运营新闻编辑室或在传统新闻一线一步步晋升的履历，其本质不过是一个写评论专栏的意见作者（op-ed columnist）。就是这样一位缺乏专业管理经验的人，如今掌管了主流媒体机构，开除坚守事实底线的资深从业者，同时提拔在餐馆里为贩毒父亲痛哭的主播。这种荒诞的人事任命与内容操纵，彻底摧毁了公众对第四阶级最后的一丝信任。
针对罗根提出“为何要冒着被视频当场拆穿的风险强行造假”的疑问，迪伦一针见血地揭示了背后的商业与受众逻辑：这类传统电视新闻的核心受众，本质上是“那些躺在沙发上甚至快要中风的70岁老人”。这群老龄观众严重缺乏网络信息检索能力，眼患白内障，根本不会上网比对多机位现场镜头；他们只需要电视机里传出一个权威的声音，告诉他们“死者驾车撞警、警察开枪完全正当”，从而心安理得地关闭思考。
迪伦进一步剖析了背后的政治动机与外交意识形态捆绑。他指出，韦斯等人之所以全力倒向特朗普，是因为特朗普在推翻伊朗政权、整肃哈佛等高校的议题上极具工具价值。在韦斯的意识形态认知中，以色列的国家利益与美国利益被完全等同为100%重合；哪怕换成拜登执政，只要拜登发动对伊朗的入侵，她也会毫不犹豫地为其护航。罗根与迪伦感叹，这种单一同盟的深层渗透在近几年愈发赤裸——从美以公共事务委员会（AIPAC）的庞大影响力，到纽约市长竞选中所有候选人排队宣誓“定当访问以色列”的魔幻政治奇观，都让普通年轻人开始真正意识到这种外来政治力量对美国内政的深度操控，而这与特朗普政府最初宣称的“美国优先”与国家修复目标形成了刺眼的巨大冲突。
- 迪伦分析传统电视新闻敢于明目张胆篡改事实的原因在于受众老龄化：70岁以上、不具备互联网多源核实习惯的老年观众是其收视基本盘。
- 迪伦认为巴里·韦斯的媒体议程深受地缘政治驱动，其核心诉求是利用美国最高行政权力推翻伊朗政权，并将外国同盟利益视作绝对优先项。
- 罗根与迪伦谈到新一代年轻人政治认知的觉醒，特别是从纽约市长选战等怪异政治现象中，看清了特定游说组织对美国本土政策的超强干预。
### [02:11:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7868s) 中东战争陷阱与金主动机的拷问
蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）谈到特朗普最初的执政纲领核心在于聚焦美国本土利益、让美国重回强盛，其最受欢迎的竞选主张之一便是绝不再深陷中东无休止的战争泥潭，避免国家背负巨额债务与深陷无法取胜的泥沼。然而现实中却充满了令人发指的“舆论洗脑”（gaslighting）。伊朗冲突爆发后，国务卿甚至公开发表言论称：“以色列反正是要打的，我们的基地随时会受到威胁，所以我们必须加入。”随即又改口否认，改称“我们是亲密伙伴，大家都觉得这是个好主意”。狄龙指出，特朗普面临着巨大的施压与裹挟。显而易见，被卷入与伊朗的中东战争绝不符合美国的根本利益；不仅大量美国犹太人反对这场战争，各界民众也持相同看法，但背后有一群极具意识形态偏见且资金雄厚的超级金主在全力推波助澜，甚至极力主张派出地面部队或采取极其极端的非常规轰炸，非要将伊朗彻底摧毁或打成一片混乱废墟，以迎合以色列的地缘野心。
狄龙特别澄清，提出这些质疑并非出于偏执的阴谋论或受害者心态。他直言自己极度反感某些美国人动辄将“自己无法成功归咎于犹太人卓越”的受害者逻辑，认为无论同性恋还是其他任何群体，一旦沉溺于“受害者身份”，就会彻底丧失对人生的自主掌控权。然而，公开展开合理质询完全是正当的——那些豪掷千金的超级金主，其真正动机到底是为了让美国更加强大繁荣，还是仅仅为了以色列的强盛？乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）随之补充，美国在这场冲突中究竟在多大程度上与世界其他地区站到了对立面？这无疑造成了无法估量的糟糕公关灾难。狄龙打了一个生动的比方：以色列现在的作风就像一个问题严重的老朋友，你为他找了无数次借口，但到最后你的妻子终于忍无可忍地说：“不许他再踏进这个家门，也不准让他靠近孩子，虽然你们曾经很有趣、有共同价值观，但他现在就是个麻烦制造者。”
- **对外干预代价**：深陷中东战争与特朗普原有的“避免无休止战争”纲领完全背道而驰，造成巨大的国债与军力消耗。
- **利益动机质疑**：超级政治捐赠者的诉求究竟是服务于美国的国家利益，还是单纯为了以色列的地缘政治霸权。
- **形象严重受损**：面对加沙、黎巴嫩南部、伊朗乃至土耳其的局势恶化，美国在国际舆论场陷入了前所未有的公关危机。
---
### [02:14:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8063s) 击杀谈判代表、万斯的阻击与政客的生存算计
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 华盛顿反战与主战派政治博弈机制
accDescr: 展示主战派超级金主与反战保守派政治人物之间的博弈和相互掣肘关系
subgraph Donors["新保守派与主战金主"]
D1["巨额政治捐款"]
D2["推动对伊对黎军事行动"]
end
subgraph Targets["遭受集中围攻的对象"]
T1["JD·万斯 (JD Vance)"]
T2["塔克·卡尔森 (Tucker Carlson)"]
T3["梅根·凯利 (Megyn Kelly)"]
end
subgraph WhiteHouse["白宫博弈与考量"]
W1["特朗普忧虑历史政治遗产受损"]
W2["试图阻止暗杀谈判代表与轰炸"]
end
Donors -->|"媒体抹黑与政治施压"| Targets
Targets -->|"呼吁停止无休止战争"| WhiteHouse
Donors -->|"外交捆绑与政策游说"| WhiteHouse
```
罗根极为愤怒地指出，当前局势最令人抓狂的地方在于，每当有和平谈判代表出面斡旋时，他们最终总会被暗杀。狄龙赞同道：“他们把谈判代表一个个干掉，甚至特朗普都不得不喊话‘别再杀谈判代表了’、‘停止轰炸黎巴嫩’。”狄龙分析，在过去两年中，特朗普终于在某种程度上与以色列政府产生了真正的对立与厌倦，因为他开始清醒地意识到，如果无法将美国从这场战争中抽离出来，他一生的政治遗产将被彻底抹黑。在整届政府中，尽管副总统 JD·万斯（JD Vance）与硅谷科技巨头的密切关系令人生疑，但万斯几乎是政府内部极少数真正站出来抵制战争继续扩大的核心人物之一。正因如此，那些支持无休止冲突的新保守派金主正在不择手段地试图毁掉万斯。
面对罗根关于“是否所有从政者的关系网都是为了政治生存所必需”的疑问，狄龙坦言，身处权力迷宫之中，根本没有任何人能够保持百分之百的独立自主。公众的责任在于给权力施加足够大的外界压力，让原本可能做十件坏事的政客至少收敛到只做两件。狄龙表示，万斯无疑是精明且充满政治野心的，他心知肚明这场战争的延续将彻底摧毁自己的政治前途。这种现象也延伸到了媒体舆论界——塔克·卡尔森（Tucker Carlson）和梅根·凯利（Megyn Kelly）近期遭遇的狂轰滥炸，根本不是因为繁杂多元的议题，而完全是因为他们敢于在战争议题上公开发声。这种由主战金主发起的单向围剿极其赤裸而透明，逼迫官方必须不断输出毫无说服力的欺骗性叙事，而这种“逻辑杂耍”早已到了无法维系的临界点。
- **击杀斡旋者**：针对谈判代表的定点清除与对黎巴嫩的持续轰炸，让任何实质性和平努力彻底化为泡影。
- **万斯的政治处境**：万斯因公开反对延长战火，成为新保守派金主攻击的核心靶子。
- **媒体人士遭遇围攻**：塔克·卡尔森与梅根·凯利因公开质疑对以政策与中东战事，同样承受了极其罕见的猛烈舆论火力。
---
### [02:18:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8280s) 加沙毁灭、战时体制与无休止战争的陷阱
两人进而讨论起加沙地带所遭受的惨烈破坏。罗根提到，有些人（比如学者加德·萨德 Gad Saad）至今仍在辩称“以色列已经做到了最好、尽了最大努力”。罗根愤怒地驳斥道：“你去看看无人机拍下的俯瞰航拍画面，飞过那片废墟，那叫‘做到了最好’？简直荒唐透顶！”狄龙直言，这种无差别的毁灭在残忍程度上甚至不亚于核弹攻击，无非是将核爆造成的粉碎性破坏分散到了两年的时间跨度里。每天都有无辜儿童被炸死，母亲当着孩子的面被屠杀，这种惨状是不折不扣的人道灾难与邪恶。狄龙强调，虽然10月7日的哈马斯突袭同样残暴不仁，但人们不应该在每一次谈论加沙惨剧时，都被迫先附带重复一遍对10月7日的谴责才准开口说话。
罗根与狄龙进一步质疑了10月7日袭击事件背后极其蹊跷的安全疏漏。以色列的国土面积仅仅相当于美国的新泽西州大小，却在事发时出现了令人难以置信的漫长安保反应延迟，边境音乐节上的年轻人和普通平民被肆意绑架屠戮。然而直到今天，以色列不仅从未对这起灾难性的安保失败展开真正的独立调查，内塔尼亚胡政府反而极力阻挠彻查，甚至立法限制国内对这一疏漏的公开质询。狄龙指出，自10月7日冲突爆发以来，借着战时状态的掩护，以色列至今没有举行过任何大选；正如乌克兰在战争期间取消了选举一样。狄龙感叹道：“如果你生活在一个国家，而你的国家领导人一心只想让国家永远处于战时状态，那么这个国家就根本不再有民主可言。”
| 话题维度 | 讨论核心观点 | 关联人物 / 案例 |
|:--- |:--- |:--- |
| **加沙毁灭惨状** | 破坏程度堪比“被稀释在两年内的核爆”；不能用10月7日作为掩盖人道灾难的免责牌 | 驳斥加德·萨德（Gad Saad）的辩护言论 |
| **安全反应迟缓** | 面积如新泽西州大小的防区出现不可思议的安保瘫痪，事后调查却遭全面压制 | 10月7日音乐节遇袭惨剧 |
| **战时取消大选** | 领导人通过维持永久战争来规避问责并维持政权，导致民主机制名存实亡 | 内塔尼亚胡、乌克兰政府、比尔·克林顿曾直言其好战本性 |
| **全面透明诉求** | 呼吁不仅要彻查中东战事内幕，美国本土事件也必须全面公开真相 | 巴特勒集会（Butler）特朗普遇刺未遂案 |
狄龙提到，早在多年前前总统比尔·克林顿就曾在访谈中公开评价内塔尼亚胡，直言他是一个“永远想要维持战争状态的人”。说到这里，罗根冷不丁插科打诨开起了克林顿的玩笑：“直到后来一个体态丰满的白宫实习生出现了……真希望时光能倒流，他是第一个在互联网上爆火全网的男人。”两人在哄笑之余重新回归严肃主题：当权者借战争之名剥夺大选与调查监督是极其危险的。狄龙最后总结道，公众必须对这些历史黑洞穷追不舍——不仅以色列的安全失职需要彻查，美国本土发生的重大安全丑闻，例如特朗普在宾夕法尼亚州巴特勒（Butler）集会上的遇刺未遂事件，同样必须查个水落石出。
### [02:20:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8425s) 虚假现实的崩塌与不可持续的债务
对话从对政府信息透明度的强烈质疑开始。Tim Dillon 尖锐地追问为什么至今大众仍无法了解 9/11 等历史大事件的全部机密档案：“大家都是成年人了，把它们公开吧，难道还怕大家知道真相？我敢说当时肯定有人做了什么见不得人的勾当。”Joe Rogan 赞同地指出，这一切遮掩正处于分崩离析的前夜，而 AI 的飞速发展正是推动墙体倒塌的催化剂之一——那些长期以来被打着“保护公众”旗号所掩盖的秘密，正在被技术的力量撕开裂缝。
Tim 回忆起自己在 2018 年首次见 Joe（当时 Big Jay Oakerson 在多伦多为 Joe 暖场），并于 2019 年与 Joe 正式相熟。他感慨仅仅六七年前，体制的裂痕还微乎其微、难以察觉；然而到了今天，大众原先信以为真、全盘接受了一辈子的现实正裂开巨大的“天坑”。包括 Tulsi Gabbard 针对 Fauci 等官僚体系展开的揭露性发布会，大量信息涌入公众视野，彻底曝光了这套体系早已腐烂不堪的事实。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 现实裂痕与债务危机图解
accDescr: 展示从信息曝光到国家债务危机导致现有体制不可持续的逻辑流向
subgraph InfoCollapse["信息幻觉的崩塌"]
A["历史机密被封存<br/>(9/11 档案等)"] --> B["AI 与非官方渠道曝光真相"]
B --> C["公众对制度的彻底幻灭"]
end
subgraph DebtCrisis["经济基本面的死局"]
D["40万亿美元国家债务"] --> E["美元储备货币地位动摇"]
E --> F["系统无法维持运转"]
end
C --> G["全面系统性信任危机"]
F --> G
```
随着真相逐渐无所遁形，经济体系本身的虚弱也让危局雪上加霜。两人探讨了接近 40 万亿美元的美国国债，Tim 直白地讽刺根本没有人指望这笔钱能被还清，哪怕债权人包括中国在内，系统也早已陷入死胡同，美元作为全球储备货币的寿命似乎也所剩无几。在一个信息透明度飙升而财政又彻底破产的世界里，旧秩序已难以找到维系自身的支点。
- 美国国家债务已接近 40 万亿美元（此前处于 39 万亿美元关口），在两位谈话者看来从数学和逻辑上都已无法偿还。
- Tulsi Gabbard 针对公共卫生官员（如 Anthony Fauci）及官僚机构的问责发声，被视为体制黑箱加速破裂的标志。
---
### [02:22:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8550s) AI 曼哈顿计划、数据霸权与极权讽刺
Joe 提出了一个核心战略问题：当前围绕 AI 展开的“曼哈顿计划式”军备竞赛，是否已经成为决定美国国运的生死之战？如果中国率先在 AI 上取得突破并实现武器化与资源控制，对西方而言可能直接意味着“游戏结束”。Tim 对此表达了极深的警惕，他直言自己最担忧的并非输给对手，而是在以“抗击对手”为借口的过程中，本国政府自己先堕落成了所反对的极权形态：“为了跟中国竞争，我们自己先变成了中国。”
这种虚伪在现实政策中随处可见。一方面，政客们公开警告外国的“社会信用评分体系”有多么可怕；另一方面，政府却在推动像 Palantir 这样的监控巨头将公民的医保健康数据、刑事司法记录与税收征管系统彻底打通合并。Tim 辛辣地嘲讽道，当副总统候选人 JD Vance 出来表达对信用体系的担忧时，底层逻辑就像是：“‘如果敌人掌握了这项技术，你们全都会沦为奴隶；所以，还是让我们先来把你们奴役了吧。’”
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 监控资本与数据整合机制
accDescr: 展示巨头整合多维数据并建立数字全景监狱的过程
subgraph PalantirMerge["数据打通合并 (Palantir)"]
D1["健康医保数据"]
D2["刑事司法数据"]
D3["税收征管数据"]
end
D1 --> Monitor["中央全维监控系统"]
D2 --> Monitor
D3 --> Monitor
Monitor --> Control["'人人都会表现良好'<br/>全天候行为训诫与信用控制"]
```
Tim 指出，世界经济论坛（WEF）等全球主义精英根本不在意普通人是否能够拥有房产、耕种土地或创业维艰。在他们的宏观经济推演中，平民的阶层跃升本就已经被宣判死刑。精英们的应对策略极其直白：一边通过中东（阿联酋、卡塔尔）源源不断涌入好莱坞和 AI 创业公司的热钱大肆套现，一边疯狂建造末日地堡、囤积财富。而在中东军事基地受袭的炮火背后，这整场博弈不过是一盘冰冷的大国棋局。
- Palantir 被点名为推动美国联邦多维度数据（医疗、司法、税务）整合归一的关键承包商。
- 支撑美国顶尖 AI 初创公司以及好莱坞的巨额资金，大量来自阿联酋（UAE）和卡塔尔等海湾国家的主权与私人资本。
---
### [02:25:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8704s) 虚无的政治仪式与“末日地堡”的黑色幽默
在政治演变层面，Tim 认为现代大众已经彻底看穿了虚假的安慰剂。当 Jared Kushner 和 Ivanka Trump 随手在海外买下一整座岛屿避世时，普通人却在苦苦挣扎。从罗马尼亚发生的针对政治权贵的激烈抗议，到贝尔法斯特街头的纵火骚乱，人们开始采取破坏性行动的原因很简单——投票已经变成了彻底的伪装，社交平台上的政治宣泄（无论是 Threads 还是 X）也全都是虚假的泡沫。Tim 强调自己绝非在鼓动暴力，但他冷静预判，当人们发现数字技术只是用来制造“你拥有影响力”的幻觉时，唯有现实中的混乱与大火才是真实的。
当 Joe 问 Tim 是否曾收到过任何科技精英末日地堡的邀请时，现场陷入了标志性的黑色幽默。Tim 坦承自己从未收到过，但也曾拒绝过来自 Peter Thiel 圈子的活动邀请。他自嘲道，硅谷大佬只要看见他曾穿着假胸恶搞扮成 Kristi Noem 丈夫的喜剧表演，就会立即把他从名单上剔除；退一步讲，就算真能拿到诺亚方舟的门票又有什么意思？“难道世界毁灭了，我整天在地堡里跟 Peter Thiel、JD Vance 和他老婆 Usha 围坐在一起吃牛排，这就叫快乐吗？”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 末日生存与人类未来分歧
accDescr: 对比精英地堡避难路径与精神觉醒路径的分野
A["文明危机与现实动荡"] --> B["精英路径: 末日地堡与财富隔离"]
A --> C["理想愿景: 精神觉醒与自主社群"]
B --> B1["少数特权者苟延残喘<br/>(与 Peter Thiel / Vance 困于一室)"]
C --> C1["反思技术依赖<br/>非强制性的同理心与道德回归"]
```
Tim 与 Joe 进一步描绘了最理想的情景：人类走出被政府、军工复合体与超级大公司强制规训的阴影，迎来一个兼具灵性、健全道德感、对科技保持适度距离且充满社区关爱的启蒙新时代。尽管 Tim 苦笑称自己“绝不会拿身家去赌这种美好蓝图能实现”，但这种精神层面的觉醒仍是值得争取的方向。
- 谈及罗马尼亚和北爱尔兰贝尔法斯特近期的激进抗议，被作为公众对选举体制失去信任后的现实注脚。
- Kristi Noem：美国南达科他州州长，Tim 曾公开在喜剧节目中扮演恶搞其家庭的荒诞形象。
---
### [02:28:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8893s) 怀旧陷阱：现代科技红利与黄金时代的代价
在探讨未来走向时，Joe 指出历史的对抗从来不是非黑即白，人类社会虽然面临巨大的不确定性，但以整体道德感和微观互动而言，现代人其实比以往任何历史时期都更善良、更少暴力。第一世界国家的人身安全保障与科技赋予个人的机会，都是前所未有的。
两人就“哪个时代更好”展开了充满市井幽默的辩驳。面对那些对嬉皮时代充满浪漫幻想的人，Tim 毫不留情地戳破泡沫：如果让人在今天的生活与 1976 年的旧金山之间做选择，他宁可选择现代。“我才不想去开那种刹车失灵的破车，跟一帮因为没有互联网而什么都不懂的蠢货住在一起！去听一场 Janis Joplin 的演唱会，抽着大麻，买个 50 美分的卷饼，然后跑到公园里鬼混，最后横死街头？”
两人也承认这种文化与安全的权衡所带来的双刃剑效应。当年的纽约充满了犯罪与危险，但那样的混乱土壤孕育出了 The Ramones 乐队和朋克摇滚文化；而如今的时代广场被彻底规训成了一座巨大的、安全乏味的购物中心，到处充斥着 TGI Fridays 这样的连锁餐厅。混乱催生艺术，但混乱无法持久维系；安全带来了秩序，却也消解了城市曾经最鲜活的灵魂。
- 讨论对比了 1976 年的旧金山湾区（嬉皮士余波）与 1980 年代初（约 1983 年）混乱但文化爆发的纽约市。
- 时代广场由昔日的危险街区演变为如今充斥着 TGI Fridays 等连锁商业设施的“巨型商场”。
### [02:29:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=8998s) 艺术需要混乱：从狂野纽约到平庸的“郊区商场城市”
谈及文化与艺术的孕育，蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）与乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）一致认为艺术创作离不开某种混乱的滋养，而这种混乱绝不可能来自 TGI Fridays 这种刻板无趣的连锁快餐店。狄龙指出，每个时代都有其特定的社会惯性，今天的现代人根本承受不了1980年代纽约那种粗粝凶险的生活环境。他打趣道，过去的人天生就适应苦难与战争，门上贴一张征召令，人们就会默默扛枪去送死；而如今的现代人连叫 DoorDash 外卖送错了餐都要在网上写长篇大论投诉，人类早已失去了耐受残酷现实的韧性。罗根随即援引历史资料补充道，1981年《滚石》（Rolling Stone）杂志曾将位于时代广场核心地带的西42街评为“全美最下流肮脏的街区”（the sleaziest block in America），而如今那里早已蜕变成了寸土寸金的黄金地段。
对于纽约的这种剧变，狄龙感到既现实又无奈。他承认虽然现在的街区更安全，但“它因更安全而变好，也因更安全而变糟”，因为任何事物都不是非黑即白的。虽然纽约依然汇聚着才华横溢的演员、喜剧人与音乐家，但当下的文化已经极度碎片化和去中心化，再也没有任何事物能保持纯粹的酷劲。狄龙极其尖锐地吐槽了纽约近年来的降级与庸俗化：过去人们在纽约下馆子，吃的是在家里绝不可能做出来的精致法餐，忍受着傲慢侍者的白眼却觉得趣味盎然；而如今人们去高档餐厅仅仅是因为泰勒·斯威夫特（Taylor Swift）去过，餐馆端上来的不过是裹着松露油的高级版冷冻披萨卷（Totino's pizza roll）、法式蘸肉三明治和千篇一律的汉堡。
在狄龙眼中，昔日的文化圣地已经彻底退化成一座充斥着皮拉提斯课程、推婴儿车的年轻家庭、聊鸡肉沙拉和逛 Wegmans 超市的“郊区化商场城市”。虽然街头不再充斥着持刀伤人的混乱，但也彻底丧失了昔日那种不可复制的城市魔力，而且这种魔力在纽约和洛杉矶都再也不会重现。
- 1981年《滚石》杂志曾将时代广场附近的西42街评为全美最下流的街区，如今该区域已全被顶级商业地产覆盖。
- 狄龙讽刺纽约餐饮界如今沉迷于把平民垃圾食品（如冷冻披萨卷、汉堡）淋上松露油卖出天价，城市文化完全沦为社交媒体 Instagram 拍照打卡的附庸。
---
### [02:32:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9156s) 政治表演的虚伪：从市长选举秀到伯尼·桑德斯的妥协
话题转入纽约政局与大选，狄龙对自称社会主义者的政客佐兰·马姆达尼（Zohran Mamdani）竞选纽约市长时的作秀行为嗤之以鼻。马姆达尼曾站在城堡投资（Citadel）创始人、亿万富翁肯·格里芬（Ken Griffin）的豪华公寓楼前拍视频，高呼“富豪住在这里，我们得把钱收缴回来”。狄龙毫不留情地戳穿这套表演逻辑：格里芬此时正在佛罗里达州棕榈滩建造价值10亿美元的超级庄园，根本不在乎纽约怎么折腾；而马姆达尼充其量只是个吃市政薪水的公务员，这种政治叫嚣与低质的 YouTube 网红博眼球毫无二致，最终既动不了富豪的分毫，也解决不了城市脏乱与犯罪抬头的本质问题。
狄龙进一步将批判的矛头指向整个美国建制派政治体系，指出像伯尼·桑德斯（Bernie Sanders）这样的人正是体制允许存在的“特供版社会主义者”。表面上看桑德斯深受激进年轻人的喜爱，但他任职参议员30年间除了给佛蒙特州争取军工复合体的工作岗位外一事无成。他虽然名下拥有数百万资产和三套房产，却在两次大选初选中被克林顿家族与高盛集团背后的势力联手做局排挤后，依然温顺地站台高呼“希拉里很棒，体制没问题”，绝不敢真正动摇现有权力结构。狄龙讽刺道，桑德斯不过是在给不满的选民“扔一根安抚性质的骨头”，目的仅仅是在几乎全由白人组成、天寒地冻的佛蒙特州保住自己的参议员宝座，安心吃着 Ben & Jerry's 冰淇淋安度晚年；罗根与狄龙还顺带调侃了在片场涉嫌过失致死后移居当地的演员亚历克·鲍德温（Alec Baldwin）。
---
### [02:34:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9282s) 2028大选博弈：深层资本派系与“无聊救赎”的降临
针对罗根关于“2028年大选会发生什么”的提问，狄龙深入剖析了共和党内部不同资本派系的博弈。他认为传统大捐款人倾向于支持马可·卢比奥（Marco Rubio），但卢比奥本质上缺乏威望，举止像个“小丑”；相比之下，JD·万斯（JD Vance）带有更强烈的孤立主义色彩，且与硅谷新兴科技资本走得极近。狄龙指出，美国超级富豪阶层内部存在着深刻的分裂：一方是由几代人资本积累构成的老牌中央银行财阀与传统军火工业集团，他们更倾向于通过战争获利且与传统地缘利益高度绑定，更喜欢卢比奥这类听话的政客；另一方则是新兴的科技巨头，虽然科技公司同样参与国防军工，但他们拥有更多元的变现渠道。狄龙预测，尽管川普提议万斯与卢比奥搭档竞选，万斯最终更有可能夺得党内提名。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 2028 Republican Donor Faction Split
accDescr: Diagram illustrating the two main donor factions influencing the 2028 Republican primary candidates JD Vance and Marco Rubio.
subgraph Tech["新兴科技资本派系"]
T1["硅谷科技巨头"]
T2["孤立主义倾向与多元变现"]
T1 --- T2
end
subgraph Banking["传统金融与军工复合体"]
B1["跨代传承的中央银行财团"]
B2["深度绑定地缘战争与传统军工"]
B1 --- B2
end
Tech -->|"倾向支持"| Vance["JD·万斯 (JD Vance)"]
Banking -->|"倾向支持"| Rubio["马可·卢比奥 (Marco Rubio)"]
```
当罗根质疑美国民众届时是否还会买共和党的账时，狄龙断言2028年必将由民主党赢得白宫，但他认为胜利者绝不会是加文·纽森（Gavin Newsom）或 AOC 这种极具争议的意识形态符号，而会是一个来自红州或摇摆州、公众甚至叫不出名字的“平庸无聊”的民主党温和派州长或参议员。狄龙以乔治亚州参议员乔恩·奥索夫（Jon Ossoff）为例，称这种面相端正、脖子粗细适中、曾在国家安全部门任职且能在保守电台获得支持的建制派“特工型面孔”，正是当下美国最需要的“政治退烧药”。
狄龙感叹，从选举之夜的混乱、川普遭遇暗杀未遂到各种极端政治暴力的频发，过去十年宛如一场全民沉迷的毒瘾，让整个国家陷入癫狂。在经历了十年政治真人秀的极限拉扯后，公众早已疲惫不堪，只需要一个四平八稳的无聊政客走上台宣告“秀结束了，我们来谈谈医保吧”，全国选民便会如释重负。罗根听罢感叹政治戏剧的虚无荒诞，并笑称非常庆幸能在充满狂热与虚妄的世界里听到狄龙清醒而辛辣的讽刺。
### [02:38:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9497s) 尾声：对《蒂姆·狄龙秀》的赞赏与道别
在节目的尾声，乔·罗根（Joe Rogan）毫不掩饰对蒂姆·狄龙（Tim Dillon）播客节目《The Tim Dillon Show》的高度赞赏，直言他的播客“太棒了”（Your podcast rules），是一处不可多得的精神避风港。罗根感慨道，狄龙能够将现实世界的残酷真相与荒诞的幽默感无缝融合，这种能力在当下的脱口秀与媒体圈中极其罕见。在罗根眼中，狄龙所做的事情非常独特且难得——他不仅带来了极具洞察力的政治与社会评论，还能将那些极其虚无主义（nihilist）的视角转化为令人捧腹大笑的爆笑段子。
面对罗根由衷的夸赞，蒂姆·狄龙表示非常感谢，并保持着一贯的讽刺幽默风格调侃道：“只要我还没被关进监狱，我就会一直做下去（I'll keep doing it until I'm put in a jail）。” 随后，两位老友互相致意道谢，罗根向所有听众道别，为长达两个半小时的精彩对话画上了圆满的句号。
- 乔·罗根评价狄龙的播客兼具深刻的政治与社会观察，同时充满了极其荒诞与虚无主义的绝妙喜剧笑料。
- 蒂姆·狄龙戏谑表态：只要自己没被逮进牢房，就会继续把这种犀利独特的讽刺播客做下去。
## Notable quotes
> Real alien shit — 知情人士（援引自 CNN 报道）
> [02:01:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7281s) I feel like I was robbed — 托尼·多库皮尔 (Tony Dokoupil)
> [02:01:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=7281s) It's kind of a haha thing — 托尼·多库皮尔 (Tony Dokoupil)
> [02:38:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9497s) Your podcast rules — Joe Rogan
> [02:38:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk&t=9497s) I'll keep doing it until I'm put in a jail — Tim Dillon
## Mentioned
Joe Rogan, Tim Dillon, Eric Weinstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Nancy Guthrie, Michelle Obama, Donald Trump, JD Vance, Hunter S. Thompson, The Undertaker, David Dutch, James Copenhaver, Kimberly Cheatle, Bari Weiss, David Ellison, Skydance Media, The Free Press, Brian Stelter, Benjamin Netanyahu, Mark Levin, Tony Dokoupil, Pete Hegseth, Scott Pelley, Nick Bilton, Renee Good, Whitney Houston, AIPAC, Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Gad Saad, Bill Clinton, Tulsi Gabbard, Anthony Fauci, Palantir, Peter Thiel, Usha Vance, Kristi Noem, Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Janis Joplin, The Ramones, Taylor Swift, Zohran Mamdani, Ken Griffin, Citadel, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Alec Baldwin, Marco Rubio, Gavin Newsom, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), Jon Ossoff, CBS, 60 Minutes, CNN, New York Post, The New York Times, Perplexity, CAA, UFC, WEF
## Video description
Tim Dillon is a stand-up comic, actor, and host of “The Tim Dillon Show” podcast. His latest comedy special, “Tim Dillon: I’m Your Mother,” is available on Netflix.
https://www.youtube.com/@TimDillonShow
https://www.patreon.com/thetimdillonshow
https://punchup.live/TimDillon
https://www.timdilloncomedy.com
Perplexity: Download the app or ask Perplexity anything at https://pplx.ai/rogan.
50% off your first box at https://www.thefarmersdog.com/rogan!
Switch today at https://Visible.com for just 25/mo. Or Save $10 on your first month of Visible+ Pro with code ROGAN.
[Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdqkloiSvk)
Source quotes
知情人士（援引自 CNN 报道）: Real alien shit
[121:21] 托尼·多库皮尔 (Tony Dokoupil): I feel like I was robbed
[121:21] 托尼·多库皮尔 (Tony Dokoupil): It's kind of a haha thing
[158:17] Joe Rogan: Your podcast rules
[158:17] Tim Dillon: I'll keep doing it until I'm put in a jail
Source quotes
[32:21] The goal is to create literally a digital god. And it's going to be controlled by not us, not the collective human race. It's going to be controlled by a select few group of people.
[39:05] Joe Rogan: If Elon is correct and there's something that's a million times smarter than human beings... why would we let people govern? Why would we let people build that stupid rail station in California that's cost how much money and produced what?
[48:05] Tim Dillon: If you do something for 30 goddamn years and get rich and famous, shut your mouth... Have the dignity to go to your house and shut your mouth about it.
[48:05] Tim Dillon: Many of my friends are not good people... But they entertain me. And that used to be okay.
[65:06] Tim Dillon: They really believe that once all of these people come to these countries and see how great it is to be a childless 40-year-old woman working in data entry at a large faceless corporation that's gay on Pride Month... when they see how happy she or he or they is living in a society where you don't own anything.
[71:47] Joe Rogan: I said, 'Oh, I take myself too seriously.' They go, 'Yes!'... It's like little corrections of your psyche.
[71:47] Joe Rogan: The idea that we know what's real and what's not real... 'This is reality: you go to Tim Hortons, you get yourself a donut, you go to work.' No, I have a feeling that experience is you being able to see something that exists around you.
[89:34] Tim Dillon: I've never encountered people who are so committed to anything... They're 10 years in going, 'Trust the plan. It's coming.'... That level of commitment is what America is about. It's about not giving up.
[111:00] Tim Dillon: She texted me and was like, 'You're part of a world in which people are anti-Semitic'... What am I doing? What is this guilt by association?
[118:40] Tim Dillon: He's crying in some Cuban restaurant about his drug dealer father... and no one believes anything's real anymore. This is a huge problem in our world.
[123:06] Tim Dillon: They're like, 'If China gets all this stuff, you're all going to... we lose.' And you go, 'Okay.' So, it's almost like China will enslave you. Let us do it first.
[123:06] Tim Dillon: Is it fun if the whole world dies and I'm just sitting and having dinner with JD Vance and his wife?
[132:36] Tim Dillon: Ken Griffin's in Palm Beach building a house worth a billion dollars. You're not going to do anything to Ken Griffin. You're a city employee. The mayor is fake.
[137:06] Tim Dillon: He's a spook. Put him in. Who cares? It's fake at this point. We all know it's fake.
[138:12] Tim Dillon: I'll keep doing it until I'm put in a jail.
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.
[0:11] >> 13 and I was smoking. My father said
[0:12] that to me. He goes, "You know what's a
[0:14] good thing about you? You never smoked
[0:15] them down to the filter."
[0:16] >> What a good kid. And what a great
[0:18] family. And what a great family.
[0:22] >> My sister smoked when we were in high
[0:23] school. I was always like, "God, why are
[0:25] you smoking? It's so stupid." Yeah. And
[0:27] then uh I had to do a play once with uh
[0:29] Adam Ferrara and a couple other people
[0:31] and I had I was supposed to play this
[0:34] >> something that a bunch of comics wrote
[0:35] like funny little sketch thing and I was
[0:37] supposed to play this like tortured
[0:39] liberal arts student and I was like
[0:40] smoking cigarettes.
[0:42] >> So they wanted me to smoke cigarettes
[0:43] while I was doing it. So I smoked like
[0:44] 15 [ __ ] cigarettes while we were
[0:46] doing it and I threw up. I had a [ __ ]
[0:48] horrible headache. I was like, "Oh my
[0:49] god, I'm so high." Like my arms don't
[0:52] move right. If you've never smoked
[0:53] cigarettes at all and you smoked 15 in a
[0:55] row during
[0:56] >> Were you like an athlete, too?
[0:57] >> Oh, yeah.
[0:58] >> Oh, so that totally [ __ ] you up.
[0:59] >> Oh, completely [ __ ] me up.
[1:00] >> Yeah.
[1:01] >> No, the first time I had a cigarette,
[1:03] it's so terrible, but I was like, "This
[1:05] is great."
[1:07] >> I My body responded. I don't know how
[1:10] like what you had is the very normal
[1:12] experience.
[1:13] >> It was just too much. One cigarette I
[1:14] actually liked. I was like, "Oo, what a
[1:16] head rush. This is kind of cool." I go,
[1:17] "Now I got I kind of get it. I get why
[1:19] you guys like this."
[1:20] >> Interesting. But I had we were doing
[1:22] this thing and I had to always be
[1:23] smoking. So we had a rehears. We were
[1:25] doing it all day and I wanted to try to
[1:26] like feel normal with a cigarette in my
[1:29] hand. So I kept smoking them and then I
[1:30] liked them so I kept smoking them.
[1:32] >> Yeah. It's it's a tough thing because
[1:35] the thing about and I've been sober 15
[1:37] years from alcohol and drugs and I look
[1:40] at people that are really drunk. It
[1:41] doesn't look appealing. It doesn't look
[1:43] good. But when you see somebody with a
[1:45] cigarette, it always looks good.
[1:47] >> It looks like ah
[1:48] >> it always looks good. You never say to
[1:50] yourself like that person's going to
[1:53] lose. Now, you'll get sick and die, but
[1:54] you never go they're going to lose
[1:56] control of their life,
[1:57] >> right?
[1:57] >> So, you look at somebody with a
[1:58] cigarette and you go, "Oh, yeah. They're
[2:01] having one. They're cool. It's fine.
[2:04] They're using it to help hang on."
[2:05] >> Yeah. And I never look cool with it.
[2:06] It's like you look at an actor doing it
[2:08] or someone at like the Khan Film
[2:10] Festival.
[2:11] >> Yeah. Someone like that.
[2:12] >> Timothy Shalomé has one. He's the size
[2:14] of one and he has one. And I go, "That's
[2:18] fine. They probably in France or
[2:20] something, you know what I mean? They
[2:22] all do [ __ ] like that. So, you'll see
[2:23] that and you go,
[2:24] >> "You should get a cigarette holder to go
[2:25] with your sunglasses." Those Hunter
[2:27] Thompson cigarette holders.
[2:28] >> Yeah.
[2:29] >> That's your next move.
[2:30] >> I just got the long stems with the
[2:32] cigarette at the end of it.
[2:33] >> Like 1920s.
[2:35] >> Like 1920s. And
[2:37] >> no, it's it's and it's the worst thing
[2:39] because the smell is terrible,
[2:41] >> right?
[2:41] >> And it destroys your clothes and it's
[2:44] very bad for your health obviously.
[2:46] >> Yeah. But it is one of those things that
[2:49] it's just such a good product. What
[2:51] other product could they tell you it
[2:52] kills you and we're raising the price
[2:55] every year?
[2:56] >> How about in England where they smoke
[2:57] like crazy of actual cancer on the
[2:59] [ __ ] cartons
[3:00] >> that when you buy them and I was in
[3:01] London and you bought one, there was a
[3:03] like a dead baby on one of them. They
[3:05] were like low birth weight. Yeah.
[3:07] >> And I was like this is terrible.
[3:09] >> And no one cares. They smoke more over
[3:10] there than anywhere.
[3:11] >> They smoke more over there. They don't
[3:13] eat the way we eat. Like they don't
[3:15] understand the way we eat gluttony. They
[3:18] don't get it. There is there are there's
[3:20] something called Toby Carvery like where
[3:23] you can just like just ladle on Sunday
[3:25] roast and Yorkshire pudding and stuff
[3:28] but for the most part the portions are
[3:30] smaller and people are more behaved in
[3:33] that sense. But they drink more and they
[3:35] smoke.
[3:37] >> This is it. European World Cup fans
[3:40] losing their minds over Taco Bell ranch
[3:42] and unlimited refills. Yeah. Oh, yeah.
[3:46] Because they get sick when they come
[3:47] here. They get sick because there's
[3:49] chemicals in our food.
[3:50] >> Somebody was telling me they went to
[3:52] BIES and the the there was uh the soccer
[3:56] teams were at BIES for the first time
[3:58] and they just [ __ ] couldn't believe
[3:59] it.
[4:00] >> Of course,
[4:01] >> imagine that's your first one of the
[4:03] first experiences you have in America.
[4:04] You walk into a BIES and you're from
[4:06] Czechoslovakia or some [ __ ]
[4:08] >> It's the it's one of the most American
[4:10] places, as you've said, that exists. You
[4:13] have this gas station, but that's also
[4:15] like a weird theme park of food
[4:19] and all kinds of other [ __ ] that you
[4:21] could need.
[4:21] >> Yeah. This guy, dude, lmao at this is a
[4:25] gas station.
[4:25] >> Yeah.
[4:26] >> Well, do you see how big they are?
[4:28] >> Yeah.
[4:28] >> The first two 24 million views. That's
[4:30] hilarious.
[4:31] >> No, it's completely alien to their
[4:33] culture. Yeah.
[4:34] >> To have a place like that where you
[4:36] could go buy the Costos are alien to
[4:39] them. The idea that you could buy
[4:41] mayonnaise in a bucket or jars and
[4:44] things that you would keep like, you
[4:46] know, like it's all they all think we're
[4:48] preppers because if you go to like a a a
[4:51] big grocery store chain, you're buying
[4:53] food for a long period of time. They
[4:56] don't do that there. They buy stuff for
[4:58] like the week. They have small
[4:59] refrigerators.
[5:00] >> Yeah. Small refrigerators, couple of
[5:01] days.
[5:02] >> They don't have refrigerators like we
[5:03] have, but also they don't have the same
[5:05] amount of preservatives in their food,
[5:07] which is why it's not poison,
[5:08] >> right? They also don't think, and they
[5:10] could be wrong about this, but they also
[5:12] don't think the like they're going to
[5:13] lose access
[5:15] >> because of some
[5:16] >> race war,
[5:18] >> you know what I mean? Like there is a
[5:20] little bit of planning that goes into
[5:22] some of these grocery runs that does
[5:23] seem slightly paranoid.
[5:25] >> Oh yeah. Well, the news media over here
[5:27] ramps you up. Oh, yeah. And you, you
[5:29] know, you start thinking about
[5:31] stockpiling gold.
[5:32] >> Oh, yeah. Yeah.
[5:33] >> Listen, when I lived in LA, when my kids
[5:35] were young, I had an apocalypse truck
[5:37] built,
[5:38] >> right? that Toyota Land Cruiser I got. I
[5:40] specifically I go I need a bugout truck.
[5:44] Like a truck where I could store a lot
[5:45] of [ __ ] in it and it can literally drive
[5:47] over a mountain. That's what I need. I
[5:49] need a car that's not just a road car,
[5:51] right? I need a car that occasionally
[5:52] [ __ ] might go sideways and you got to
[5:54] get the [ __ ] out of here and you got to
[5:55] drive through the desert.
[5:56] >> Wow. And you and I've left LA multiple
[5:59] times to make that drive. Not in an
[6:01] apocalypse car, but because of fires,
[6:03] because of riots. Like sometimes you
[6:05] just got to get out of dodge. three
[6:06] times. I got evacuated three [ __ ]
[6:08] times when I lived there and it got us
[6:10] close to like burning my fence down.
[6:12] >> It's part of the LA experience to get in
[6:14] a car. David Spade called me once during
[6:15] the riots. He goes, "Your block is on
[6:17] fire." I thought he was kidding, but
[6:19] there was just overturned cop cars on
[6:21] fire and it was like riots. This was
[6:23] 2020. So, I just got in my car and I
[6:25] went, "Okay." And I drove to the desert.
[6:26] That's part of the LA Yeah.
[6:28] >> experience is fleeing.
[6:29] >> That's what Palm Beach is.
[6:30] >> Yeah.
[6:31] >> Yeah. You Palm Springs.
[6:32] >> Palm Springs, right?
[6:33] >> Yeah. You flee.
[6:34] >> Yeah. You flee.
[6:34] >> You go. I mean, Palm Springs makes no
[6:36] sense. It's hot as [ __ ] There's no
[6:38] water.
[6:39] >> Started with money.
[6:40] >> It started because when when Paramount
[6:42] Pictures was doing edits, if you were in
[6:44] a movie, you had to be within 200 miles
[6:48] of until the movie was finished editing.
[6:50] It was in your contract. Palm Springs is
[6:52] like exactly 200 miles from LA.
[6:54] >> Oh, that's interesting. That's why they
[6:58] started it. Hollywood that, you know,
[7:00] they were like, "We own you. You can't
[7:02] go anywhere until the film is edited. So
[7:05] if you want to go on a vacation, you
[7:06] have to go there.
[7:07] >> You know what's interesting is like
[7:08] Pasadena was where all the like
[7:10] producers lived.
[7:11] >> Yeah.
[7:12] >> There is beautiful houses in Pasadena,
[7:15] man.
[7:15] >> Mid-century modern. Beautiful.
[7:17] >> Incredible places like estates that just
[7:20] seem completely out of place.
[7:22] >> Totally beautiful. And
[7:23] >> from another time.
[7:24] >> From another time. Well, that's the
[7:26] thing in LA now. You get the vibe that
[7:27] your your Santino made a brilliant
[7:30] point. And he's like, "It's not
[7:30] Hollywood. It's Hollywood the sequel."
[7:33] >> Like, you're not living in the thing
[7:35] anymore. You're living in whatever the
[7:37] second version of the thing is,
[7:38] >> right? The second of the thing is second
[7:40] version is tick- tocker.
[7:42] >> Yeah. Whatever it is, it's not it's not
[7:44] what it was. And every place seems a
[7:46] little bit like a museum or like it was
[7:49] cool 20 years ago or 15 years ago. You
[7:52] know,
[7:53] >> somebody recently said this and it's
[7:54] perfect. They said LA is slowly becoming
[7:57] Detroit.
[7:58] >> Interesting.
[7:58] >> Yeah. The only thing that might save it
[8:00] is the weather.
[8:01] >> The weather will help, but the industry
[8:03] dried up.
[8:04] >> So, the big industry in Hollywood,
[8:06] regardless of whether or not is the
[8:08] biggest economic industry, the biggest
[8:10] industry in terms of like cultural value
[8:12] and getting people to move there was
[8:13] always show business and that's they
[8:16] barely make movies anymore.
[8:18] >> They overtaxed and overregulated their
[8:21] biggest industry to other states and
[8:24] other countries. Yeah. And most people
[8:26] are making things all over the world and
[8:29] very few I think at one time it was like
[8:31] 80 to 90%. Now it's 25 30% shot in LA.
[8:36] >> Wow. It's a big difference.
[8:37] >> That's a giant difference. Well, that
[8:39] that arrogance of like this is the best
[8:41] place in the world. Everyone's going to
[8:42] come here no matter what. Right.
[8:44] >> That that's the Gavin Newsome attitude
[8:46] whenever he defends California talks
[8:48] about how great the GDP is. we, you
[8:50] know, we're the fifth, we we would be
[8:51] the fifth largest economic,
[8:54] you know, he starts rattling off all
[8:56] these wonderful statistics and this is
[8:58] like instead of acknowledging, yeah,
[9:00] we've got [ __ ] real problems. People
[9:02] are moving for the first time ever more
[9:03] than they're coming here, we're losing
[9:05] all these giant corporations that are
[9:07] leaving. Instead of that, it's just this
[9:10] we're the [ __ ] No one's doesn't m I'm
[9:12] I'm very big on California. I'm bullish
[9:15] on California. It's always going to be
[9:16] amazing here. Well, it's what every
[9:18] empire said until they fell, right? Like
[9:21] there's we are the thing,
[9:22] >> but people don't want to ever believe
[9:24] that things can fall. It's so weird. We
[9:25] we'll walk right through the coliseum
[9:27] and go, "Well, this will never happen
[9:28] again."
[9:28] >> Right. When we landed in LA, I looked to
[9:33] the right and that that warehouse was on
[9:36] fire with 85 billion or 85 million tons
[9:40] of chemicals in a warehouse that was on
[9:43] fire. It was like a multi-day blaze. and
[9:45] you're landing and you're looking out
[9:47] the window and you're just seeing the
[9:50] warehouse on fire and then there was a
[9:52] car fire on the 405. Like I sold my
[9:54] house, I have an apartment there now,
[9:56] but like as I was going to my apartment,
[9:58] there was a car on fire and I was as I
[10:00] was landing the warehouse was on fire.
[10:02] And you start thinking to yourself,
[10:03] somebody doesn't want us here. Like
[10:05] somebody wants us out. Like it almost
[10:08] feels like we're being evicted by
[10:09] nature.
[10:10] >> By nature. Interesting. Maybe human
[10:12] nature. by bad decisions, by everything
[10:16] >> which is nature. Yeah.
[10:17] >> You know, human nature is nature and
[10:19] that the stupidity of humans is it's no
[10:22] different than the stupidity of animals
[10:23] when they go extinct.
[10:24] >> Do you think it comes back any shot, any
[10:26] chance?
[10:27] >> Something has to happen, right?
[10:28] Something big has to happen. I mean,
[10:30] there there has to be something that
[10:32] completely shifts the way LA looks at
[10:35] itself. You know, it has to look at
[10:36] itself as like a functioning business
[10:38] instead of a giant scam for nonprofits,
[10:41] right? was the a big part of LA's
[10:43] problem is there's a bunch of people
[10:45] that are in the empathy industry.
[10:46] >> Yeah.
[10:47] >> And they're in the you know we're
[10:48] working for this and we're working for
[10:50] that and and a giant chunk of their
[10:53] money is going to that kind of show.
[10:54] >> I did a great show at Oceans in Atlantic
[10:56] City which is a casino there and the
[10:58] owner of that casino was talking to me
[11:00] and I said, "What would fix Atlantic
[11:02] City?" Because Atlantic City has some
[11:04] similar problems to LA but vastly worse.
[11:08] >> Yeah. Way worse. and and uh he was
[11:10] telling me he goes we have just a high
[11:12] amount of people and a lot of social
[11:14] programs in one area. So you have a lot
[11:16] of people that are not for whatever
[11:19] reason productive and they are living in
[11:22] one area and everything that comes along
[11:24] with that which is crime which is you
[11:27] know vandalism which is you know
[11:29] disorder to varying degrees and he goes
[11:32] you need to get rid of that in order to
[11:35] have a climate where businesses can
[11:38] thrive
[11:39] >> 100%
[11:39] >> which is what happened in New York in
[11:40] the '9s people hate it they don't want
[11:42] to admit it but what happened in New
[11:44] York in the '90s was
[11:46] They did clean up a lot of the crime and
[11:49] and a lot of businesses then felt better
[11:51] about investing
[11:52] >> 100%. That's what Giuliani did.
[11:54] >> That's what he did. Yeah.
[11:55] >> And he's demonized.
[11:57] >> He's demonized. He's He's demonized. He
[11:59] hasn't He's one of those guys where if
[12:02] he had just done that and died, his
[12:04] legacy would have been amazing.
[12:06] >> But he's hung around for a while and
[12:08] he's kind of gone into some interesting
[12:10] tangents. So, it's one of those
[12:12] scenarios where it's like had he just
[12:14] cleaned up New York City and then left
[12:16] public life, it would have been like
[12:17] that guy, right?
[12:18] >> But he hung around a little bit and, you
[12:20] know, got involved.
[12:21] >> They always have to hang around.
[12:22] >> They always hang around. You're going to
[12:24] do shows. You're always going to do
[12:25] standup. You know, that's right.
[12:26] >> You're always going to do shows.
[12:27] >> But he did such a good thing and then it
[12:29] was like just
[12:30] >> Yeah.
[12:30] >> Just exit.
[12:31] >> He's also, you know, he was easy to make
[12:34] fun of. Like that time where he was
[12:35] sweating and his dye from what I mean,
[12:37] you know what I mean? He's melting. He's
[12:39] doing a hair conference in a parking
[12:41] lot.
[12:42] >> Don't dye your hair. You're 100 years
[12:43] old. It's okay to have gray hair.
[12:45] >> It's just these guys. There's so much
[12:48] silliness on both sides. You know,
[12:51] there's so there's silliness on the left
[12:52] and silliness on the right. There's
[12:54] goofy people because the only kind of
[12:55] people that want that kind of position
[12:57] of power are a little goofy, right?
[13:00] >> You don't get the best and the brightest
[13:02] and the most enlightened that want to be
[13:03] the mayor of New York City. It's like
[13:05] not the job. You get a lot of people
[13:07] that want power and they want influence
[13:10] and they you know I think a lot of that
[13:13] >> the AI stuff which is very interesting
[13:15] is starting to I think it might I I
[13:17] don't know how
[13:19] quickly it will do this but I do think
[13:21] it's going to it's going to lessen some
[13:24] of the cultural divides and I think it's
[13:27] going to potentially unite people
[13:30] because it's I I think it's going to be
[13:33] the next fight seems to be about
[13:37] surveillance, privacy,
[13:40] your your own rights, what rights you'll
[13:42] have. Like I feel like that will be it
[13:45] might take precedent instead of like
[13:47] these cultural fights that people have
[13:49] been having for a while. It might be
[13:51] like people might be demanding autonomy,
[13:56] you know, from artificial intelligence.
[13:58] The problem is going to be if you can't
[14:00] demand if you if you don't have a voice
[14:03] anymore. And this is the potential
[14:06] nightmare scenario that we're seeing
[14:08] play out slowly in England.
[14:10] >> So in in England, their freedom of
[14:12] speech has been suppressed to an
[14:14] alarming point where people are not
[14:16] freaking out nearly enough about it. The
[14:18] amount of arrests that people get over
[14:20] there for [ __ ] retweets and likes.
[14:23] Retweets and likes.
[14:24] >> That's so crazy to me that you could get
[14:26] arrested for liking a tweet. Arrested.
[14:31] Not even retweeting. Cuz we all know if
[14:33] you like you're a piece of [ __ ] You
[14:36] should retweet.
[14:38] >> We all know that
[14:40] it retweet it. So to and if you're going
[14:42] to go to jail, you might as well retweet
[14:44] it anyway. If you're going to get locked
[14:46] up
[14:48] for a retweet versus a like.
[14:49] >> I'm sure your honor, my client just
[14:52] liked this. They were confused. They hit
[14:53] a button. So as soon as you have people
[14:56] that feel like the the reality of the
[14:58] world they live in is not being
[15:00] represented and they're not allowed to
[15:03] complain about it online because if they
[15:05] complain about online they get arrested.
[15:07] So right now it's for immigration
[15:08] primarily. This is the big one.
[15:10] >> But that could change that could change.
[15:13] Well, it does seem to be that they they
[15:16] feel that there was a decision made by
[15:20] somebody that
[15:23] the public can only discuss issues in a
[15:27] very rigid way. They can only offer
[15:30] their you like I if not everyone who's
[15:32] talking about immigration is doing it in
[15:34] the most articulate way, but it's their
[15:36] right to do it. It's their country. They
[15:39] should be able to say,
[15:41] um, I'm worried about increased levels
[15:45] of immigration, you know, and they
[15:47] should be able to say that in in an
[15:49] ineloquent way. Right.
[15:51] >> Right.
[15:52] >> So, what they're doing now is they're
[15:54] policing certain words and I think
[15:56] certain ways of speaking and they're
[15:59] calling a lot of things uh an incitement
[16:01] to violence. Now, some things clearly
[16:03] are an incitement to violence, but you
[16:06] know, the internet, people speak in a
[16:08] colorful way. People talk using irony.
[16:12] Some people are trying to be funny. Some
[16:14] people are So, I I think the way that
[16:17] they're doing it over there is they're
[16:18] they're basically looking at these
[16:19] statements and going, "This person is
[16:23] inciting violence and threatening the
[16:25] public good by what they're saying."
[16:28] >> Right? And then there's also people were
[16:32] getting arrested for saying that there
[16:33] were rape gangs.
[16:34] >> And there were
[16:35] >> and there were.
[16:36] >> There were.
[16:37] >> And so this new report, who released
[16:39] this new report that said a quarter
[16:41] million people, it says UK scraps police
[16:44] probes of legal social media posts after
[16:46] review says response went too far. So
[16:48] this is uh April 1st, 2026. Uh but I
[16:52] just saw a thing about a guy getting
[16:54] arrested like a few days ago. And we
[16:56] have rape gangs here, but our ours are
[16:57] more successful.
[16:58] >> I think that's a
[17:00] legal social media post is which weird.
[17:03] So legal social media post, right? Their
[17:06] law is different than our law. They
[17:07] don't have freedom of speech over there.
[17:08] So incitement to violence is a violation
[17:10] of their law, right?
[17:11] >> So when it says legal, it could just be
[17:14] they went too far for things like like
[17:16] cartoons or something like that. That's
[17:18] not clearly not an incitement to
[17:19] violence. But would it find out, Jamie,
[17:22] what that report was about the rape
[17:24] gangs? I was just there for 21 days. I
[17:27] was in London. I went to Paris for a
[17:29] couple of days, but I was in London
[17:30] primarily for 21 days. And you talk to
[17:33] different groups of people. And London
[17:35] is a global city. It's a cosmopolitan
[17:37] city. It's like New York. And, you know,
[17:40] I think one of the things that,
[17:43] you know, they're they're used to
[17:45] diversity there. And so they're not
[17:47] full-on panicked about different types
[17:49] of people coming in. But there is
[17:52] undeniably a real problem um outside of
[17:56] London, also in London, but outside of
[17:59] London because a lot of the economy is
[18:01] stagnated. So you're bringing people in.
[18:03] It's not clear immediately what jobs
[18:05] they'll do. And a lot of their cultures
[18:07] vary greatly from the English culture in
[18:11] a in a meaningful way. And that could be
[18:13] the rights of women, that could be the
[18:15] rights of gay people, that could be the
[18:17] opinions about freedom of speech, that
[18:18] could be freedom of religion, whatever
[18:20] it is, there is a cultural tension there
[18:23] between, you know, immigrants, migrants
[18:26] coming in and this the very established
[18:29] society that's been around for a very
[18:30] long time. This episode is brought to
[18:32] you by the farmer's dog. Here's a fun
[18:34] fact. Research shows that dogs who
[18:36] maintain a healthy weight can live up to
[18:38] two and a half years longer on average
[18:40] than dogs who are overweight. Isn't that
[18:43] wild and also kind of obvious at the
[18:45] same time? So, why is feeding vague
[18:48] scoops of ultrarocessed kibble still the
[18:51] status quo for most dog owners? Healthy
[18:54] alternatives exist. And trust me, I know
[18:57] I buy one, the farmer's dog. I use it
[18:59] for both my dogs. They love it. They eat
[19:01] it up quick. It smells good to them. It
[19:04] smells good to me. It's human grade
[19:06] food. The Farmers Dog makes fresh food
[19:08] for dogs, and my dogs love it. Their
[19:11] recipes are made with real meat and
[19:13] fresh vegetables that are gently cooked
[19:15] to retain vital nutrients. They also
[19:17] portion out the meals to your dog's
[19:19] nutritional needs, which helps avoid
[19:21] overfeeding and makes weight management
[19:23] easier. And isn't getting more time with
[19:26] our four-legged best friends something
[19:28] every dog owner wants? The answer to
[19:31] that is yes, obviously. So try the
[19:35] farmer's dog today and get 50% off your
[19:38] first box of fresh, healthy food. Plus,
[19:41] get free shipping. Just go to the
[19:44] farmersdog.com/rogan.
[19:46] This offer is for new customers only.
[19:49] Like we were talking right before the
[19:50] show. Is it about Dearborn? Is that
[19:52] where it is?
[19:52] >> Dearborn, Michigan. Yeah.
[19:53] >> So we're a bunch of really progressive
[19:55] people. Thought it's amazing.
[19:57] >> Bring everyone in. Everyone Everyone's
[19:59] welcome. And so they got enough Muslim
[20:01] people in there where they could vote in
[20:02] a mayor. And then this guy says, "No
[20:05] more pride flags."
[20:06] >> No more pride flags.
[20:07] >> Yeah. And they're inching towards what
[20:09] they would like. Yes. Which is Sharia
[20:12] law. If you ask most people who live in
[20:15] these Islamic countries. Now again, if
[20:16] you're asking them, they're probably
[20:18] under duress. They're probably terrified
[20:20] of saying the wrong thing. So you've got
[20:22] to factor that in. But at least a
[20:23] percentage of them think Sharia law
[20:25] would be a great idea. I think there's
[20:27] certainly a
[20:29] Yeah. I mean, and this was covered up,
[20:31] too. A lot of the grooming gang scandal
[20:33] there.
[20:34] >> Yeah. So, we're looking at it right now.
[20:35] It says this is on uh National Review,
[20:37] the UK's horrific rape gangs. So, this
[20:41] but there was is this
[20:44] the rape gang inquiry report, right? So,
[20:46] who put this report out?
[20:50] Uh members of Parliament and Restore
[20:52] Britain party leader Rupert Low. And so
[20:55] the investigators had limited power such
[20:57] as inability inability to compel
[20:59] witnesses or require sort of document
[21:01] production that could cooperate some of
[21:03] the most heinous victims. Viewed with
[21:06] those limitations in mind, the
[21:07] independent report is a damning
[21:08] collection of victim testimonies that
[21:11] vividly portray the sexual terrorism
[21:13] that occurred nationwide for decades.
[21:16] >> Oh Jesus Christ.
[21:18] >> Yeah, this is terrible. I mean obviously
[21:20] I mean the the
[21:20] >> I think they said it was 250,000
[21:24] girls
[21:24] >> and this was covered up because the
[21:26] media didn't want to inflame anger
[21:29] against you know population of migrants
[21:32] >> right
[21:33] >> most of whom I'm sure were innocent of
[21:34] this obviously
[21:36] >> obviously
[21:36] >> but it is something that you know in a
[21:40] free society everyone has the right to
[21:42] know if there are rape gangs in their
[21:44] country and who's operating them
[21:45] >> but isn't that crazy that in the under
[21:48] under the guise of progressiveness.
[21:50] Yeah, you've enabled rape gangs.
[21:52] >> Well, 100%. It's crazy, but it's also
[21:56] incredibly
[21:58] >> It's not shocking because
[22:02] the ends justify the means approach of
[22:05] politics seems to be what we're doing
[22:09] right now. Whereas basically if the goal
[22:12] is to just eliminate,
[22:16] you know, whatever whatever it's being
[22:18] called like this patriarchal white male
[22:21] dominated society and if you want to get
[22:24] rid of that and that's the end goal, a
[22:27] lot of people ignore what happens in the
[22:30] middle. Like a lot of people aren't
[22:32] super concerned about whose rights are
[22:35] being respected in that process because
[22:37] their end goal really is to kind of
[22:41] decrease the power of um people they
[22:45] disagree with, you know. So, I mean,
[22:47] it's like, you know, you know, it's hard
[22:51] to look at this and not see a design.
[22:55] And I don't I don't quite know exactly
[22:57] where the design comes from, but it's
[23:00] it's odd that this is all happen stance
[23:02] because everybody knows it's happening
[23:04] and people are afraid to talk about it.
[23:06] So I I would imagine that at some point,
[23:09] you know, for example, like countries
[23:11] like Ireland right now that are having
[23:12] lots of issues over this, it's, you
[23:15] know, they're part of the EU and the EU
[23:18] would set migration policy for Ireland.
[23:21] So the EU is a super national
[23:22] organization that would basically say
[23:25] here's how many migrants you have to
[23:27] admit. Here's your carbon emission
[23:29] standards. Here's your, you know,
[23:31] monetary policy, whatever it is. And
[23:34] Ireland is kind of in that in that
[23:35] sense, they feel like they're losing
[23:36] their sovereignty. They're losing their
[23:38] ability to chart the course of their own
[23:42] country to a super national
[23:45] organization that's that primarily seems
[23:49] concerned with the economics because if
[23:51] you bring in more migrants you can
[23:53] artificially grow the economy which is
[23:55] what they're doing. A lot of people in
[23:57] Europe are not having children. So, a
[23:59] lot of these economies are run by people
[24:02] that are not really too concerned about
[24:05] the the cultural landscape of bringing
[24:07] migrants in. They're looking more about
[24:09] how do we grow this economy? How do we
[24:12] get cheap, you know, help and and how do
[24:16] we get workers? And a lot of it is
[24:18] you're you're getting third world
[24:19] migration. Some of it's genuine refugees
[24:21] for sure, but a lot of it's economic
[24:23] migration. People are coming for better
[24:25] life. Hard to blame them. But do the
[24:28] people that live in those countries get
[24:30] to have a better life? That's the
[24:31] question. If you lived in Ireland, do
[24:34] you get to have a a better life? Do do
[24:37] your economic prospects get to grow? Do
[24:39] your children get to own property? Do
[24:41] they get to have health insurance and a
[24:43] job and things like that? And it no one
[24:47] seems that concerned about that. like
[24:49] these these citizens who've lived
[24:51] forever in these countries whose
[24:53] grandparents have fought and died in
[24:55] wars to secure the freedom of some of
[24:57] those countries you know Britain UK you
[25:00] know things like that those citizens
[25:02] seem to not be as prioritized as people
[25:07] coming in from other countries and
[25:09] that's one of the big problems
[25:12] um that they're having there well is
[25:14] it's it's really interesting to watch
[25:16] because if there is a plan I It's not
[25:19] interesting. It's kind of horrific. But
[25:20] if it it's interesting in that
[25:22] >> it can be both.
[25:22] >> It can be both.
[25:23] >> Sure.
[25:23] >> Um if there is a plan like whose plan
[25:28] and who's benefiting from this? Like why
[25:31] why would you do this? I think it's a
[25:32] small group of people that concern
[25:36] themselves primarily with economic
[25:39] matters that don't care that nation
[25:42] states have cultures and histories and
[25:46] customs. and that doesn't really that
[25:49] doesn't bother them as much. Um, and
[25:52] their their basic their basic uh, you
[25:56] know, response is to just deal with it
[25:59] and to call everyone a racist who
[26:00] questions it or to say everyone's uh,
[26:03] jingoist or ethnosentric or
[26:05] anti-immigrant or whatever. They shut
[26:07] down those conversations. And I think
[26:10] it's because a lot of people believe
[26:12] more in a global world and they don't
[26:15] believe in a world of nation states that
[26:18] have their own ability to govern
[26:20] themselves. They want to take that power
[26:23] economically
[26:24] from those people and then eventually
[26:28] they want to take it culturally and
[26:31] every other way. So they just want to go
[26:33] around the world and say here's the way
[26:34] every country will look. here's the
[26:37] economic policy of every country and if
[26:40] the people in those countries don't like
[26:42] it and they express, you know, that on
[26:45] social media, they're going to get
[26:46] kicked off. And if they organize in the
[26:48] streets, they're going to use, you know,
[26:50] military authority to to fire water
[26:52] cannons at them or shut them down or use
[26:54] gas or whatever. And if there's a
[26:56] genuine
[26:58] resistance movement to some of it,
[27:00] they're going to infiltrate it and turn
[27:02] it into some psychotic thing, which they
[27:04] do all the time,
[27:05] >> right?
[27:06] >> So, it's hard to see it. Not to sound
[27:09] like a paranoid nut job, but that's what
[27:11] I am and how I've made my living,
[27:13] >> but I think it is clearly someone's
[27:17] design. This isn't happen stance. None
[27:20] of this has to happen. We don't have to
[27:23] invade countries,
[27:25] sponsor coups,
[27:28] steal resources, and then
[27:31] like drench our our communities in in
[27:34] guilt and say now we have to bring all
[27:36] those people here and you have to deal
[27:38] with it. None of that has to happen.
[27:40] That's that's a strategy of of a group
[27:43] of people that want to keep perpetuating
[27:46] this. Do you think it also has a one of
[27:48] the factors might be that they want
[27:50] conflict? The more conflict people have
[27:52] in the streets, the less they're going
[27:53] to pay attention to what the
[27:54] government's doing.
[27:55] >> Well, 100%. I also think the more chaos
[27:57] in the street, the more likely you're
[27:59] going to be willing to accept
[28:00] >> new laws.
[28:01] >> New laws, new technologies,
[28:04] >> and you're going to just say, "I want
[28:06] peace."
[28:07] >> And I don't care how we get it. I don't
[28:09] care how we achieve it.
[28:10] >> Yeah. And I think that's very possible,
[28:12] but it does feel like it it's it's on
[28:15] the road a little bit to where people
[28:17] want a uniform standard across. But as
[28:21] you've said earlier in this, it's very
[28:23] interesting because this uniform
[28:25] standard is supposed to include
[28:28] non-binary art students in Vermont and
[28:31] religious Muslims from North Africa.
[28:35] Yeah, good luck.
[28:39] But I mean that's but it's amazing that
[28:41] the people that would be most opposed,
[28:44] >> the people that like if you do bring
[28:46] those people in, the people they're
[28:47] going to hate the most are the people
[28:49] that want them in the most.
[28:51] >> They're the ones who are most likely to
[28:53] say we shouldn't have some border that
[28:55] keeps some person from coming here and
[28:58] no person's illegal.
[28:59] >> And the people that want them in the
[29:01] most, I think, are not even the people
[29:02] bringing them in. They're being used,
[29:04] >> right? They're being their suicidal
[29:06] empathy. Their empathy is being
[29:07] weaponized. It's being used people,
[29:10] right? So people that are
[29:13] >> manufacturing
[29:15] this reality are using those people.
[29:18] These are the same people who really
[29:19] don't care if people in the state over
[29:21] have healthcare,
[29:22] >> right?
[29:23] >> These are people that haven't spoken to
[29:24] their sister in two years,
[29:26] >> right?
[29:26] >> And they care a ton about people in the
[29:28] Ukraine or people that are coming over
[29:30] from Syria, whatever. But we [ __ ] up
[29:33] Syria. We put that guy in who used to be
[29:37] in ISIS. We got rid of Gaddafi. There's
[29:39] slave markets in Libya,
[29:41] >> right?
[29:42] >> So, we did that. We sent refugees all
[29:45] through Europe. We destabilized all of
[29:48] Europe. And
[29:50] you know, you can't take us out of it.
[29:53] You can't take Western powers out of it.
[29:55] You can't take Israel out of it. You
[29:56] can't take the US and Britain and France
[29:59] and a lot of other powers that have
[30:01] destabilized these countries and sent
[30:04] these people
[30:05] flooding through Western countries,
[30:08] European countries.
[30:11] Yeah. Fun. It's going to be a fun next
[30:14] 50 years.
[30:14] >> It's kind of crazy when you see images
[30:16] of France. There was a a video of France
[30:19] from 1998 from Paris.
[30:21] >> Yeah.
[30:22] >> Versus today. They showed like 1998 and
[30:24] then they showed
[30:25] >> different. It's a different thing. And
[30:27] you know, listen, some of that's
[30:28] inevitable. The world changes,
[30:30] >> different groups of people, you know,
[30:32] but then you look at in Ireland, this
[30:34] guy just got beheaded
[30:36] >> uh in the street, which I'm against and
[30:38] I think is wrong.
[30:40] >> And um he beheaded some guy, a migrant
[30:43] who had been brought in, had beheaded or
[30:46] damn near beheaded, tried to. And
[30:48] there's a video of it and and and now
[30:52] Belfast like you know it's probably
[30:54] quieted down now but there were like
[30:56] tremendous riots. They were like burning
[30:58] things down because they're like we
[30:59] never got a vote on this.
[31:01] >> We never got a vote on on bringing the
[31:03] people in.
[31:03] >> Yeah.
[31:04] >> We never got a vote on that. No one ever
[31:05] asked us how much demographic change we
[31:09] wanted in our country and how quickly
[31:12] and what we were prepared to do. No one
[31:14] ever asked that. People don't like to
[31:17] admit it, but an armed population,
[31:20] it's much more difficult to pull things
[31:22] off% population. And that's another part
[31:25] of the problem with the UK, with
[31:26] Ireland, all these places. It's very
[31:28] difficult to have a gun.
[31:29] >> Diversity also relies on a very
[31:31] productive economy. So, New York City
[31:34] works to do to the degree it does
[31:36] because people can go out and get jobs
[31:38] because the economic
[31:40] um reality of the city is that it it can
[31:44] support a lot of people coming in. There
[31:46] are a lot of jobs for those people. Um
[31:49] but when you have a stagnant economy
[31:50] like many parts of the UK, that's a lot
[31:54] harder. It's a harder cell. Harder to
[31:57] assimilate people into a landscape where
[32:00] the people there are not doing well.
[32:02] Like the people that have lived there
[32:03] forever are not thriving. They don't
[32:04] feel great. Their prospects economically
[32:07] aren't great. And now you're bringing
[32:09] all these new people who also are
[32:11] struggling to find work. So that's part
[32:15] of the problem. Do you think that this
[32:17] is being done with a a strategy knowing
[32:21] that AI is about to completely disrupt
[32:25] society?
[32:26] >> Yes. One I believe this is what I
[32:28] believe. I believe
[32:31] no one for example, no one's trying to
[32:33] get anyone in this country to own a
[32:34] house. No, people pay lip service to the
[32:38] idea, but there's there's a lot of
[32:39] people now, a lot of them are my age who
[32:42] have never owned a home and never will.
[32:44] And no one's trying to no one's wants
[32:47] them. They've forgotten what owning a
[32:49] home feels like. They've forgotten what
[32:51] it feels like to like have a yard where
[32:52] you can invite people over and drink a
[32:54] glass of wine and smoke a cigar and
[32:56] watch a game. And they live in a little
[32:57] apartment. They type, you know, they're
[33:00] on a MacBook. They're getting
[33:02] radicalized in any direction. they're
[33:05] upset, they're on dating apps or
[33:07] whatever, but they they they don't feel
[33:08] like they have a uh foundational core to
[33:12] their life. No one has really
[33:16] even given them the idea that they're
[33:17] going to get that. So, I think that's
[33:20] just one of the things where people are
[33:23] they're basically saying like, "No, you
[33:26] don't need a house and you're not
[33:27] getting a house and forget what owning a
[33:30] house was." Like, forget that. That
[33:32] doesn't matter. And I think part of this
[33:34] is because they know the same thing with
[33:36] health care. There's no real movement to
[33:39] give anyone health care in this country.
[33:41] And if it is, it gets shut down
[33:43] immediately.
[33:44] So on the positive side, you might go,
[33:46] well, they know that AI is coming and
[33:48] that AI is going to do a lot of stuff
[33:49] with health and it's going to help
[33:52] extend life spans. And but also on the
[33:55] negative side, they go, "Yeah, it's
[33:57] going to disrupt the economy to a point
[33:58] where like we're not going to have
[34:01] people owning homes and cars and things
[34:03] like that. We're going to have a lot of
[34:07] people without a steady income or they
[34:10] don't really know what to do. We're
[34:11] going to have a lot of wealth that's
[34:13] existed, uh, a lot of capital, and we're
[34:16] going to have tremendous inequality, and
[34:18] we're going to have a lot of
[34:19] joblessness." So for sure I think that
[34:23] they're they're preparing for that. I
[34:25] mean there's no way you can look at the
[34:28] landscape because they're selling the
[34:30] country off for parts and this is both
[34:33] parties and this is like they're selling
[34:35] it off for parts. So, I mean, obviously
[34:40] there something's coming. Something's
[34:43] coming for sure. And I I don't know when
[34:45] it is. And I'm sure the AI thing's
[34:46] overblown to an extent. And I think so
[34:49] much of our GDP depends on it that a lot
[34:51] of these companies are are but
[34:54] anthropics are creepy. These are creepy
[34:57] companies, you know? I mean, they're
[35:00] just creepy.
[35:01] >> Well, the amount of power Yeah. that
[35:03] tech companies have in general totally
[35:05] >> is unprecedented. There's never been
[35:07] corporations I mean unless you go back
[35:09] to like the East India Corporation that
[35:11] you know you go back in the day where
[35:13] they they had like an enormous army
[35:15] right you know totally and they took
[35:17] over India and Pakistan and
[35:19] >> the but if you look at what they're
[35:21] doing it's very different than that
[35:25] >> you know other than the army part what
[35:27] they have is robot armies and then they
[35:29] have AI which Elon just recently said is
[35:32] going to be like a million times smarter
[35:33] than the the smartest human that's ever
[35:36] lived Right?
[35:36] >> Like this is the goal. The goal is to
[35:38] create literally a digital god. And it's
[35:41] going to be controlled by not us, not
[35:45] the collective human race. It's going to
[35:47] be controlled by a select few group of
[35:49] people. And that's weird. Like, and
[35:51] we're just trusting them. Well, that's
[35:53] why you're not getting a vote on
[35:54] immigration levels or you're not going
[35:55] to get a vote on, you know, like
[35:58] >> I think the the the reality is that
[36:01] eventually they're going to go, "Do you
[36:03] want safe streets? Do you want food? Do
[36:05] you want a little bit of money? You got
[36:06] to do X, Y, and Z. You got to believe X,
[36:08] Y, and Z.
[36:09] >> Yeah.
[36:09] >> And I mean, that seems to be coming.
[36:11] >> And uh it seems like if you put people
[36:13] in a corner, you get them scared,
[36:15] they'll This is what we learned during
[36:17] co like they will back down. They'll
[36:19] they'll go along with a lot of stupid
[36:21] [ __ ]
[36:22] >> They'll go to they'll go they'll try to
[36:25] find comfort
[36:26] >> and they will listen to people that they
[36:29] deem to be worthy. Yeah. you know,
[36:33] >> they'll trust the government, which is
[36:35] wild. The left is the people that trust
[36:36] the government.
[36:37] >> Well, you have all these studies that
[36:39] come out. You know, this is the thing
[36:40] and I like I love London and I the
[36:42] people there are great and they're fun
[36:44] people and everything like that, but
[36:46] they have a you know, because they they
[36:47] get healthcare. They get a little more
[36:49] from their government than we do.
[36:50] There's more trust in their government
[36:51] than we have in our government. And
[36:53] there there's there's positives to that
[36:54] and there's negatives, but they they are
[36:57] a society of rules and customs and order
[37:00] and it is a bit different. And so I
[37:02] think they are more likely to go along
[37:04] with the grand plan of the government
[37:09] more so than the United States where we
[37:11] really do question
[37:13] more what's happening than people in
[37:17] Europe or the UK
[37:19] >> overall. Yeah. Well, that makes sense,
[37:21] right? They have socialized health care.
[37:23] They have Isn't their education paid for
[37:25] completely? Isn't
[37:27] >> they have good stuff? They have a good
[37:28] life.
[37:28] >> Yeah. There's benefits to that.
[37:30] >> Totally. there's like a balance to be
[37:32] achieved. I've always said that like in
[37:33] this country it's foolish that we don't
[37:35] have that we don't pay for higher
[37:37] education. Like the more educated people
[37:39] the better. Like the the less losers the
[37:40] better.
[37:41] >> Part of our country is is you know we're
[37:45] we do we we manufacture a lot of
[37:48] geniuses. We also manufacture a lot of
[37:50] psychopaths. That's what our culture
[37:52] does.
[37:52] >> A lot of sociopaths.
[37:53] >> A lot of sociopaths.
[37:54] >> A lot of people that don't give a [ __ ]
[37:55] about anything.
[37:56] >> A lot of people that don't care about
[37:58] anything.
[37:58] >> Yeah. And it's that's the thing that
[37:59] comes along with the gluttony too,
[38:01] right? It's celebrated and they don't
[38:02] even realize that that outward gluttony.
[38:05] It just inspires all these eat the rich
[38:06] people. The whole thing is out of
[38:09] balance. That's what I would describe
[38:11] America. If you had to describe it in
[38:12] three words, it's just out of balance.
[38:14] It's out of balance. It does. And it's
[38:16] hard because we've got 350 million
[38:18] people.
[38:19] >> It's hard to b, you know, and it's like
[38:21] what do the people in Menllo Park have
[38:24] to do with the people in Baton Rouge
[38:26] have to do with the people in Canari?
[38:27] Like, yeah, I get it. It's a weird
[38:29] place.
[38:30] >> You have all these different climates,
[38:31] habitats, people have different
[38:33] interests. But I think AI might unite
[38:35] people because like the idea of this as
[38:38] such a powerful force if people don't
[38:40] start getting cognizant of it eventually
[38:43] and start, you know, talking about
[38:45] regulating it or anything. You know, I
[38:47] do think it's it it it is going to be,
[38:51] you know, a very strange time if people,
[38:55] >> you know, just ignore it forever.
[38:58] >> It's going to do something weird. I'll
[38:59] tell you that it's not going to be nor
[39:01] like whatever is coming over the next 20
[39:03] years, no one is predicting it.
[39:05] >> I get the feeling when you see a lot of
[39:06] these tech guys start adopting
[39:08] Christianity.
[39:10] >> How about Peter Teal's like that whole
[39:12] Antichrist thing?
[39:13] >> Yeah, he does that whole thing.
[39:14] >> What is he doing? He gave a [ __ ]
[39:16] lecture on the Antichrist.
[39:17] >> There's a bunch of lectures on the
[39:18] Antichrist. He's fascinated with it. And
[39:20] and a lot of those guys are are are
[39:23] moving into this interesting area of um
[39:26] this is this is God wants this.
[39:31] Like JD Vance, who's not the worst
[39:33] person obviously, and I think he's the
[39:35] sest voice in that administration about
[39:37] the Iran war for sure. I think he's by
[39:40] far one of the only people in there
[39:42] going, "Let's calm it down." which is
[39:44] why a lot of the big donors are are are
[39:48] slinging mud at him, you know. But
[39:51] again, it's just he just released a book
[39:53] about faith and reconnecting with his
[39:54] faith. I'm sure it's a lovely book.
[39:56] Haven't read it. Fun beach read. JD
[39:58] Vance is reconnecting with his faith.
[40:01] Great, inspiring, amazing. We'll get to
[40:04] it. Haven't read it. We'll get to it.
[40:07] Top tier. But,
[40:10] you know, it's also interesting because
[40:12] like some of his donors are huge tech
[40:13] guys.
[40:14] And it's it's it's all of these worlds
[40:17] existing together where you have this
[40:19] world of people who are trying to build
[40:21] a god and the world of people who
[40:24] already believe in a god and trying to
[40:27] get all of those people in the same
[40:28] tent. That's interesting.
[40:31] >> It is. You know, imagine if that's where
[40:34] God comes from. If this is a a natural
[40:37] process for human beings and their
[40:39] curiosity and insatiable need for
[40:41] technological innovation. Then what
[40:43] happens once we get God? Like once let's
[40:45] say we bring this god in then what
[40:46] happens?
[40:48] >> Nirvana.
[40:49] >> Nirvana.
[40:50] >> Yeah. We we all merge becomes perfect.
[40:54] >> Interesting. So we all merge and that's
[40:56] perfect.
[40:57] >> It's fine. Don't worry about it. We're
[40:59] all going to merge with the machine.
[41:01] >> Interesting.
[41:04] Because people do believe that. At one
[41:07] point in time, cavemen had to be looking
[41:09] at the wheel going, "Man, I see where
[41:11] this is going to go,
[41:12] >> right?
[41:12] >> This is going to [ __ ] my whole gig up.
[41:14] My whole gig is making weapons out of
[41:17] stone and tying them to a stick with
[41:19] tendons and then chasing an animal and
[41:22] sparing them. And now these
[41:23] [ __ ] invented guns and these
[41:25] [ __ ] invented arrows." And with
[41:28] every progression of techn like bow and
[41:31] arrows, technology changed everything.
[41:32] Horse riding, figuring out how to ride a
[41:34] Well, that's like a new innovation,
[41:36] right? Ride a horse now. Now you can
[41:38] move a lot faster. You get a lot of
[41:39] things done. Some guy figured out a
[41:40] wheel. All right, drag the wheel. Put a
[41:42] cart on it. Now we can carry stuff with
[41:44] us, right?
[41:44] >> More than the stuff that you could put
[41:46] on a horse. Get a couple horses. They
[41:48] pull a wagon. Oh, great. Hey, this guy
[41:50] figured out a [ __ ] engine. We don't
[41:52] need horses anymore. All right, let's
[41:54] make the whole ground everywhere hard so
[41:56] we could roll around with these machines
[41:58] with internal combustion engines. And
[42:00] then it just keeps going and keeps going
[42:01] and keeps going and keeps going and then
[42:04] one day it's unrecognizable just like it
[42:06] is now. If you showed Australia Pythecus
[42:09] Manhattan in 2026, they'd be like they
[42:11] would freak out. They'd probably start
[42:13] screaming. They wouldn't know what to
[42:14] do. They would be horrified.
[42:16] >> But do you think like if we showed Peter
[42:19] Teal 2050, he'd go, "No, that's it. Like
[42:22] that's what I want." Like whatever 20
[42:24] Like do you think the guys now have a
[42:26] real idea of what it's going to be?
[42:28] >> No. I think I think there's a lot of
[42:30] guesswork. I don't think it's possible.
[42:32] I don't think it's possible to know what
[42:33] these things are going to do when they
[42:35] become sentient. I don't think it's
[42:36] possible if you if Elon is correct. If
[42:39] Elon's correct and there's something
[42:40] that's a million times smarter than
[42:42] human beings and somehow or another is
[42:45] why would we let people govern? Why
[42:47] would we let people build that stupid
[42:49] [ __ ] rail station in California
[42:52] that's cost how much money and it's
[42:54] produced what?
[42:55] >> How much how much track was done? Why
[42:57] would they let people do that when you
[42:58] could have AI do that?
[42:59] >> But if a if something's a billion times
[43:01] smarter than human beings, it's going to
[43:03] go, we're not building a rail station
[43:04] for these fat [ __ ]
[43:06] >> you know? I mean, seriously, it's going
[43:08] to go, why would we build a rail station
[43:09] for these people so they can get drunk
[43:11] and go fight each other?
[43:13] >> How about we get rid of them?
[43:14] >> Well, maybe it's we don't even need to
[43:16] do that because we can make you travel
[43:18] instantaneously from here to there. We
[43:21] create little mini wormholes all over
[43:22] the country. You don't need a car
[43:24] anymore. you just press a button and all
[43:25] of a sudden you're at Starbucks. You
[43:27] know, we'll do something.
[43:30] I just look at technology and I go, it's
[43:32] made the world better in many ways, but
[43:33] in a lot of ways it hasn't. And it did
[43:35] stop around 2014, 2015. A lot of the new
[43:38] things started that came in made the
[43:41] world to me very impersonal, corporate,
[43:44] sterile, and cold.
[43:46] >> Yeah. and the experiences that you get
[43:49] now like I you know there was like you
[43:52] if you you know I went with a friend of
[43:53] mine we we were in a McDonald's and like
[43:55] you order on a touchcreen there's nobody
[43:57] there's some nine-year-old kid going hey
[43:58] I ordered a McFlurry some woman
[43:59] screaming at him where's the receipt
[44:01] what's the receipt he's like nine he's
[44:02] like what there's a weirdness when you
[44:04] take people out of everything
[44:06] >> you take people out of everything and
[44:07] then you don't also they have no purpose
[44:10] >> right especially you consider the high
[44:12] number of unemployed people and checked
[44:14] out people and then people that have
[44:16] whatever their job is has nothing to do
[44:18] with what they enjoy. So if they just do
[44:20] the job and then afterwards they're just
[44:22] watching television all day. That's a
[44:24] lot of people. They're just watching
[44:25] their phone. They're playing video
[44:26] games. There's a lot of people that
[44:28] don't have any purpose. They don't have
[44:30] a feeling of purpose. They don't have a
[44:32] thing that they're connected to.
[44:33] >> But some experiences are much worse now
[44:36] than they were sure
[44:38] >> before they were digitized. Like I do
[44:40] think there was just pressing a button
[44:43] and getting something on Amazon is much
[44:45] easier. But there was something nice
[44:46] about going out in December during the
[44:50] Christmas season and like going to
[44:53] different places and seeing people and
[44:55] like the struggle of like getting the
[44:57] thing you want. There was something I
[44:58] bet you were expending energy. You're
[45:00] walking around, you get a cup of coffee,
[45:01] you see people. If we destroy all of
[45:04] that, what happens to the human psyche?
[45:08] That's my question. Well, if we had an
[45:10] anxiety meter, if we could see like
[45:12] anxiety, like levels of measurable
[45:14] anxiety over time, I guarantee you from
[45:17] like whatever the age of the internet
[45:22] kicked in. So, it's like what 94 or
[45:24] something like that. I think it probably
[45:26] slowly ramped up until social media came
[45:29] up and then it's probably significantly
[45:31] higher than it's ever been before
[45:32] without real threats.
[45:34] >> Totally. like just regular anxiety from
[45:37] reading things on your phone and
[45:39] interacting with things online.
[45:41] >> Well, people are very, you know,
[45:43] attached to this idea that
[45:47] >> they have to weigh in on everything that
[45:50] they have to have a fully formed opinion
[45:52] on everything and and the horrors of the
[45:55] world are on full display in front of
[45:57] them all the time.
[45:58] >> Yeah. And they need to then not only
[46:00] view them, which is scarring in and of
[46:02] itself, but then they need to
[46:04] contextualize them in a way that makes
[46:05] sense.
[46:06] >> Yeah.
[46:06] >> Which I think is also another level of
[46:08] stress. Am I a good person? Am I do I
[46:12] have the right thoughts about this
[46:13] thing? Am I being you know? So that to
[46:17] me is also another level of stress where
[46:19] like you would have never had to there
[46:21] were people when I grew up
[46:24] >> that just were really good at one thing
[46:27] and they they didn't need to have an
[46:30] opinion on something that was happening
[46:32] a h you know a world away cuz they
[46:34] didn't have the knowledge
[46:35] >> and they weren't forced into forced into
[46:37] expressing that opinion.
[46:39] >> Yeah. and they were able to live in a
[46:40] very in a much simpler way, in a much
[46:42] happier way with real genuine
[46:44] connections to people. And I think the
[46:47] fact that nobody feels like they're able
[46:48] to do that now, like the generation
[46:50] that's coming up, you know, the younger
[46:53] people, I I they seem better off like
[46:55] the Zoomers or whatever they are, they
[46:57] seem to be a little they have a little a
[46:59] dose of nihilism, but I think it's
[47:01] appropriate. They're a little, you know,
[47:03] they have good sense of humor. They're
[47:04] skeptical. They're a little cynical.
[47:07] They've seen all of these institutions,
[47:10] you know, turn out a lot of garbage and
[47:13] I think they're they're into, you know,
[47:16] some of the crypto stuff. They're into
[47:18] like, you know, they're they're
[47:19] selfarters. They are they're not
[47:21] institutionalists. Everyone I grew up
[47:23] with and the generation directly under
[47:25] me, they're all institutionalists.
[47:28] They believe very strongly that
[47:31] knowledge is given through an approved
[47:34] whether you're at NYU or whether it's
[47:36] the state department or whether it's a
[47:39] board or whether it's or whether it's uh
[47:42] an a nonprofit that commissioned a study
[47:44] that proved a thing. A lot of these kids
[47:48] do not think for themselves. They don't
[47:49] and they're not kids. They're in their
[47:50] 30s, by the way, and they're in their
[47:52] 30s or 40s. They don't think for
[47:54] themselves. They've been taught that
[47:56] thinking for themselves is bad. It's
[47:58] racist or it's it's uh it can lead you
[48:01] down a road that you don't want to go
[48:02] on. It's um you know, whatever. It's
[48:05] misogynist. It's homophobic. Like
[48:07] whatever questions you're asking like
[48:09] why are the Padres's gay why do the
[48:10] Padres's have to wear gay uniforms? Like
[48:13] that doesn't make any sense to me.
[48:16] Like as a gay person, I never said why I
[48:18] need the Padres's to be gay. Why are the
[48:20] Padres's gay?
[48:20] >> How does the P What does the Padres's
[48:22] uniform look like? What it they're
[48:23] making them wear like gay things on the
[48:25] uniform
[48:26] >> like pride stuff.
[48:27] >> It's like pride stuff. I don't think
[48:28] it's like a dildo on their head, but I
[48:30] think it's like pride stuff.
[48:31] >> They play in Dearborn.
[48:33] >> It's not going to It's not going to go
[48:34] well, but it's like why is City Bank
[48:36] gay? Why is Chase Why is Chase gay? What
[48:40] is it? Why does this help anyone that a
[48:43] corporation is is trans? Why is Chbani
[48:47] Yogurt trans?
[48:50] What's the point of this? I don't
[48:52] understand. Does this get people
[48:53] healthcare? Does this make people happy?
[48:56] Does this satisfy
[48:57] >> it? It makes some people happy.
[48:59] >> It makes some people happy that I worry
[49:01] about because I just don't understand.
[49:02] And it makes mo more people angry. And
[49:05] that's why gay marriage has lost 11
[49:06] points in support. More people are
[49:08] annoyed. They're like, "We're all cool
[49:10] with however people want to live their
[49:12] lives." A lot of most people are, but
[49:14] they're like, "Why is my bank gay?
[49:21] When did my bank come out as gay? And
[49:24] like I'm okay with it, but could
[49:26] somebody have told me? Like what are we
[49:29] doing? I don't This doesn't make
[49:31] anybody's life better. It is the It is
[49:35] just virtue signaling horseshit that
[49:38] ends up doing the exact opposite of what
[49:40] they want. They think it increases
[49:42] acceptance. it decreases it because
[49:46] you're shoving
[49:48] a world view down someone's throat and
[49:51] at the end of the day it's like if I
[49:54] went to a restaurant for example I have
[49:59] no problem with Scientology
[50:02] on record by the way I like it I like
[50:05] cults I like cults children have too
[50:08] many rights put them on that boat
[50:09] whatever you do see or make them work
[50:12] don't rape them but make them swap the
[50:13] deck, whatever they do on that boat. And
[50:16] I don't have a problem with Scientology.
[50:17] And I don't like the people who leave
[50:18] Scientology and then rat on it after it
[50:20] got them all these movie parts. I think
[50:21] that's [ __ ] up, too. I think it's
[50:23] [ __ ] up. I think they're rats. And I
[50:24] know you've had some of them on. Sorry.
[50:26] But I think they're rats. If you are do
[50:29] something for 30 goddamn years and get
[50:31] rich and famous, shut your mouth. Have
[50:34] the dignity to go to your house and shut
[50:35] your mouth about it. Don't then try to
[50:38] go on uh your new era is that you're
[50:41] going to dime on everybody in this thing
[50:43] that made you rich anyway. But if I went
[50:47] So that's just an aside. It's just an
[50:49] aside. It's truly but that's the way I
[50:52] feel.
[50:53] >> Tom Tom Cruz hangs in there.
[50:55] >> Hangs in. Can you imagine how gross that
[50:57] would be?
[50:58] >> How disgusting would it be if Tom Cruz
[51:00] went out and he's like, you know,
[51:01] Scientologist is really abused. Shut the
[51:03] [ __ ] up. You're top gun.
[51:06] You were Top Gun. This worked. Whether
[51:08] you're gay or not, they covered it up.
[51:10] They covered it up. You You said you did
[51:13] something wrong. They said, "We'll audit
[51:14] you. We'll put you in the box. You're
[51:17] fine. Give us some money. Live on this
[51:19] mansion. It's all fine." But if I went
[51:22] to my bank and it was just all
[51:25] Scientology for the month of June, I
[51:29] would go, "This is a lot." Do you know
[51:31] what I mean? So to me, I think it's like
[51:34] this weird aesthetic politics that
[51:36] people have where they just they need to
[51:39] pin ribbons on themselves and go, "I'm a
[51:41] good person. I have no problem with the
[51:43] polyamorous orgy happening at Chase or
[51:46] whatever."
[51:48] Just shut up. This whole country right
[51:50] now is being torn apart by people who
[51:54] need to feel like they're good people
[51:56] and they need to project their life onto
[51:58] other people just to just live and let
[52:00] live. People disagree with you. That's I
[52:02] have good friends I disagree with like
[52:05] on fundamental things, foundational
[52:08] things. And I and I don't care. I don't
[52:11] care because I think they're funny. I
[52:14] think their lives are funny. They're bad
[52:16] people.
[52:18] Many of my friends are not good people.
[52:20] I wouldn't even introduce them to other
[52:22] people I cared about. But they entertain
[52:25] me. And that used to be okay. Used to be
[52:27] able to go, I like that guy. He's
[52:28] entertaining. People go, "He's crazy. He
[52:31] was in jail." You go, "Eh." You always
[52:34] minimize. You minimize that. You go,
[52:36] "Sure, he was. Maybe. I don't know what
[52:40] happened between him and her. Someone
[52:41] fell down the stairs. He's fun
[52:43] sometimes." And you should be able to do
[52:46] that. Not everyone's going to agree with
[52:48] you. Not everyone's going to agree with
[52:49] you. It's okay. You got to Life is too
[52:52] short.
[52:52] >> No. You want that. You don't want
[52:54] everybody to agree with you.
[52:55] >> No.
[52:55] >> You You want to live in a world of
[52:57] texture.
[52:58] >> Yes. Yeah. You want to live in a world
[53:00] you want to have the Joey Diaz's of the
[53:02] world.
[53:02] >> Totally.
[53:03] >> You want to have some wild people out
[53:05] there. They're fun.
[53:06] >> And the problem with the generation
[53:07] under me is they're all very like this
[53:09] and they all went to the same liberal
[53:10] arts schools that have taught them like
[53:13] this orderly way of processing
[53:15] information
[53:17] and they're all afraid to like they like
[53:19] say things. They see them in a very well
[53:22] well the the well the rape gang they're
[53:25] gangs that are raping well that's bad
[53:29] but there's a lot of I don't know what's
[53:32] been proven and there's a lot of racism
[53:34] like it they just always they're so
[53:37] afraid of having an independent thought
[53:40] because they've been programmed their
[53:41] entire lives they don't realize it
[53:43] they've been programmed their entire
[53:44] lives to believe a certain set of things
[53:47] and their self-worth depends on those
[53:50] things mattering.
[53:51] >> Yeah.
[53:51] >> The school you went to, the internship
[53:53] you got, the corporation whose dick you
[53:55] have to suck sometimes literally to stay
[53:58] in it. That is where they derive their
[54:01] self-worth from. So their entire world
[54:04] crumbles if you challenge any of their
[54:06] ideas. This episode is brought to you by
[54:08] Visible. How many of you are currently
[54:10] listening to this podcast on your phone?
[54:13] If you are chronically online like most
[54:16] of us are these days, your wireless
[54:18] network should be too. With Visible, you
[54:21] get unlimited 5G and unlimited hotspot.
[54:25] All powered by Verizon's 5G network. The
[54:29] perks of big wireless for half the cost.
[54:32] Visible isn't just a wireless plan. It's
[54:36] unlimited wireless designed to keep you
[54:38] connected and no contract holding you
[54:41] back. Switch today at visible.com.
[54:44] Plans start at just $25 a month. Or get
[54:48] our premium Visible Plus Pro plan and
[54:51] save $10 on your first month when you
[54:54] use promo code Rogan, an exclusive offer
[54:58] for podcast listeners. Yeah. Yeah. And
[55:01] it's um it's very confusing for young
[55:04] people, you know, because the whole
[55:07] thing acts like a religion. It acts like
[55:09] a cult and you have to kind of go along
[55:11] with every aspect of it or you'll be
[55:13] excommunicated. Yeah. You'll be kicked
[55:14] out just like you get kicked out of
[55:16] Scientology. you get kicked out. And if
[55:18] your life is and it's sterile and it's
[55:20] corporate and it's boring
[55:23] >> and and that to me is my one of my
[55:25] biggest problems with with with with a
[55:26] lot of people that I speak to is that
[55:29] they seem genuinely
[55:32] afraid to to use their mind for more
[55:37] than you know what the allotted
[55:40] functions are.
[55:41] >> You mean afraid to express themselves or
[55:43] Yeah.
[55:44] even entertain thoughts in their own
[55:46] head.
[55:46] >> They want to avoid the punishment.
[55:48] >> Yeah.
[55:48] >> You know, it's a scary punishment. Have
[55:50] you seen this uh new Army Hammer movie
[55:54] that is out now?
[55:56] >> No, but
[55:56] >> some vigilante movie.
[55:58] >> He's great.
[56:00] Fan of him. Big fan of him. Think he's
[56:02] great. Love everything he's doing. And I
[56:06] like it. I like that you can't get
[56:07] cancelled. People come right back.
[56:09] >> Well, I don't know if he's necessarily
[56:10] coming back. I mean I mean if this movie
[56:13] is gonna bring him back I should say. I
[56:15] mean I What did he say? I mean he said
[56:17] he wanted to eat girls.
[56:19] >> He wanted to eat a couple of people.
[56:23] >> You know is that a problem?
[56:25] >> But is it real? Is it just crazy talk?
[56:28] >> Text me. Even if it was Is it consensual
[56:31] or not?
[56:32] >> I mean is it just saying wild things?
[56:34] Like what is is it
[56:35] >> Listen,
[56:35] >> what is it?
[56:36] >> He was he he his fantasy was that he
[56:39] wanted to be accountable.
[56:40] That was his like fantasy. That was his
[56:42] kink. Now it was fake. But if it if he
[56:46] was in a situation where it could have
[56:47] been real, yeah, he would have tried a
[56:48] heart. If
[56:52] >> if Army Hammer if Army Hammer had the
[56:56] money to arrange this, and some people
[56:57] in our country do, um, if he had the
[57:00] money to arrange it, he's trying to hard
[57:03] >> 1,000%. And by the way,
[57:06] doesn't make me hate him. Doesn't make
[57:08] me hate him. As long as a person was
[57:09] dead or ready, I'm against it. I would
[57:11] never do it. But if you told me, this is
[57:14] how open I am to different people. If
[57:17] you told me army hammer, there was a
[57:20] somebody died and there was a heart and
[57:22] army hammer tried a little bit of the
[57:23] heart, I'd go, "Hey,
[57:25] fine. Live and let live." Do you know
[57:27] the story of General Buck Naked?
[57:29] >> No. General Butt Naked is a guy in
[57:32] Liberia. So Liberia is a part of Africa.
[57:36] I don't want to [ __ ] this up. So, let's
[57:38] be let's check on this. I think what
[57:41] happened in Liberia is
[57:43] they released a bunch of slaves from the
[57:46] United States and sent them to Liberia,
[57:49] like after slavery was abolished,
[57:51] >> right?
[57:52] >> And I think Liberia has had a a series
[57:55] of civil wars, like really crazy, brutal
[57:58] ones. And in one of them, there's this
[58:00] guy named General Butt Naked. And Vice
[58:02] covered this guy. They they interviewed
[58:04] him and essentially now he's a priest.
[58:07] He's a preacher and he gave his love to
[58:10] Jesus Christ and now he's saved. But
[58:12] back then, well, good for him.
[58:14] >> He would talk about how he would go into
[58:16] war completely naked and then they would
[58:19] kidnap children of the opposing army and
[58:21] cut their heart out and eat it for
[58:23] protection.
[58:25] >> That's that's certainly an extreme way
[58:27] to do it.
[58:28] >> But he did that,
[58:29] >> but then he found Jesus, so it's okay.
[58:32] Well, it is certainly better. And that's
[58:35] um Wouldn't the Mayans kind of do that
[58:38] or was that human sacrifice?
[58:39] >> They did a lot of human sacrifice along
[58:41] with the Aztecs. What What happened with
[58:43] Liberia? Is that an accurate depiction?
[58:45] I don't want to [ __ ] this up.
[58:48] >> So, Liberia was established in 1822 by
[58:51] the American Colonization Society as a
[58:55] refuge for formerly enslaved and
[58:57] freeborn black Africans to relo relocate
[59:00] to Africa. Yeah, there it is. Over
[59:02] several decades, roughly roughly 16,000
[59:04] freed slaves known as Americans
[59:08] migrated there. While envisioned as a
[59:11] sanctuary, the nation later faced its
[59:12] own internal scandals regarding forced
[59:14] labor and human exploitation.
[59:17] Yeah.
[59:18] >> Interesting.
[59:19] >> Uh-huh. Um, see if you can find that
[59:21] general butt naked guy, though. This
[59:23] this guy this whole story is [ __ ]
[59:25] crazy. Is this it?
[59:27] >> Okay.
[59:28] >> Jeez. Yeah. formed his own militia of
[59:30] several dozen fighting uh several dozen
[59:33] fighters known as the naked base
[59:35] commandos or butt naked brigade, most of
[59:38] whom were children as young as nine
[59:40] operating under the Monrovia area with
[59:44] his unit uh how do you say his name?
[59:46] Blahi Blah blahi I'm not sure how to say
[59:49] his name became known as wearing only
[59:52] shoes and magic charms and eventually
[59:54] adopted the nom digure general butt
[59:56] naked his fighters followed his patterns
[59:59] of dress which uh in line with his
[60:02] distorted emulation of uh animist
[60:05] tradition believed he could believe
[60:08] could make one immune to bullets to fund
[60:11] his wartime activities he and secure a
[60:13] steady supply of drugs for his fighters
[60:15] Balahi allegedly traded locally mined
[60:18] diamonds and gold to Mexican drug
[60:20] cartels in exchange for guns and
[60:22] cocaine. Let's [ __ ] go. He
[60:24] conscripted many of his fighters and
[60:25] according to some accounts laced the
[60:27] food he fed them with cocaine along with
[60:30] showing them JeanClaude Vanam films and
[60:33] uh to uh explaining that to them that
[60:37] killing people was a game in an effort
[60:39] to uproot the fear of death.
[60:43] uh his fighters he and his fighters
[60:45] perpetrated numerous atrocities although
[60:47] the exact extent of the crimes they
[60:49] committed have been subject to dispute
[60:51] frequently discussed the alleged
[60:52] atrocities he perpetrated which
[60:54] according to Balahi including murders
[60:56] cannibalism and h human sacrifice he has
[60:59] repeatedly estimated that the naked base
[61:02] commandos were ultimately responsible
[61:04] for 20,000 deaths a claim which was come
[61:06] under criticism okay
[61:09] >> yeah and he's alive now and he's
[61:11] religious
[61:12] >> I'm pretty sure now Yeah,
[61:13] >> have him on. And I bet he's a lovely
[61:15] person.
[61:16] >> That's the thing.
[61:18] >> I', by the way, I would. He has an open
[61:20] invitation. He's I open invitation.
[61:23] Look,
[61:23] >> he's got Jesus on his shirt.
[61:24] >> He's led a full life. And there's
[61:26] something about someone who has led a
[61:27] full life.
[61:29] >> This man has led a full life. There he
[61:31] is. He looks like Beetlej naked.
[61:35] >> Wow.
[61:37] Crazy.
[61:40] It's a
[61:41] >> imagine seeing a dude naked with his
[61:43] dong flopping running at you with an
[61:45] AK-47 with kids blood all over his face.
[61:47] >> I mean that's that's I mean that's
[61:50] disturbing but I imagine that there are
[61:52] very rich rich people in our country
[61:53] seeing that and paying good money to see
[61:55] it.
[61:56] >> One of the things that we were talking
[61:57] about with uh before the show started we
[62:00] were out in the hallway. We were talking
[62:02] about how
[62:03] >> there's a giant chunk of the world
[62:04] that's [ __ ]
[62:06] >> Yeah. And what's coming into England,
[62:07] it's not like
[62:10] >> it's not unusual for other parts of the
[62:12] world.
[62:12] >> You know, if you go to Karach, that's
[62:14] that's what life is chaos.
[62:16] >> Yeah.
[62:17] >> Like just chaos is making its way into
[62:18] these protected bubbles and that's
[62:20] what's freaking people out. We live in a
[62:22] very privileged even even the poorest
[62:24] and the worst which is obviously you
[62:27] know it's not to minimize their
[62:28] struggles
[62:30] but if you go to any of those third
[62:33] world countries you're very aware of how
[62:36] privileged you are to live in a western
[62:39] country and you know it also makes a lot
[62:43] of sense why the people in those third
[62:45] world countries would want to leave them
[62:46] and go to other places for opportunity
[62:49] and I think immigration ation's had a
[62:52] lot of positive impacts on America and
[62:54] it's had a lot of positive impacts on
[62:55] Britain and other countries. And it's
[62:57] not it's not the idea that immigration
[62:59] is all bad or all good. It's the idea
[63:02] that like you have to do things a
[63:04] certain way because you know societies
[63:07] are fragile. This is what we're
[63:08] learning. We're learning that societies
[63:10] are more fragile. When I grew up that
[63:12] wasn't a common thought that our society
[63:15] was very fragile, right?
[63:17] >> We thought it was very strong. We
[63:19] actually thought nothing could break us.
[63:21] And then you look at a couple years of a
[63:23] pandemic and most of the downtowns of
[63:26] the American cities don't look the same.
[63:29] Commerce has changed in a dramatic way.
[63:31] The Iran war proved that you know
[63:33] militarily our military is obviously
[63:35] brave men and women. They're amazing.
[63:36] But like the changing nature of warfare
[63:39] has made military campaigns very
[63:42] difficult. It's hard to look at this
[63:43] Iran war as a victory. It's almost
[63:45] impossible unless you're completely
[63:47] dishonest. I don't think anyone is
[63:48] looking at it as a victory. Um so I
[63:51] think our vulnerability in you know to
[63:55] threats foreign and domestic we are more
[63:57] aware of that now than we have ever been
[63:59] how fragile societies are. So when you
[64:01] demographically change a society very
[64:03] quickly which has never happened
[64:05] historically. It took wars, long periods
[64:08] of immigration. Now it's overnight.
[64:11] People have to adjust to a new cultural
[64:13] and and sometimes economic reality.
[64:17] That's a very disruptive thing and
[64:19] societies are very fragile and you've
[64:21] got to be very careful about how you
[64:24] alter and change a society because if
[64:26] you do it too quickly there's a
[64:27] tremendous backlash and you have to make
[64:30] sure that
[64:32] people want it changed that people are
[64:35] on board with it. Not everyone. No one's
[64:38] on board with everything. But like if
[64:40] you went to a lot of people in these
[64:43] countries that live in the bigger
[64:45] cities, they would probably be very pro
[64:48] immigration and and because immigration
[64:50] has a lot of clear benefits to them.
[64:53] They get food delivered all the time.
[64:55] They have access to a lot a wide variety
[65:00] of goods and services that immigrants
[65:02] bring. A lot of them are awesome. A lot
[65:03] of great food, you know. So obviously,
[65:06] but again, if you went out into the
[65:07] suburbs and you went out into areas
[65:09] where the economies have stagnated,
[65:11] areas where maybe you've had scandals
[65:13] like this, grooming scandal and things
[65:14] like that, um Sweden, whose crime rate
[65:18] has skyrocketed because you've brought
[65:20] in a lot of people from other places
[65:22] that are selling drugs and not all of
[65:24] them obviously, but like if you look at
[65:26] that and those people have a much more
[65:29] negative view of it because they don't
[65:32] connect the benefits of it because they
[65:35] don't they don't feel them in their
[65:36] life,
[65:37] >> right? They were living pretty sweet.
[65:38] >> They were living good.
[65:40] >> They were living pretty sweet. They're
[65:41] riding their [ __ ] bicycles and eating
[65:43] herring.
[65:43] >> Pretty safe out there.
[65:44] >> Pretty safe and doing what they wanted
[65:46] to do. And then, you know, you have this
[65:49] influx of people. You now have real
[65:52] poverty. You now have a lot of people
[65:54] >> also brought in people that came from a
[65:56] war torn part of
[65:58] >> a war torn country. Yeah. And not
[66:00] everyone's going to be general but naked
[66:02] who becomes a Christian pastor and is
[66:04] probably lovely now. You probably see
[66:07] him in HB you're like sweetheart
[66:11] ate a few people maybe but now it's
[66:14] better that guy not everyone's going to
[66:17] convert not everyone's going to be you
[66:20] know you're going to bring people in
[66:20] that are people are products to an
[66:22] extent of their environment like we all
[66:24] are. So the idea that like you know
[66:28] women have less rights in these
[66:29] countries so the courtship rituals in
[66:33] these countries are different
[66:36] the familial relations are different
[66:39] that's just the way it is. So and and a
[66:43] lot of people there like that.
[66:46] So, you know, why would
[66:50] why would those beliefs and systems of
[66:54] change just because you happen to be
[66:56] living in Ireland,
[66:57] >> right?
[66:59] >> Why would you think Irish women or
[67:01] British women would necessarily or
[67:02] inherently get more respect than your
[67:04] wives, daughters, sisters, whatever? And
[67:07] I'm not saying that it's all like
[67:08] throughout the entire Islamic world. I
[67:10] think there's a lot of diversity in the
[67:11] Muslim world and there are lots of
[67:13] countries where there's arguments that
[67:15] women are safer than they are in
[67:16] America, but there's a lot of countries
[67:19] where that's not the case and women have
[67:20] far fewer rights and and it's pretty
[67:23] barbaric. And I don't know why those
[67:25] attitudes would change when they are
[67:30] just in a different physical location.
[67:32] The spectacular bizarness of it is that
[67:35] the really kind left-wing people who
[67:39] oppose
[67:41] toxic masculinity,
[67:42] >> right?
[67:43] >> Oppose this sort of uh society that's
[67:47] that that we're talking about this this
[67:49] maledominated
[67:51] society. Like you're inviting in
[67:54] something that literally has that as its
[67:56] doctrine.
[67:57] >> Well, they think it can be tamed. So,
[67:59] here's the thing with those people. They
[68:00] love a challenge. This is the I can fix
[68:03] him version of it. And to an extent,
[68:06] cultural attitudes do change over time.
[68:08] People do assimilate to certain
[68:10] practices. That's not a completely
[68:12] ridiculous thing to think. But they
[68:14] really believe that once all of these
[68:17] people come to these countries and see
[68:18] how great it is to be a childless
[68:21] 40-year-old woman working in data entry
[68:23] at a large faceless corporation that's
[68:25] gay on Pride Month. the corporation goes
[68:28] gay and when they see how happy she or
[68:31] he or they is living in a society where
[68:35] you don't own anything. You know what's
[68:37] interesting about family? I just spoke
[68:39] to a a comedian who went on a world tour
[68:40] and he was in India and he was talking
[68:42] about how poor people in India don't
[68:45] live on the street, they live in slums
[68:46] which it's it's better it's better to
[68:49] live in slums than the street because a
[68:52] lot of poor people are with their
[68:53] families and they won't cast their
[68:57] family out. Um family in America almost
[69:01] means like nothing. like we've we've
[69:03] kind of we've everything's such an
[69:06] individual pursuit that family means
[69:09] nothing and
[69:12] like that's reinforced like I I am in an
[69:15] argument with my father his wife has
[69:17] different political views on c certain
[69:19] things so we haven't spoken in a little
[69:21] bit my cousin's getting married and I
[69:24] told I have a therapist now that I've
[69:26] had for 6 months who I don't know if
[69:28] it's good or I don't know if you ever
[69:29] know if a therapist is good or not and I
[69:31] told my therapist says, "You know, my
[69:34] dad and his wife are going to be there,
[69:35] and I haven't spoken to them, but I love
[69:36] my cousin, and I want to support our
[69:38] marriage. I want to go." And my
[69:39] therapist goes, "Well, you don't have to
[69:41] go." SO,
[69:46] my therapist goes, "If you feel like
[69:49] it's going to make you happy, go." So,
[69:51] therapy in our country is has become a
[69:54] way to kind of enable like sick people
[69:57] to just become selfish psychopaths. And
[70:00] family in America means almost nothing.
[70:03] And it is reinforced how little family
[70:06] means because
[70:09] like doctors will tell you, "Yeah, [ __ ]
[70:11] it. It's your father. Who cares?" So
[70:13] it's it's basically a thing where like I
[70:16] think when you go to these other
[70:17] countries and you realize how deeply
[70:19] rooted a lot of things are in family and
[70:22] culture and tradition and then we come
[70:24] from a country where like very little
[70:26] is. I'm not saying people don't have
[70:27] great families here, but like, you know,
[70:30] America is about you. And it's not about
[70:33] if you don't agree with your sister,
[70:35] [ __ ] her. If your mother disagrees with
[70:37] you, block her. That's our country. And
[70:40] in other countries, that's unheard of.
[70:43] >> Like that's unheard of. Like it that
[70:45] doesn't happen.
[70:46] >> And you know, the comedian was
[70:48] explaining to me like in India there's
[70:50] le there's like a lot less of a drug
[70:52] problem in certain areas. And he would
[70:53] and he was wondered why. And he goes,
[70:56] "Well, people don't want to do drugs to
[70:57] like disgrace their family." Even poor
[70:59] people. Even poor people will be like,
[71:01] "I don't want to be a drug addict
[71:02] because my family's going to think bad
[71:03] about that."
[71:04] >> Wow.
[71:05] >> Whereas here, there's people that'll
[71:08] shoot up in front of their parents.
[71:11] You know what I mean? Like, so it's just
[71:12] a different it like it's it's culturally
[71:15] we've gotten to this point where people
[71:17] are having less children. Family means
[71:19] very little. So then what has replaced
[71:21] that? It's clearly the state and
[71:23] corporations
[71:24] >> and ideologies
[71:25] >> and ideology. So, they've replaced
[71:27] families and communities.
[71:28] >> Well, the ideology is your community
[71:30] because you're online most of the time.
[71:32] Yes. And a giant percentage of the
[71:34] interactions you have with people is on
[71:36] social media.
[71:38] >> So, I think that like that world we have
[71:42] a pretty secular world with. What is
[71:45] that?
[71:47] That is so interesting.
[71:48] >> CBD.
[71:49] >> Interesting. Yeah. Interesting.
[71:53] I thought it was something that
[71:54] >> No, it's a CBD.
[71:55] >> I thought it was somebody gave you
[71:56] something that's like it's you're going
[71:57] to about to transcend or something.
[71:59] >> Oh, no.
[71:59] >> I thought you were like, "It's DMT."
[72:01] >> Imagine.
[72:02] >> I'm bored with you. I'm going somewhere
[72:03] else for a few minutes.
[72:05] >> When's the last time you've done DMT?
[72:06] >> It's been a while.
[72:07] >> Interesting. Should I do it? Should we
[72:09] all do it?
[72:10] >> Yeah.
[72:10] >> I'm going to have a cigarette.
[72:11] >> Are you thinking about it?
[72:13] >> I'm thinking about maybe doing it.
[72:14] >> A lot of people have asked me about it
[72:16] recently. Seems like
[72:17] >> that spirit molecule thing years ago
[72:20] >> was an awesome documentary.
[72:23] >> You know this Al Andrew Gallamore guy.
[72:24] Do you know what he's doing?
[72:26] >> So he's uh what is his exact discipline?
[72:29] Is he a psychologist?
[72:31] >> Um he's doing these things in a country
[72:34] where it's legal where you fly there and
[72:36] you do a fivehour DMT experience like
[72:40] intravenous.
[72:42] He's a chemical pharmacologist,
[72:43] neurobiologist and a writer. one of the
[72:46] most world's leading experts on
[72:47] psychedelics. Very interesting guy. And
[72:50] uh he's creating this place. I forget
[72:54] what it's called. Do you remember the
[72:55] name of the place?
[72:58] >> A lot of people I know do I
[73:00] >> that's an orally active version of DMT.
[73:03] This thing seems a little a little
[73:05] crazier because they can kind of
[73:08] regulate the dose much better and they
[73:10] can keep you there for a long period of
[73:12] time.
[73:14] Elucius. Okay. So, like like the
[73:16] Illusinian mysteries from the uh from
[73:19] ancient Greece.
[73:20] >> So, this place it's in Bakquia. Am I
[73:24] saying that right? In the Caribbean in
[73:27] March of 2026. And the aim is to study
[73:30] DMTX and DMT entities and attempt to
[73:33] communicate with these entities. So, one
[73:35] of the things that he's saying, so he
[73:36] was just on someone's podcast,
[73:41] maybe Danny Jones, uh, he was been on
[73:43] this podcast as well. Uh, but one of the
[73:45] things that he was saying was that they
[73:48] keep going to the same place that you
[73:50] can like it's they're actually trying to
[73:52] create a map of whatever this experience
[73:54] is. So instead of doing it like an
[73:57] iawaska ceremony or doing it like you're
[73:59] smoking DMT in a you know some sort of a
[74:01] psychedelic ceremony with your friends
[74:03] and it's a 15-minute experience instead
[74:05] of that they're having repeated
[74:08] experiences in the same environments
[74:10] like that there's actually a place that
[74:12] you can go and by regulating the dose
[74:15] >> somehow or another over a prolonged
[74:17] period of time that allows you to
[74:19] maintain this state and keep entering
[74:22] deeper and deeper into whatever the [ __ ]
[74:24] this is. But it seems to be mapappable.
[74:26] Okay. It was the basement. That's what
[74:27] it was. So it is uh AJ from the Y Files,
[74:31] which is an awesome YouTube show if
[74:33] you've never seen it before. And so he's
[74:35] talking about it doesn't take you to
[74:37] somewhere new. It unlocked what's always
[74:40] there. Um these guys are they're trying
[74:42] to develop like maps of what this is. So
[74:45] they keep experiencing they're they're
[74:48] charting out different entities that you
[74:50] experience and there's a bunch of
[74:52] different ones that you you experience.
[74:54] And one of them I've seen multiple times
[74:56] is jesters.
[74:58] >> Interesting.
[74:58] >> And these bizarre looking psychedelic
[75:01] jesters.
[75:02] >> Interesting.
[75:03] >> I wonder if they were the original
[75:04] jesters. I wonder if like the reason why
[75:07] jesters dress the way they do with these
[75:09] dangling things off their heads because
[75:11] this is what you experience in the
[75:12] psychedelic state and they're trying to
[75:14] recreate it. But what they have done
[75:16] when I've done it is mock me and make me
[75:19] realize that I'm taking myself
[75:20] seriously. Like one time there was like
[75:22] like fractal. There's millions of them.
[75:24] I don't know how many. And they were all
[75:25] giving me the finger like this. Wow.
[75:27] >> And I was like uh and it was a and I
[75:29] said I go oh I take myself too
[75:31] seriously. They go yes. And they were
[75:33] going like that. That's it.
[75:34] >> It was like there's little corrections
[75:37] of your psyche that take place during
[75:39] these experiences.
[75:40] >> Interesting.
[75:41] >> It's very weird.
[75:42] >> I'm scared to do it. Well, I'm scared
[75:45] I'll go in and it'll be fractals of JD
[75:47] Vance
[75:48] >> yelling at me. Yeah, it's old JD Vance
[75:51] going, "You need to learn about AI." No,
[75:53] I um I don't know. I I I find it
[75:56] fascinating.
[75:57] >> Well, it is. It's definitely
[75:59] fascinating. Chase Hughes is just in the
[76:00] podcast and he did it somewhere in the
[76:02] United States where they did some 5h
[76:04] hour DMT experience and he was, you
[76:06] know, it's like changes you. Whatever
[76:08] you are now is a totally different
[76:10] version of who you were before you had
[76:12] that experience.
[76:12] >> Interesting. which is like life overall
[76:15] over you know day after day, month after
[76:18] month, week after week, year after year,
[76:20] you become a different thing. You're a
[76:22] different person than you used to be.
[76:23] But sometimes an experience like a
[76:25] psychedelic experience can make it
[76:26] abrupt and then you instantaneously
[76:29] become a different person.
[76:31] >> It's so it's so fascinating because we
[76:34] are having all these conversations about
[76:35] aliens and entities and demons and
[76:39] whatever.
[76:40] >> I think it's connected.
[76:41] >> Yeah. I think what these uh psychedelic
[76:44] things allow you to do is experiencing
[76:47] things. You're experiencing things that
[76:48] are already there that have been there
[76:50] all the time. You just lack the ability
[76:52] to see them. You're you're tuning into
[76:54] it pharmacologically. Like there's
[76:56] they're changing the chemistry of your
[76:58] brain. And it's not an alien chemical.
[77:01] That's the nutty part about it. DMT is
[77:03] produced by the human body.
[77:05] >> It's produced in in the brain. It's
[77:08] produced in the liver. I think in the
[77:09] lungs you need the releases when you
[77:10] die. I don't maybe it's very poorly
[77:13] understood. It's there's not I mean
[77:15] there's been some work done on it. One
[77:17] of the big ones was Rick Stman. He wrote
[77:19] a book called DMT the spirit molecule
[77:22] and he did this. It was really kind of
[77:24] brilliant. He had an FDA study that he
[77:26] got this is all like government approved
[77:29] study on psychedelics under the guys he
[77:31] wants to find out how bad they are for
[77:32] you.
[77:33] >> Interesting.
[77:34] >> So he told him we want to study the
[77:35] dangers of these drugs.
[77:36] >> Right. And that's why he got all the
[77:37] money.
[77:37] >> Yeah. And so then he writes this book
[77:39] like this shit's amazing
[77:40] >> smart.
[77:41] >> And by doing that and then studying uh
[77:44] they studied the Cottonwood Research
[77:46] Foundation. They're studying where DMT
[77:48] is coming from. So like the thought was
[77:50] that it's coming from the pineal gland.
[77:52] So the pineal gland is like literally a
[77:55] third eye in the middle of your head.
[77:57] But now they think it's coming from the
[77:58] whole brain. They they don't really
[78:00] there's the human body produces it.
[78:02] That's the most important part. So the
[78:04] human body produces this of the most
[78:06] potent of all psychedelic chemicals that
[78:08] transports you into another world. Like
[78:10] how weird is it that the body produces a
[78:14] gateway to some other place. Now whether
[78:16] it's perceived or a hallucination,
[78:19] the experience is the same. So you can
[78:21] get hung up all the time on the oh,
[78:24] you're just seeing things that aren't
[78:25] there. These are visions. Okay, maybe
[78:28] maybe what you're doing is experiencing
[78:31] something that's real. Like it might not
[78:34] be something that you could put on a
[78:35] scale. It might not be something that
[78:37] you can measure with a ruler, but it
[78:39] doesn't mean it's not real. And I think
[78:41] we are very arrogant in our assumptions
[78:43] that we have an understanding of all
[78:46] that exists with all that we know about
[78:49] bacteria and molecules and cells and the
[78:54] mitochondria and then subatomic
[78:57] particles and like what there's the the
[78:59] just the reality that we've observed is
[79:01] so [ __ ] bizarre. The idea that we
[79:04] know what's real and what's not real and
[79:05] you can say oh it's just a
[79:06] hallucination. This is the reality is
[79:09] you go to Tim Hortons, you get yourself
[79:10] a donut, you go to work,
[79:11] >> right?
[79:13] >> No, I think I have a feeling that what
[79:17] that
[79:18] >> experience is is you being able to see
[79:20] something that exists around you. Well,
[79:22] a lot of people are very hopeful. I
[79:25] wasn't one of them per se, but this idea
[79:27] that like we were on the edge of some
[79:29] disclosure that the government was going
[79:31] to start telling us things about
[79:34] extraterrestrials and like remember
[79:36] that? Well, the creepiest one that kept
[79:38] going around
[79:39] >> was that um they had brought together a
[79:41] bunch of pastors to talk to them about
[79:45] disclosure because disclosure disclosure
[79:47] is going to disrupt the fabric of
[79:49] society so greatly. And the the question
[79:51] was what were they going to tell them?
[79:53] And so what I have been hearing from
[79:55] people that supposedly know things about
[79:56] UFOs was that they were told that
[79:58] religion was created by aliens to keep
[80:01] people in line and that humans are the
[80:02] product of accelerated evolution and
[80:04] they needed some sort of an origin story
[80:06] that made sense with rules and morals
[80:08] and ethics and guidelines to follow and
[80:11] something to worship because without
[80:12] that people are lost
[80:14] >> and so that these aliens have created
[80:16] that.
[80:16] >> Well, please let Trump say that in a
[80:18] press conference. He's the president to
[80:21] say that. Yeah, I got to talk to him to
[80:24] get on there and go. Guys, listen. Just
[80:27] We don't know what's going on. The
[80:28] straits are horused. They're open.
[80:29] They're closed. They're open or closed.
[80:31] Who gives a [ __ ] anymore? Anyway, there
[80:33] is no God. You were all created by
[80:35] aliens and you were told a bunch of lies
[80:37] about it. Good luck. Keep going to work.
[80:40] Market's up. Straight straight's open.
[80:42] Market's up.
[80:43] >> It's not even that there is no God. is
[80:45] that the God story
[80:47] >> that you've been told is it's it's
[80:50] formulated in a way for your tribal
[80:53] primate brain to accept and understand,
[80:56] right?
[80:56] >> And that there's probably a true story
[80:59] to all of it. If you go back far enough
[81:01] and if you got the actual events that
[81:03] they were trying to lay out, there's
[81:05] probably there's too much of too much of
[81:06] stuff that's in the Bible that like is
[81:08] historically verifiable.
[81:10] >> Totally. But do you think they
[81:13] didn't tell people that because they
[81:15] thought it would be too disruptive?
[81:17] >> Well, here's the thing. There's a lot of
[81:19] stuff that you know what when you talk
[81:21] about the Bible, right? You're talking
[81:22] about a series of stories, right?
[81:24] Especially when you get to the Old
[81:26] Testament. It's a series of stories. And
[81:28] some of these stories aren't in the
[81:30] Bible that were a part of the like the
[81:32] religious cannon of the day. And one of
[81:35] them is the book of Enoch. So Anna
[81:37] Paulina Luna told me about she like
[81:39] she's like you really have to read that
[81:40] and I was like okay like she was so
[81:42] adamant about it I'm like okay let me
[81:43] let me read it. So I listen to on tape
[81:45] in the sauna which is the perfect way to
[81:47] do it. I'm listening audio book it's
[81:49] 195° I'm sweating my balls off. I'm
[81:51] dying in there and I'm listening to this
[81:53] [ __ ] crazy account that
[81:56] >> is in the same Dead Sea Scrolls as they
[81:58] found the book of Isaiah the same
[82:00] collection of these religious texts. And
[82:03] it's all about how the watchers came
[82:05] down and mated with the daughters of men
[82:08] and chose them as wives and then created
[82:10] this race of beings called the Nephilim,
[82:12] which were giants that ruled the earth.
[82:14] Like this is
[82:15] >> in the Bible. It's they talk about the
[82:18] Nephilim. In the Bible, they talk about
[82:21] Enoch. Like he's referenced in the
[82:23] Bible, but the book of Enoch, the
[82:25] stories that are in the book of Enoch
[82:27] are [ __ ] bananas. Like completely
[82:30] bananas. And the only reason why it's
[82:31] not in the Bible, a bunch of rabbis
[82:33] decided that it didn't align with the
[82:35] Torah. The Torah or the Talmud, I forget
[82:37] which one, but they decided like this
[82:39] this this contradicts some of the
[82:42] stories that are in other religious
[82:44] texts. So, we're going to keep that one
[82:46] out.
[82:46] >> Interesting. Because it was it was a
[82:48] collection of these things that's all
[82:51] together. Who are these rabbis?
[82:53] >> Exactly. Right.
[82:54] >> Well, I mean, who are all these people
[82:56] that wrote these things down? You know,
[82:58] I have this bit where I read out of the
[82:59] book of Ezekiel. There's like the
[83:01] hilarious parts of the book of Ezekiel
[83:03] and then there's also parts that sound
[83:04] like it's they're talking about a UFO.
[83:06] Like these profound experiences and then
[83:08] other things we're talking about a
[83:09] prostitute. It's very funny,
[83:10] >> right?
[83:11] >> But this whole thing is a bunch of
[83:13] people's interpretations of stories
[83:16] written down, passed down generation to
[83:18] generation, written largely intact once
[83:22] it was an original piece. So like they
[83:25] found the book of Isaiah in the Dead Sea
[83:27] Scrolls and it's identical to the book
[83:29] of Isaiah that is a thousand years
[83:31] newer. So that was older than the book
[83:34] of Isaiah that they had by a thousand
[83:35] years, the oldest one they ever found.
[83:37] And it was verbatim,
[83:38] >> right?
[83:38] >> So they once they got these stories
[83:40] down, they they wrote them over and over
[83:43] and over again. And like priests would
[83:44] learn to do that and monks would learn
[83:46] to do that with their religious texts.
[83:47] They would rewrite things over and over
[83:49] again. It was part of the practice. and
[83:51] someone knows
[83:52] some in some subterranean part of the
[83:55] government, they know something or many
[83:58] things that they're not going to tell
[84:00] people because it would be disturbing or
[84:03] disrupting.
[84:03] >> This was the story about Jimmy Carter.
[84:05] Now, the story about Jimmy Carter was
[84:06] Jimmy Carter, I believe in 1969,
[84:09] he had some sort of an very strange UFO
[84:13] experience that was very real to him,
[84:15] very bizarre, saw something. Yeah. And
[84:17] part of his thing was once he gets into
[84:19] office, he wants to tell people the
[84:21] story is that he was briefed. They
[84:24] explained to him something about the
[84:26] reality of the UFO experience, like what
[84:28] it what it really is. And he was crying
[84:31] that he wept openly. So what could that
[84:34] mean? Like what would that mean? What
[84:35] was
[84:35] >> he kind of he Yeah.
[84:38] >> Kind of a [ __ ]
[84:39] >> He was a a [ __ ]
[84:41] >> And this Habitat for Humanity I never
[84:44] understood. I thought it was I think
[84:45] he's a genuinely kidding genuinely good
[84:47] person.
[84:48] >> Of course he was. He built houses. Yeah.
[84:51] He was
[84:51] >> never enriched himself,
[84:52] >> but he was also, if you read books about
[84:54] him, he was kind of an operator, too.
[84:56] >> Uhhuh.
[84:56] >> He was kind of He was into the peanut
[84:58] stuff, right? He was a peanut farmer or
[85:00] something. Yeah.
[85:02] >> You know, he was Nobody gets to be the
[85:03] Yeah. He was sweeter.
[85:05] >> Sweetest.
[85:06] >> Sweetest.
[85:07] >> Yeah. One of the sweetest of all.
[85:09] >> He was still the president. But so they
[85:11] Who is doing this? Explain. It's just
[85:12] the men and black people from the the
[85:14] depths of Raven Rock or Cheyenne milit
[85:17] or wherever the hell they are.
[85:19] >> What they could be do doing is covering
[85:21] up years of lying to Congress and
[85:24] misappropriation of funds for all these
[85:25] black ops programs and the way they can
[85:28] get out of jail because if they go and
[85:30] Yeah. If they go and tell the
[85:32] government, oh yeah, by the way, we lied
[85:34] to Congress for 50 years. There's no
[85:36] solid verifiable evidence that Jimmy
[85:38] Carter cried. Of course there's no solid
[85:39] evidence.
[85:40] >> Jamie, stop being an arc. He's an arc
[85:42] because UFO sightings UFO. The Carter
[85:45] cried over UFO story is based on second
[85:47] or thirdand anecdotes. Those are my
[85:49] favorite and is not confirmed by Carter
[85:51] himself or primary official sources. Uh
[85:54] I think it's true. Uh
[85:55] >> I think it's true.
[85:57] >> About his 1969 sighting. Carter
[85:59] described seeing a strange light but did
[86:01] not mention crying or be emotionally
[86:03] shattered by it. No, but I don't think
[86:05] that's what they're saying. They're
[86:06] saying he was emotionally shattered by
[86:08] the disclosure. right after UFO
[86:11] briefing.
[86:11] >> You've got to live with that knowledge.
[86:12] So, he's just got to go around now. And
[86:14] >> Richard Dolan, who is by far one of the
[86:16] best guys to read about about UFOs and
[86:20] UAPs. Very balanced guy and like very
[86:23] evidence-based guy. He he includes a lot
[86:25] of crazy stories, but he never goes
[86:27] along with them.
[86:27] >> Yeah.
[86:28] >> But Richard Dolan's really good. He's
[86:29] got a bunch a bunch of books. So, I
[86:32] don't know if it's true.
[86:33] >> Is the Jake Barber guy real? He's the
[86:36] guy that said that he actually had to
[86:38] move a UFO, right, with a helicopter.
[86:41] Yes.
[86:41] >> I haven't talked to him.
[86:42] >> I was just watching it. But it's too
[86:44] long. These UFO guys, it's all three or
[86:46] four. Like it's not
[86:47] >> Well, Jesse Michaels does a lot of very
[86:49] indepth ones with these guys and has
[86:51] long But but the good thing about that
[86:52] is if someone's like really full of [ __ ]
[86:54] after a couple of hours, you got to say
[86:57] >> you see tendencies that maybe they're
[87:00] they exaggerate or they make things up
[87:02] or they leave stuff out or whatever it
[87:04] is. But something's going on, right?
[87:07] There's something that people keep
[87:09] seeing. There's enough radar
[87:10] information. There's enough video that
[87:12] doesn't make any sense.
[87:13] >> We never found out what those drones
[87:15] were. Remember that? They're all around
[87:16] the bases in New Jersey and stuff like
[87:18] that.
[87:18] >> Yeah, it was crazy. There was I mean,
[87:19] people were scared to fly.
[87:20] >> People say it's a domestic. It was
[87:22] domestic. It was us. That's what I've
[87:24] heard. But then, you know,
[87:25] >> could be China. Could be China flexing
[87:27] and pulling their dick out saying check
[87:29] out what we have, [ __ ] Who
[87:30] knows?
[87:31] >> Who knows? But there was a lot of things
[87:32] that those things were doing that we
[87:34] don't know that they can do. One of the
[87:36] things like they were flying for hours
[87:38] at a time. And so what's the fuel
[87:40] source? Cuz it's not batteries. Downed
[87:43] US pilot reported seeing Iranian drones
[87:45] swarm in jellyfish formation. Whoa.
[87:49] >> Well, they're probably getting drones
[87:51] from, you know, who knows, China. China,
[87:54] Russia, of course they so the highest
[87:57] end of high-end
[87:59] government drones that we don't know
[88:01] about. Who knows what those [ __ ]
[88:03] things can do?
[88:05] >> Multiple drones interconnected and
[88:07] moving at as one with smaller drones
[88:09] below the bigger drones like legs. One
[88:12] of the sources familiar with the pilot's
[88:14] witness account told CNN, "Real alien
[88:16] shit." Another source told CNN the pilot
[88:18] described witnessing a minefield of
[88:20] drones in the air. Holy [ __ ] When did
[88:23] this happen?
[88:25] >> 13 hours ago this was posted.
[88:27] >> So 13 hours ago this F1 F-15 got down.
[88:29] >> When I mean he's talking and they're
[88:31] reporting it, so I don't the actual
[88:33] event.
[88:33] >> Bro, how nuts is that? They got taken
[88:35] out by alien drones.
[88:37] >> April.
[88:37] >> In April.
[88:39] Whoa. So he ejected from the aircraft.
[88:42] The Iranian drones hovering in the air
[88:43] moving as one in a formation that
[88:45] resembled a jellyfish. [ __ ] dude.
[88:48] >> Yeah. I mean, so there is a there is a
[88:50] chance that it is R. It's DARPA and it's
[88:52] all of these countries that are, you
[88:55] know, you have these black projects,
[88:57] they have these secret defense projects
[88:59] and they're saying it's
[89:01] extraterrestrial. I think if I was
[89:04] running uh an undercover operation for
[89:07] as many years as these people probably
[89:09] have been doing and what Eric Weinstein
[89:12] thinks, he thinks it's like a separate
[89:13] branch of physics. He said he thinks
[89:15] there's a bunch of physicists. Where did
[89:16] they get?
[89:17] >> This is the story of the We went and did
[89:19] the crazy invasion to get these guys
[89:21] back.
[89:21] >> Oh, this is down pilots. Yeah.
[89:23] >> Oh, this is how they got taken out.
[89:25] >> This is
[89:26] >> Oh, wow.
[89:27] >> This opens up a lot more questions.
[89:29] >> Wow.
[89:29] >> Wow.
[89:30] >> Wow.
[89:32] >> Right.
[89:33] >> Right. No.
[89:34] >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
[89:34] >> They used the heart the heartbeat thing.
[89:36] That was the whole Right.
[89:38] >> That's what they said. Yeah.
[89:39] >> What was it? So the heartbeat thing was
[89:40] the thing that they said that they were
[89:41] able to locate this guy's heartbeat, his
[89:43] his very unique heartbeat in the
[89:45] mountains where he was hiding.
[89:46] >> Wow.
[89:47] >> And everybody was like, "Well, that's
[89:48] bullshit."
[89:50] >> I don't know. I don't know. And and it's
[89:52] based on some sort of quantum something
[89:54] or another. What is it called again?
[89:55] >> And then the [ __ ] White House said
[89:56] they did you see that today? Yesterday
[89:58] that they posted something on their [ __ ]
[90:01] that they're going to announce something
[90:02] about quantum computing.
[90:03] >> Oh Christ.
[90:04] >> Do you think that God's
[90:07] >> they were making a joke about Q with it?
[90:08] That's sort of why I asked if you guys
[90:10] had seen that. Uh,
[90:11] >> what's the joke about Q?
[90:12] >> Like a I'll find the pose. Hold.
[90:14] >> Okay.
[90:20] >> I think they have drones that move like
[90:22] UFOs. I think for sure. I I don't
[90:24] >> Where are they getting this technology?
[90:26] >> I don't know.
[90:27] >> Do you think it's possible
[90:28] extraterrestrials are giving us
[90:30] technology?
[90:31] >> It is possible. So the reason White
[90:34] House will be Qosting today. What?
[90:36] They're just trolling and having fun.
[90:38] >> And you scroll all the way down and it
[90:39] says,
[90:42] >> and by Q, we mean quantum. Stay tuned.
[90:43] >> Stay tuned.
[90:44] >> Here's the thing.
[90:45] >> Look how much they're trolling.
[90:48] >> They're the most committed people I've
[90:50] ever encountered.
[90:51] >> Yeah, they're fun.
[90:52] >> I've never encountered people who are so
[90:54] committed to anything.
[90:56] >> The UFO people are close.
[90:57] >> Sure. I mean, the Q people are 10 years
[90:59] in going, "Trust the plan. It's coming."
[91:02] And you go, guys, it's unbelievable how
[91:06] how dedicated they are to the plan and
[91:11] that it it's still morphing and going in
[91:13] different directions. And the data
[91:15] centers are actually prisons for people
[91:18] who did the vaccine. They're not data
[91:20] centers.
[91:21] They're still going. And that level of
[91:23] commitment is what America is about.
[91:26] It's about that. It's about not giving
[91:29] up.
[91:30] >> Yeah. Don't give up. Don't give up.
[91:34] You're too deep in to give up. I My
[91:36] advice to anyone in that movement, stay
[91:38] in it because you there's no there's
[91:40] nothing good on the outside. Reality is
[91:43] not good. Stay in that movement. Take it
[91:45] as far as you can.
[91:46] >> What would the government possibly have
[91:48] to announce about quantum computing?
[91:51] >> No idea.
[91:52] >> What was the quantum heartbeat thing?
[91:54] What was that thing called? How did they
[91:56] locate that that gentleman?
[91:59] >> I don't remember. them never coming out
[92:01] and saying because people were
[92:02] speculating that like how could you even
[92:04] do it? I think someone came on the
[92:05] podcast the next day and was like that's
[92:07] not how quantum stuff works,
[92:09] >> right? But I don't know if they know
[92:10] that for sure. So they don't really know
[92:12] what the technology is. But what was the
[92:13] technology that the government
[92:14] described? Cuz they described it as very
[92:16] bizarre and there was a name for it that
[92:18] involve something quantum and they said
[92:20] that somehow or another they were able
[92:22] to detect this guy's heartbeat,
[92:24] >> right?
[92:25] >> Unique heartbeat from I think it was
[92:26] like was it 70 or 700 miles away?
[92:29] Seventh. This was posted on the New York
[92:31] Post.
[92:32] >> Secret never-before used CIA tool that
[92:34] helps find airmen downed in Iran. If
[92:37] your heart is beating, we will find you.
[92:40] >> Wow.
[92:41] >> So, this is it. Long range quantum
[92:44] magnetometry to find the electromagnetic
[92:47] signal of a human heartbeat that pairs
[92:48] with the data pairs the data with
[92:50] artificial intelligence software to
[92:51] isolate the signature from background
[92:53] noise. And so, how what is the range on
[92:57] this stuff? cuz they were saying this
[92:58] >> was 40 miles I think they found this guy
[93:00] is what the claim was
[93:01] >> but didn't they say the range is up to
[93:03] like 70 miles something along those
[93:05] lines so I don't know
[93:07] >> how long have they had this right is it
[93:09] even real but this is the thing is like
[93:12] is it real
[93:13] >> like so this is a post that's in the New
[93:14] York Post and I think it was from did
[93:17] someone release this as a statement like
[93:20] what did they do to say they did it
[93:25] the confirm okay so
[93:27] >> Saturday morning. Yeah, there CIA
[93:30] director talking about Yeah, there you
[93:31] go. CIA missing American 40 miles away.
[93:33] That was unclear.
[93:35] >> Okay,
[93:35] >> that's Trump saying that. Not. So, these
[93:38] are two different or three different
[93:39] speeches all going in together. I guess
[93:41] maybe they spoke at the same press
[93:42] conference.
[93:42] >> So, here's the other thing. If that
[93:45] technology doesn't exist, right, and
[93:48] they just made that up to cover for
[93:50] technology that does exist. So maybe
[93:52] there's technology that does exist
[93:54] that's some sort of largecale satellite
[93:57] imagery of the earth. It gets down to
[93:59] like a grain of sand and they can find
[94:01] anybody anywhere. They can just down
[94:04] find out where the plane is. Scan the
[94:07] area. Bam. There he is.
[94:08] >> There he is.
[94:09] >> Okay, we don't want to say we have this.
[94:10] What are we going to say? Let's say we
[94:12] have quantum heart rate magnetometry.
[94:16] Yeah, we can find we can find
[94:17] >> We couldn't find Maxwell in New
[94:20] Hampshire. When that came out, people
[94:21] were asking, "Yeah, why couldn't you use
[94:22] it?"
[94:23] >> She was in New Hampshire. Yeah. Where
[94:24] is, you know, whatever. Well, it could
[94:26] be that that technology just recently
[94:29] got invented. That's also possible.
[94:30] >> Well, there's still missing people.
[94:32] Guthri is missing still, right? I don't
[94:34] We shouldn't have missing people then if
[94:36] that technology exists.
[94:37] >> That's a weird thing and my heart goes
[94:39] out to her. But that's the craziest
[94:41] thing I've ever heard.
[94:42] >> Yeah, that's a weird one. And didn't
[94:44] they like they looked at family members
[94:46] as suspects, right? I think they looked
[94:48] at family members to say, "Is she back?"
[94:50] And I think she's back to work.
[94:51] >> Back in the story. I don't know.
[94:52] >> And isn't she back to work?
[94:54] >> I don't know.
[94:55] >> Did What did you say? There's a break in
[94:56] the story.
[94:56] >> No, I I think the story got updated
[94:59] recently. Yeah, there's something about
[95:00] a note. Ransom note claimed Nancy
[95:02] Guthrie died after abduction. And
[95:05] >> well, well, that's a Well, you're not
[95:07] going to get ransom then.
[95:09] >> Second ransom note claim she died. Yeah,
[95:11] this is
[95:12] >> That's a horrible ransom note.
[95:14] >> So, someone posted a note saying that
[95:16] she died. I want money. It's a ransom
[95:19] note that says she died.
[95:20] >> What about what if it's she died? Just
[95:22] give us
[95:22] >> I'm reading headlines.
[95:23] >> What if it's she We're sorry she died.
[95:24] Just give us what you want.
[95:26] >> It's not a It's not a specific amount of
[95:28] money. It's just give what you feel is
[95:31] >> it's like church. Give what you can.
[95:33] >> We're sorry she passed away. Give what
[95:35] you can. We're not going to say a
[95:36] specific amount of money.
[95:38] >> So the note sent days after the
[95:40] disappearance. Oh, so this is not new.
[95:42] >> Oh. indicated she had died but contained
[95:45] no request for payment for the release
[95:47] of her body. Three people familiar with
[95:49] the matter said though the existence of
[95:51] the note was known, the specific
[95:52] contents had not been previously
[95:54] disclosed. So it's just the contents
[95:56] were disclosed that they knew that she
[95:58] was dead.
[95:58] >> It seems like it's an inside thing. It
[96:00] seems like someone's involved that knew
[96:02] them. I mean, I hate to think that, but
[96:04] it does feel like it's
[96:05] >> What was the Was there a request for
[96:07] money? What was the first request
[96:09] >> originally? Yeah, I think it was a bunch
[96:10] of Bitcoin or something they wanted.
[96:11] what it Well, let's find out what it
[96:13] was.
[96:15] >> It's a It's a harmful thing, obviously.
[96:17] >> We'd like to know,
[96:18] >> but it does seem like this is a inside
[96:21] job.
[96:22] >> Well, someone certainly
[96:25] Okay, the
[96:26] >> family's involved. Maybe not. I don't
[96:28] know.
[96:31] >> See, this is all bringing up stuff about
[96:33] Reb.
[96:34] >> Ask AI. Press uh AI mode.
[96:37] >> I can't do that.
[96:38] >> You can't do it.
[96:39] >> Okay. Put it in there. Put it in
[96:41] perplexity.
[96:45] How much do you think they asked for?
[96:48] I bet 10 million.
[96:50] >> 10 million
[96:51] >> for mom. Five.
[96:55] >> Five.
[96:56] >> Let's see.
[96:57] >> 10's a lot.
[96:58] >> Multi-million dollar payments in
[97:00] cryptocurrency, mostly Bitcoin, with
[97:02] amounts ranging from about four to six
[97:04] million and set deadlines, sometimes
[97:06] with escalating or else consequences.
[97:08] >> Terrible. GH
[97:10] >> this is this is insane. But think about
[97:12] it. Is that random? I guess it could be.
[97:14] >> It could be. But there was there was
[97:16] some concern that it was a family
[97:17] member.
[97:18] >> Concern that it was something that a
[97:20] family member did this.
[97:22] >> Yeah. Who knows?
[97:23] >> It's sick.
[97:25] >> Yeah.
[97:27] The Bitcoin thing is weird, too. Like
[97:29] you could transfer money in Bitcoin.
[97:30] >> There was a group of people that wanted
[97:32] me to advertise on my podcast and it was
[97:34] a um like a memecoin thing and that was
[97:38] like a platform, whatever. And then I
[97:40] was like, but their like identities were
[97:41] shrouded in people knew who they were,
[97:43] but they were also very secretive
[97:44] because they didn't want to get
[97:45] kidnapped and they split their time
[97:46] between Dubai and London. And CIA, you
[97:49] know, came to me and they were like,
[97:50] "Hey, they want to give you a bunch of
[97:51] money." And I go, "What are they?" And
[97:53] CIA is like, "Well, you know, it's cryp,
[97:54] you know, they don't, you know, I mean,
[97:56] demons from hell. No offense. Love my
[97:57] people." But they were, I was like, "I
[98:00] got to meet them. I got to meet them and
[98:02] sit down and talk to them as human
[98:04] beings and like ask them what their
[98:05] company does and everything like that."
[98:06] And then immediately once I requested
[98:08] that they said, "Okay, they'll all meet
[98:10] you in Dubai and talk to you about the
[98:12] company." I said, "I can't I need to
[98:13] know like I know like you know
[98:15] whatever." They pulled the offer and
[98:18] wouldn't meet.
[98:19] >> Interesting.
[98:20] >> Yeah.
[98:22] >> Yeah. So there's there's all these [ __ ]
[98:23] because by the way, here's a great way
[98:25] to [ __ ] someone is to advertise on their
[98:29] show and then go, "By the way, the money
[98:32] came from Russia."
[98:34] >> Yeah.
[98:34] >> And you didn't even know that. Well,
[98:36] didn't that happen to a bunch of
[98:37] right-wing? I'm sure it a part of some
[98:39] >> It's hard to know who knew what, but
[98:41] like it's great is what a great way to
[98:43] just make people appear compromised. So,
[98:45] when somebody when you go, where's this
[98:47] money coming from? Maybe it's an
[98:48] intelligence agency. Maybe it's ours,
[98:50] maybe it's someone else, but you start
[98:52] going like, "All right, I need to sit
[98:53] down with you, have dinner with you." It
[98:54] doesn't mean that I would necessarily be
[98:56] able to know who like if these guys were
[98:58] legit or not, but the fact that they
[99:00] wouldn't even meet for a dinner
[99:03] tells me that
[99:05] um something was up. Also, a friend of
[99:08] mine who's working at a company that's
[99:10] producing young shows, long form shows
[99:12] for YouTube creators told me that a lot
[99:14] of the money is coming from Democrat
[99:18] super PACs because they want a captive
[99:22] audience to be programmed politically
[99:24] and not only Democrat super PACs, but
[99:26] like super PACs that are associated with
[99:29] certain issues and things like that. So,
[99:32] what they're going to start doing is
[99:33] like getting behind content and, you
[99:36] know, funding longer form things on
[99:40] social media platforms and and things
[99:41] like YouTube or whatever. And then those
[99:44] companies that are are are kind of in
[99:47] the background of this will then say,
[99:49] "Oh, we have an audience of five or 10
[99:51] million people watching this. We can we
[99:53] can put political ads on it and and
[99:56] whatever else."
[99:57] >> Jeez. So I mean this is kind of I think
[99:59] the future is going to be all many
[100:02] things like this
[100:03] >> and when you can do it through something
[100:05] like crypto like if you can hide your
[100:08] identity like who knows if it's even a
[100:10] real company. It could be a company
[100:12] designed entirely just for influence.
[100:14] >> It's it's very questionable. You have
[100:16] the intelligence world, you have the
[100:18] crypto world and you know you have the
[100:21] world of international crime syndicates
[100:24] like they all are live in that world.
[100:26] Um, and I'm not saying people that are
[100:28] into crypto are inherently suspect in
[100:30] any way. Obviously, they're not. But
[100:33] >> there is a lot of uh [ __ ] going on
[100:36] with the intelligent stuff in the
[100:38] crypto. It's like obvious.
[100:40] >> Clearly, clearly when whenever there's
[100:42] money,
[100:43] >> if the amount of money that you can make
[100:44] in crypto is [ __ ] bananas and it
[100:46] doesn't make any sense, right? So,
[100:48] whenever there's money in drugs, right,
[100:50] like this is Iran Contra. When there's
[100:52] money in anything, they they find a way
[100:53] to get a part of that money. I think
[100:55] what concerns people partially about the
[100:59] this administration is some of the
[101:01] crypto stuff. I think people are
[101:03] concerned with some of the coins and
[101:06] some of the, you know, crypto.
[101:08] >> Well, Melaniacoin's legit.
[101:10] >> That one I love. But the rest I worry.
[101:13] No, but I think I think it's a fair
[101:14] concern when it is a fair concern.
[101:17] >> It's legal, but it's like should it be?
[101:19] >> Is it should it be? Should it be? Should
[101:21] it be? For sure. I mean, there's some
[101:24] freedom to you being able to make your
[101:26] own coin and you back it with money, I
[101:28] guess. But it's also a way that you can
[101:29] launder money and it's also a way you
[101:31] could pay people off for stuff
[101:32] >> and dup people into spending their
[101:34] money. You know what I mean? Like I
[101:36] think a lot of people Yeah. I mean, that
[101:38] poor girl, huh?
[101:38] >> That poor girl. They got her.
[101:40] >> They got her.
[101:40] >> They got her.
[101:41] >> They got her. I hope she did well on
[101:43] that.
[101:44] >> I bet she didn't.
[101:45] >> Really?
[101:46] >> Probably not. Certainly in terms of what
[101:48] she could be doing. sad because as soon
[101:50] as they get mad at you for something
[101:52] like that, well then they don't like you
[101:53] anymore.
[101:53] >> She did the wrong thing and and it's
[101:56] sad.
[101:57] >> I also 22 or something.
[101:59] >> I also don't know if she was going to be
[102:00] Merryill Street, but it listen
[102:04] girl makes more money than anybody.
[102:06] >> It's true. Um but I think it could have
[102:08] gone on longer than it what a what a
[102:11] society we live in.
[102:12] >> I mean I just that just hit me. That
[102:14] just like hit my brain that she makes
[102:16] more money than anybody and it's true. I
[102:18] was listening to your take on the White
[102:19] House UFC card being the end of MAGA.
[102:22] Yeah.
[102:22] >> And that the moment when that guy said
[102:24] Michelle Obama is a man.
[102:25] >> Yeah. Well, it's just the greatest thing
[102:27] for if you're a deep deep hardcore and I
[102:31] don't even mean the like the America
[102:33] first principles. I just mean like
[102:34] you're along for the ride. You're here
[102:36] for the part. There's a lot of maggot
[102:37] people that I'm friends with that are
[102:39] deep that they're not political. They're
[102:41] along for the part. They like the party,
[102:42] right?
[102:43] >> They want fun. They're in Florida. It's
[102:45] 4 pm. They're drunk.
[102:47] >> You know what I mean? And they're
[102:48] they're in for the fun. And it's fun.
[102:50] They have like they have like boat shows
[102:52] and riatas where like a bunch of boats
[102:54] will go out with Trump flags.
[102:56] >> When they're watching that UFC event in
[102:58] their house in St. Augustine or Tampa or
[103:02] or [ __ ] West Palm, whatever it is,
[103:04] and that guy stands up and goes,
[103:06] "Michelle Obama is a man." It's the
[103:09] culmination of things that you they're
[103:11] not going to beat that. It's hard to
[103:14] beat that. That there were houses that
[103:17] cheered when that happened.
[103:19] >> 100%. It cheered.
[103:20] >> How many do you think
[103:22] >> over the whole country?
[103:23] >> It was audible in Florida.
[103:26] >> Florida I know for sure was audible. For
[103:29] sure. People cheered and it was like
[103:30] listen
[103:31] >> like outside bars.
[103:32] >> Yeah. It was a party. The fights were
[103:35] good. you you know it's like to me it's
[103:38] like there's this there's this every
[103:41] cultural thing has a moment where it
[103:44] just explodes and it's over after that
[103:47] you know it's like Hunter Thompson has
[103:48] that famous quote about it
[103:50] >> where he was part of this thing and then
[103:52] it just you know we saw it happen with
[103:56] >> like celebrity culture a lot of it like
[103:58] that I imagine video during co was kind
[104:00] of the end of that like people are like
[104:02] shut up
[104:03] >> like it really it was like they they did
[104:05] that video and they didn't know it at
[104:07] the time, but people really started to
[104:08] turn on them. They're like, "Just shut
[104:09] up."
[104:10] >> And there was the other one, the BLM
[104:11] one.
[104:12] >> Totally. All of them.
[104:13] >> Sorry to be white or whatever it was.
[104:15] >> Same [ __ ]
[104:16] >> Same kind of thing. People just said,
[104:17] "Okay, enough of this."
[104:19] >> And I do think that every movement just
[104:22] gets to a point where you've done all
[104:23] you can do. You've done all you can do.
[104:25] And when you are standing in the octagon
[104:27] of a UFC fight on the White House lawn
[104:30] and you're asked if you have anything to
[104:31] say and you scream Michelle Obama's a
[104:33] man that is the clock has struck
[104:36] midnight. That's that I mean I don't
[104:38] know what else you could do. That guy
[104:41] Josh Hoit.
[104:42] >> Yeah.
[104:42] >> You know that's like he's got a a
[104:45] stickick like he's got a character.
[104:48] >> The Incredible Hulk. And so he's
[104:50] basically like a pro- wrestling bad guy
[104:52] who also is a really good fighter,
[104:55] >> right?
[104:56] >> So there's a there's a real problem
[104:57] there.
[104:59] >> Yeah. And he says crazy stuff.
[105:01] >> Well, they probably
[105:03] >> in retrospect.
[105:04] >> Yeah.
[105:04] >> If they wanted to avoid this, probably
[105:06] shouldn't have had him fight on the
[105:08] White House lawn because if he said that
[105:10] at the T-Mobile Arena or in Madison
[105:12] Square Garden, totally outrageous,
[105:14] >> but not that big a deal.
[105:15] >> But it's the Yeah. But here's what
[105:17] should have happened afterwards.
[105:18] Michelle Obama should have made an
[105:20] Undertaker like entrance.
[105:26] >> Let's go in.
[105:27] >> All of a sudden, the lights go dim
[105:29] >> and then the light goes on on the
[105:31] balcony. Michelle Obama
[105:32] >> and she comes on a on a cord that she
[105:34] flies over.
[105:36] >> If Michelle Obama had made an Undertaker
[105:38] like entrance and got in the stage and
[105:41] then body slam like can you imagine?
[105:45] Unbelievable.
[105:46] >> That would have been amazing. The
[105:47] country just exists for ratings now
[105:50] anyway. It's all it exists for. It's
[105:53] just that's all we're doing anymore.
[105:55] That would have been unbelievable.
[105:58] >> Here it is.
[105:59] >> This isn't the undertaker, but this is
[106:00] what you guys are I think we're
[106:02] sticking.
[106:02] >> Yes. Yes. Yes. She's in the ceiling the
[106:06] entire time.
[106:07] >> Michelle Obama comes down.
[106:10] >> You see Trump Trump starts doing his
[106:12] dance.
[106:13] >> He's doing his Trump dance. Michelle
[106:14] Obama comes down. She's got a cape. Bro,
[106:17] it would be the end.
[106:18] >> It would have been unfucking believable
[106:21] and she would have been president next.
[106:24] She would have been president next with
[106:26] no election. No election. Vance is going
[106:29] to stand up to that. She should have
[106:31] descended from the rafters in a cape,
[106:34] fought that guy, you know. You know,
[106:36] choreographed little fake body slam him.
[106:38] >> It's fun. Fake. And then she does an
[106:42] uppercut and then he's on a on a cord
[106:44] and he sails out. Unbelievable. Missed
[106:47] opportunity. Missed opportunity
[106:52] because why not? Why not have some fun?
[106:56] >> Yeah, why not?
[106:57] >> Why not have there? They said or some
[107:00] wrestling event there. They could they
[107:01] could still pull it off.
[107:03] >> They could do it. And if she's smart,
[107:05] she hears this and she's on her phone
[107:07] with her people. Don't sue him. They
[107:11] were going to sue him. They thought
[107:12] about suing him. It's like, what? Stop
[107:14] with the suing all the time in this
[107:15] country.
[107:16] >> Yeah.
[107:17] >> Do something fun.
[107:19] >> I agree. Too much suing.
[107:23] Well, there's there is this moment where
[107:26] the UFC thing was going on where like
[107:28] the planes flew overhead where it just
[107:31] like I'm like, is this even real?
[107:33] >> It's it was a it was it was wild. It's
[107:35] such an amazing spectacle. It's hard to
[107:38] top.
[107:38] >> It was pretty amazing.
[107:39] >> That's what I mean about a piece of
[107:41] entertainment. Of course,
[107:42] >> it was also the only UFC card in the
[107:45] history of the the sport where every
[107:48] fight was a knockout.
[107:49] >> Yeah, it's this was the that this is
[107:54] senior prom. Everyone's got to go to
[107:57] college next year and you know, wherever
[107:59] they go, this is it. This is the party.
[108:01] Jack,
[108:02] >> there's a moment after senior prom or
[108:04] you know some party that you have senior
[108:06] you know the summer of and you're
[108:07] looking around at all your friends
[108:08] you're all high and drunk and you're
[108:10] looking around and you and if you're
[108:11] smart and most people a lot of them have
[108:13] this thought they go this is never going
[108:14] to be like this again
[108:15] >> right this will never be like this again
[108:18] we'll never be able to get together on
[108:20] the White House lawn and do motocross
[108:21] and watch UFC and call Michelle Obama a
[108:23] man
[108:27] started when he walked down the
[108:28] escalator we went through a lot of
[108:30] things the guy almost got
[108:32] Who knows who did it? No one knows. No
[108:33] one seems to care. Whatever. Fine.
[108:35] Moving on. But, you know, he's he's you
[108:38] know, he's gone through many iterations.
[108:40] There's he's been out. He's been in.
[108:41] It's the most it's the most interesting
[108:43] story really in recent human history.
[108:45] And and this is the party to throw. And
[108:48] it's wild because we're not going to win
[108:50] the Iran war. We're not going to win the
[108:51] Iran war. It seems very clear that it's
[108:53] very difficult to imagine a scenario
[108:55] where we come out with like a decisive
[108:57] victory. So instead of that, we this
[108:59] this we did this.
[109:02] >> How is there no more open investigation
[109:06] into the assassination attempt? What
[109:08] happened there? Cuz that's where Kent
[109:10] said that he was told to stop.
[109:11] >> Do you want it honestly done? Do you
[109:13] know who you put in charge of it? If you
[109:14] want it truly, and I'm being very
[109:16] serious,
[109:16] >> if you want an honest investigation, put
[109:19] Israel in charge.
[109:22] Joe, if you want
[109:26] if you want it done right, have them do
[109:29] it. That's all I'm saying. Have them do
[109:31] it.
[109:33] Just have them do it. I I would trust
[109:36] >> You think they should look at the
[109:37] Charlie Kirk assassination as well?
[109:38] >> I would trust their conclusions.
[109:41] Have them do it. That would be my
[109:43] thought. Just Just a fun thought.
[109:47] >> There's a lot of people that think it
[109:48] was a hoax and that it was a setup. And
[109:50] if it was, I've said on my show, just
[109:52] tell us how you did it because that's
[109:53] fun, too.
[109:54] >> It's fun.
[109:55] >> Pennsylvania men shot during Trump rally
[109:56] in Butler sued the United States. Two
[109:59] men who were wounded in the shooting.
[110:01] Um, they're suing
[110:04] James Copenhaver and David Dutch were
[110:06] shot during attempted assassination of
[110:08] Trump. Their attorneys filed federal
[110:10] lawsuits against the United States for
[110:12] their lifealtering physical and
[110:14] emotional injuries, claiming those
[110:15] injuries were the direct result of
[110:17] negligence on the part of the United
[110:18] States Secret Service. Dutch was shot in
[110:21] the stomach while Copenha was shot
[110:22] twice.
[110:25] >> Yeah. Does the suing ever end in this
[110:27] country?
[110:27] >> But there's an argument that that was
[110:29] negative negligence.
[110:31] >> Remember that woman Kim Cheetel who was
[110:32] in charge and then they put her back in
[110:34] a bunker?
[110:35] >> Who?
[110:36] >> She was in charge of the Secret Service.
[110:38] That's right. That's right.
[110:39] >> She was like Dick Cheny's assistant.
[110:42] >> The rope was too sloped or something.
[110:43] >> Yeah. She said the roof was too slope to
[110:46] get
[110:46] >> They shot the guy and he didn't even
[110:48] fall. He didn't roll off the roof. Like
[110:49] the whole thing
[110:50] >> Well, the the slope of the roof that
[110:52] they were on was steeper.
[110:53] >> If it's a faked assassination attempt, I
[110:56] don't care. I want to know how it was
[110:58] done and so does the rest of America.
[111:00] produce a special where Barry Weiss
[111:03] interviews Donald Trump about how they
[111:05] faked the assassination attempt, put it
[111:07] on CBS where she's doing and she's
[111:10] taking over CNN now.
[111:12] So I think and she's now isolated
[111:15] herself on the sixth floor of CBS where
[111:17] she can no longer see the staff and they
[111:19] cannot approach her and she is true.
[111:21] >> That is correct. And she's guarded by
[111:23] guards.
[111:24] >> What?
[111:24] >> Yes.
[111:25] >> Where'd you hear this?
[111:26] >> This is in the news. She is she's in a
[111:29] bunker like detaining the peak during
[111:31] 9/11 except it's Barry Weiss at CNN
[111:34] surrounded by guards and no one can and
[111:38] it's like it's it's like a militarized
[111:40] zone. She's in a militarized zone. Barry
[111:44] in the bunker and Ellison at the gates.
[111:47] >> Yeah. Is this real?
[111:49] >> She's unbeliev.
[111:52] >> Why does she hate you?
[111:53] >> Well, you know, I've said things but
[111:55] here's the thing.
[111:58] I like her more now.
[112:00] >> Did she start hating you after your
[112:01] hilarious impression?
[112:02] >> I She's She's She's turned on me. Um she
[112:06] turned on me uh a while ago.
[112:09] >> Turned on you how?
[112:10] >> She texted me and was like, "You're part
[112:12] of a world in which people are
[112:15] anti-Semitic." And and I'm like, "Well,
[112:16] am I what am I what what am I doing?"
[112:19] And she's like, "You're part of this
[112:21] thing." And I was like, well, that's
[112:24] like what am I why am I what is this
[112:27] guilt by association? I don't like this
[112:29] >> part of a thing that's anti-semitic.
[112:32] >> Yeah. She's like, you're part of a
[112:33] cultural space of anti-semitism. And I'm
[112:35] like,
[112:35] >> so is she connecting you to anti-semite?
[112:38] connected me to all these different
[112:39] people because if it the thing that she
[112:41] hated and the thing that she crusaded
[112:43] against was this whole idea that like
[112:46] >> she's applying the same principles that
[112:48] she supposedly didn't like which is like
[112:49] if you're willing to have a conversation
[112:51] with somebody you endorse every one of
[112:53] their views or if you question something
[112:56] like Israel you hate Israel or you hate
[112:59] Jewish people which is insane
[113:01] >> and that was I thought she was the one
[113:03] who was like we should have nuance on
[113:04] the trans issue what happened to that
[113:06] >> what happened to being ble to question
[113:08] gender ideology and all these things
[113:10] like why aren't we where's the nuance
[113:13] where's the why aren't we holding space
[113:15] for nuance bar
[113:18] >> CBS News boss Barry Weiss poised to
[113:21] oversee CNN editorial operations yeah
[113:23] this is what he just said right
[113:24] >> yeah I saw that
[113:25] >> but she's living her best life as people
[113:27] would say this is what she was meant to
[113:28] do and when someone steps into their
[113:30] truth I support them and she has stepped
[113:33] into her truth she's exactly where she
[113:35] should be in a bunker guarded by the
[113:37] milit military while she systematically
[113:39] destroys uh CBS.
[113:42] She's stepping into her truth. This is
[113:44] what she was there. She was put there to
[113:45] destroy it. She was obviously put there
[113:47] to destroy it. She wasn't put there to
[113:49] make it work. She put there to just
[113:51] destroy it and she's doing it.
[113:54] >> Do you think they understood the amount
[113:55] of push back that they were going to
[113:57] get? I don't think they I think they
[113:59] said, "Listen, let's just put her in
[114:00] there and see what happens because who
[114:03] car
[114:05] but it's like these legacy media
[114:08] institutions are dying.
[114:11] They're not turning around. No one's
[114:14] going back to watching the evening
[114:16] news." And they know that these are
[114:18] billionaire, not idiots. The Ellison are
[114:21] not dumb. They don't. They said, "Let's
[114:22] have a little fun while this thing
[114:24] goes."
[114:25] It says she took the helm of the
[114:27] struggling organization last month with
[114:29] a mandate to shake it up following David
[114:32] Ellison led Sky Dance takeover of CBS
[114:34] parent company Paramount in 2024.
[114:37] Paramount Sky Dance bought Weiss's
[114:39] online outlet, The Free Press, for a
[114:41] cool 150 million as she became
[114:44] editor-inchief of CBS News.
[114:46] >> Yeah, that's a lot of money for the Free
[114:49] Press.
[114:49] >> Well, no, because if you look at the
[114:51] podcast ratings, it was you and then she
[114:52] was number two. Wow.
[114:54] >> Um, so that's why No, she would get
[114:56] 7,000 YouTube views.
[115:01] >> And it seems high. It certainly seems
[115:03] like a lot, but you know, when you take
[115:06] into account her uh cultural impact,
[115:09] >> it's interesting because like when it
[115:11] came to her like pushing against woke
[115:13] ideology that infected the New York
[115:15] Times, she seemed really reasonable. And
[115:17] there's this very famous clip of her
[115:19] talking to Brian Stelter where she talks
[115:21] about the world gone crazy. Remember
[115:23] that? The world gone mad. Yes. Where
[115:25] she's like very brilliantly lays out why
[115:30] if this is what you're saying, you know,
[115:32] when people are saying that silence is
[115:34] violence,
[115:35] >> right?
[115:35] >> And not actual violence is violence. The
[115:38] world's gone mad.
[115:39] >> And she lays these all out. It's so
[115:41] brilliant.
[115:41] >> Well, there's got to be room for nuance.
[115:43] Like October 7th was horrible. Hamas is
[115:45] not good. We all know this. However, you
[115:49] also cannot look at what's gone on the
[115:51] last few years and think that Israel has
[115:54] not number one perpetrate. You could
[115:56] call it I I call it a genocide. People
[115:58] can call it anything they want. Doesn't
[116:00] matter. It's a campaign of of mass
[116:03] murder where a lot of people have died,
[116:04] civilians have died, many children have
[116:06] died, people that are innocent have
[116:07] died. And they're doing they're starting
[116:10] to do something similar in southern
[116:11] Lebanon. And they're now talking about
[116:14] Turkey going, "By the way, Turkey also
[116:17] is a pro. Turkey is a NATO [ __ ]
[116:18] country." So the idea that any criticism
[116:22] of Netanyahu or the Israeli government
[116:25] or Israel or our relationship with
[116:26] Israel or the money makes you
[116:28] anti-Semitic is an insane thing. It's
[116:31] the exact thing that she fought against
[116:35] in race and gender. She fought against
[116:38] that man good and evil, black and white.
[116:41] She fought against it and she was right.
[116:44] She was correct to say you should be
[116:47] able to have conversations about when is
[116:49] it appropriate for a child to be exposed
[116:52] to certain ideas and when should they be
[116:54] able to make a determination about how
[116:56] they want to live their life and like
[116:57] when is it appropriate for um people to
[117:02] call, you know, to designate between a
[117:05] protest and a legit and a riot and the
[117:08] silence is violence and all of that
[117:09] stuff. She had really pretty logical
[117:14] opinions on all that stuff, but when it
[117:16] came to that one issue, she seems very
[117:18] incapable of understanding any nuance or
[117:22] gray area or complexity regarding this
[117:24] particular issue.
[117:25] >> No, she is all in for Israel. And that's
[117:27] fine. That's her that's her choice and
[117:30] to and I get it. Um but it's so obvious
[117:34] when a Mark Levvin goes, "The
[117:35] president's great because we're going
[117:37] into Iran." He goes, "The president's
[117:38] great. He's the greatest leader of all
[117:40] time. And then he goes, "Well, this
[117:41] didn't work out like we thought. We're
[117:42] going to make a deal and we're going to
[117:44] try to, you know," and then Mark Levin
[117:47] goes, "This is a failure. This is a
[117:50] blunder. This is a strategic thing." And
[117:52] it's like, "For who? Is it for us? It's
[117:56] not not a failure for like it's clearly
[117:58] a failure for us, but like it seems like
[118:00] the bigger failure would be for Israel
[118:02] that wants Iran neutered because they
[118:04] have aspirations regionally, globally,
[118:07] but certainly regionally." So, who's it
[118:09] a failure for? And that's a fair
[118:12] question. And I think it's like there's
[118:14] you've got to be able to have that
[118:16] conversation without being tred and
[118:18] feathered as someone who's like a
[118:21] conspiracy mongering anti-semite, which
[118:24] is like very there's a group of people
[118:27] that are, but a lot of people just want
[118:30] sanity. And this is not this is not
[118:33] sane. And just like you were talking
[118:34] about with the banks forcing that [ __ ]
[118:36] down people's throats that it's going to
[118:38] make them Yeah.
[118:39] >> Yes.
[118:39] >> Same thing.
[118:40] >> Nobody understands blowback. Like the
[118:43] CIA term blowback when you like go into
[118:44] a country, kill everyone, and they go,
[118:46] "You like us, right?" They go, "No,
[118:49] not really.
[118:51] We killed your mother, but we're sorry,
[118:53] but you want the mall. We're going to
[118:55] build a mall." They go, "No, we're going
[118:57] to we're going to bomb you and try to
[118:58] kill you." This is blowback. There's
[119:01] blowback when you shut down
[119:03] conversations. And and and in order to
[119:06] shut people up, you got to pay them or
[119:08] kill them. That's the only way to do it.
[119:10] If you don't pay people a lot of money
[119:12] or kill them, they're going to talk.
[119:14] They're And if if you don't if you limit
[119:18] that, they're going to get angrier and
[119:21] the blowback is going to be intense.
[119:24] >> Well said.
[119:25] >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, that's entirely
[119:27] accurate.
[119:27] >> CBS News, I'll go on. That's the thing.
[119:30] I have no beef with her. I like her. I
[119:32] like that she's in a bunker. I will go
[119:34] on to that show. I'm there.
[119:36] >> Things that I thought was hilarious, it
[119:37] was some fake story was that they were
[119:39] going to bring me on for 60 minutes.
[119:41] >> Everyone keeps saying that. I texted you
[119:42] about it. I'm like, are you doing 60
[119:44] Minutes? I thought that was wild. But
[119:47] why not?
[119:48] >> I mean, what you know, half the staff
[119:51] has left. One of that guy, that guy Bill
[119:53] P just got out. Yeah, she got out and
[119:55] then she's got that Dokapole, whatever
[119:57] his name is in the evening news crying
[119:59] like a psychopath.
[120:00] >> Who's that?
[120:01] >> He's the guy who does the CBS Evening
[120:03] News and his first his first episode
[120:05] he's in Miami and he's crying. Can you
[120:08] get that up? It's unbelievable. Anchor
[120:10] of the news.
[120:10] >> Why is he crying?
[120:11] >> He's crying because he's he starts
[120:13] talking about his family and how he grew
[120:14] up in Miami. It's unbelievable. This is
[120:18] the guy who was selected to to run these
[120:21] CBS Evening News to be the anchor of the
[120:23] CBS Evening News and like he does this
[120:25] thing where he's in Miami and they take
[120:29] him out of the chair because they want
[120:30] to start she's shaking it up. Barry
[120:33] shaking it up. So instead of sitting at
[120:34] a desk and doing the thing, they bring
[120:36] him to Miami to like visit his childhood
[120:40] places and he starts
[120:43] sobbing in uh I forget it was like a
[120:46] restaurant or something. Jamie, you can
[120:48] find it.
[120:48] >> Didn't have him crying for some reason.
[120:50] It was just talking.
[120:50] >> He's crying in like a restaurant or he
[120:52] start he gets like choked up and it's
[120:55] deeply uncomfortable and it's really
[120:56] weird
[120:58] and he starts talking about how he had a
[121:00] hard childhood. It's like unbelievable.
[121:03] >> This is the guy.
[121:05] Embarrassing first days. CBS EVV News
[121:08] Savage by Staff. It's State TV.
[121:11] Whoa. In conversation with one of his
[121:14] handlers during an ad break, Pete
[121:16] Hegsith said during his interview with
[121:18] Tony, how do you say his name?
[121:20] >> Doc Dapole.
[121:21] >> Doapole. We did it at Barry's request
[121:24] and because CBS News did something right
[121:27] on this.
[121:28] >> I wish you had him crying. I wish you
[121:30] had him in his in that restaurant.
[121:32] >> So his Marco Marco Rubio's moment is
[121:35] what he's talking about.
[121:36] >> No, this is not the right thing. No,
[121:37] >> he's in Miami and and Doapul. Yeah, I
[121:40] mean, yeah, he's this is psychotic. You
[121:42] have to watch.
[121:43] >> Hold up. It's not just keeps crying.
[121:45] >> It wasn't showing the video.
[121:46] >> Maybe that's his thing, you know, like
[121:47] George Hamilton was tan all the time.
[121:49] >> He's crying. He's talking about
[121:52] >> Yeah. Look at this. Look at this. This
[121:54] is the anchor of the CBS Evening News.
[121:56] >> So, he's being interviewed.
[121:56] >> Yeah. Can we listen to this? I'm trying
[121:58] to I can't Facebook's weird.
[122:00] >> Damn it.
[122:01] >> Doesn't let me control the player cuz
[122:04] show up.
[122:08] >> Let me get a second here.
[122:09] >> Get take it from the beginning so I know
[122:10] what he's crying about.
[122:14] >> What? It makes me emotional. It's so
[122:16] funny. I I didn't mean I didn't think it
[122:17] would catch, you know.
[122:23] >> This is your favorite place in the
[122:25] world. Why? Why South Florida and Miami?
[122:31] >> What? It makes me emotional. It's so
[122:33] funny. I I didn't mean I didn't think it
[122:34] would catch, you know.
[122:41] Cuz you only have one childhood, right?
[122:43] So,
[122:45] >> let me get a second here.
[122:46] >> No, you're okay. I can relate. This is
[122:48] home.
[122:52] people will to to help people understand
[122:54] why I have such a reaction.
[123:03] Florida is where I grew up.
[123:09] >> We didn't get a lot of sleep. So,
[123:10] >> no, it's okay.
[123:11] >> Yeah. My grandmother's here and my
[123:13] father, my mother, my aunts and uncles,
[123:15] cousins,
[123:17] and it's where I would have spent all of
[123:19] my childhood, but we left uh because of
[123:23] my father. He got in trouble with
[123:25] business. It's like we laugh about it
[123:26] now, but he was a drug dealer. But he
[123:29] was a drug dealer. He went to jail. It's
[123:31] kind of a haha thing that we say now,
[123:33] but the reason it's so emotional for me
[123:35] is because I feel like I was robbed.
[123:38] >> It's kind of a haha thing. HE'S THIS
[123:41] HEAD OF the CBS Evening News. He's the
[123:43] anchor of the CBS Evening News.
[123:48] This is what drives everyone so crazy
[123:50] about the world. How fake everything is.
[123:52] That's the guy. That's the best guy for
[123:55] the job. This is When I grew up, you
[123:58] would go see Whitney Houston and go,
[124:00] "Fuck, she's good. I can't sing like
[124:02] that. Who cares if she smokes crack? She
[124:05] deserves it." You watch this and it
[124:08] drives you insane. And you go, "This
[124:10] guy's crying. His father's a drug
[124:12] dealer. This is who's the best guy for
[124:15] the job. He's going to have to report on
[124:18] death, like like murder,
[124:22] war, famine,
[124:25] whatever." And he's crying in a [ __ ]
[124:27] in some Cuban restaurant about his drug
[124:30] dealer father, so they had to leave
[124:32] Miami. And no one believes anything's
[124:35] real anymore. This is a huge problem in
[124:37] our world. people the do people go
[124:39] that's the guy that's the anchor of the
[124:42] CBS evening news it's crazy
[124:44] >> well the other guy who was on a bunch of
[124:46] people attacked him after he left right
[124:48] so he left and apparently he made it
[124:50] very public
[124:52] >> yes Scott P or something
[124:53] >> big public out so what was he pissed
[124:57] about he he was saying something about
[124:59] they were going against science or it
[125:03] some of it had to do I believe with
[125:04] climate change some of it had to do with
[125:06] a bunch of other things that he
[125:07] disagreed with the stat the where the
[125:10] news organization. Let's find out what
[125:11] his exact complaints were.
[125:13] >> Yeah, let's find out. I don't know what
[125:14] they were, but I you know, Barry chairs
[125:19] the meetings there and really goes on
[125:22] and embarrasses herself and on the calls
[125:24] and stuff has no idea what she's talking
[125:26] about. And so, here it is. Following his
[125:28] criticism,
[125:30] uh, news editor Barry Weiss, 60 Minutes
[125:32] executive producer Nick Bilton, uh, at a
[125:35] staff meeting, PY was fired by CBS News.
[125:38] What did he say? Uh, was CBS fired P uh
[125:42] Builton wrote a cover letter which
[125:43] obtained by the New York Times. Builtin
[125:45] stated as follows. Your antipathy
[125:49] antipathy to the future of the show has
[125:51] come through loud and clear. And we have
[125:53] I have heard you therefore write on
[125:56] behalf of CBS News, Inc. to inform you
[125:58] that your employment with CBS is
[125:59] terminated for cause effective
[126:01] immediately. Next day, Weiss said, "I'm
[126:03] only interested in working in a newsroom
[126:05] that is built on trust and mutual
[126:07] respect." Okay, so what did he say?
[126:12] Um, PCR accused the new CBS leadership
[126:16] of instructing him to insert falsehoods
[126:18] into a political story and to include
[126:21] assertions that were not verified,
[126:22] instructions he says he ignored. The
[126:25] collapse of values at the top has become
[126:27] untenable. The leadership at 60 Minutes
[126:29] is no longer recognizable. Uh the
[126:31] principles I hold dear are gone and so I
[126:34] must leave as well. Wonder what exactly
[126:37] they meant though by the falsehoods in a
[126:39] political story and including assertions
[126:41] that were not verified.
[126:43] >> Well, oh, here it is. It says, um, "The
[126:45] story CBS intervened on was a report
[126:48] about the 2026 protests in Minnesota,
[126:51] and the falsehood CBS asked for was to
[126:53] describe protester Renee Good as driving
[126:55] her car toward the officer who killed
[126:58] her,
[126:59] >> which P said contradicts video evidence
[127:01] of the event." That's correct. It it
[127:03] seemed to me that he was the lady was
[127:05] trying to turn the car away from him,
[127:08] >> but it did brush up against the guy,
[127:11] which is enough for him to decide to
[127:13] kill her.
[127:14] >> Well,
[127:15] >> you know, but it wasn't it was not she
[127:17] was trying to run him over.
[127:18] >> No. And I think it
[127:19] >> But however, that guy had been dragged
[127:21] by a car very recently. So, he's
[127:24] probably filled with PTSD. He almost
[127:26] [ __ ] died. I think he he got dragged
[127:28] like 300 300 yards, rather.
[127:30] >> I think it's fair to ask this.
[127:31] >> 300 feet.
[127:32] >> Yeah. But I think it's also fair to ask
[127:33] at this point like what is the media?
[127:35] >> Like what is the media? Like
[127:37] >> all due respect to Barry Weiss, but like
[127:39] so it was a heavily inflated price for
[127:41] the for her blog that she sold and
[127:44] YouTube channel, whatever.
[127:46] >> It's clearly there's clearly a political
[127:48] agenda to this. You have billionaires
[127:49] that own
[127:51] >> all of these companies and we're we're
[127:54] asked to believe that like she's the
[127:56] most qualified for the job even though
[127:58] she's never ran a newsroom. She didn't
[128:00] like work her way up the rank. She's an
[128:01] op-ed columnist, an opinion writer and
[128:04] stuff like that. Great. She made a lot
[128:06] of sense. We said it before. Um, and
[128:08] then she appoints hires this guy who's
[128:11] crying in a restaurant in Miami about
[128:13] his dad. And it's like, who the hell's
[128:15] that guy? So, I think it's fair to ask
[128:17] like,
[128:20] do we have any trust left in these
[128:22] institutions? Do we have any trust left?
[128:24] And like people that work there are
[128:26] leaving and saying, I'm being asked to
[128:28] insert things into this that isn't true.
[128:30] Well, that alone, just that alone, like
[128:32] driving the car towards the officer,
[128:34] that's not that's just not technically
[128:36] correct,
[128:37] >> right?
[128:37] >> It seems like she was steering it away.
[128:39] Why would they want to say something
[128:42] that's not correct when you could just
[128:43] see it in a video? Like, if you were
[128:45] running a newsroom, that would be the
[128:47] last thing you would want to do is
[128:48] contradict something that's obviously
[128:50] verifiable. So, that would for what
[128:54] reason would you sacrifice your
[128:56] credibility? Because that's essentially
[128:58] what it's doing. you. It's such a a
[129:00] shortterm play.
[129:02] >> Yes. But I'll tell you exactly why.
[129:03] >> Okay.
[129:04] >> Because their main demographic is
[129:07] 70-year-olds who are having strokes on
[129:08] their couch.
[129:10] >> They're not verifying this. They're not
[129:12] They have a very old audience that is
[129:14] not
[129:16] online savvy. They're not looking at
[129:18] many angles. They're they're they have
[129:20] cataracts and they're hearing this and
[129:23] it allows them to dismiss it as, well,
[129:26] she did the wrong, you know, she drove
[129:28] justifiable shooting.
[129:30] >> Yeah. I I don't think there
[129:31] >> but somebody's motivating them to do
[129:33] that for those people.
[129:33] >> Well, for Yeah. For Yeah. Well, because
[129:36] she's in the tank for Trump because
[129:38] Trump promised or maybe didn't promise,
[129:40] but like whatever. He's useful in the
[129:44] sense that he's going to go in and
[129:45] topple the regime in Iran. he's gonna
[129:47] sue all these, you know, or he's gonna
[129:49] bring Harvard College to heal for
[129:51] whatever the hell they did. Um, and, you
[129:54] know, she believes that, and again, a
[129:57] lot of this is just connected to her her
[129:59] view that, you know, Israel's interests
[130:02] are always 100%
[130:05] concurrent with America's. And Trump
[130:07] gets that and he understands that.
[130:09] though she's in the tank for Trump,
[130:12] which by the way, if Biden would have
[130:14] invaded Iran, she would have started
[130:16] protecting him. It doesn't seem like
[130:17] it's she doesn't care that much about a
[130:20] ton of issues. It seems to be that this
[130:22] is her big issue.
[130:24] >> That's a the disturbing thing to a lot
[130:26] of people, like how much influence do
[130:28] they really have on this country?
[130:30] >> That's that's what creeps people out
[130:31] because I think no one even really
[130:33] considered it before October 7th. It
[130:35] wasn't I mean, I'm sure people
[130:37] considered it. Nick Fuentes considered
[130:39] it. It wasn't like it was an openly
[130:42] discussed thing amongst young people,
[130:44] >> right?
[130:45] >> It wasn't until we started realizing,
[130:48] first of all, it was Apac. It was the um
[130:52] the weirdness of the New York City
[130:54] mayoral race.
[130:55] >> Yeah, of course.
[130:56] >> Very weird. Where they were all like,
[130:58] "We're going to visit Israel." Like,
[131:00] what? Well, it's also in direct
[131:02] opposition to the stated goal of the
[131:04] Trump administration, which is to repair
[131:08] the United States and to make it great
[131:11] and to elevate it and to focus on the
[131:13] United States and to not go into Middle
[131:16] Eastern wars, which was a huge, very
[131:19] popular plank of his platform, and to
[131:21] not waste money and saddle ourselves
[131:23] with debt and mire ourselves in these
[131:25] unwinable wars. And there was such a
[131:28] gaslighting campaign. the secretary of
[131:29] state came out after the Iran war and
[131:30] goes, "Well, Israel is going to attack
[131:32] them anyway and our bases were going to
[131:33] be vulnerable, so we had to join." And
[131:36] then he went, "No, I didn't mean that.
[131:39] I didn't really mean that. We're
[131:40] partners and we both think it's a great
[131:42] idea." And there was tremendous pressure
[131:45] on him to do this.
[131:46] >> Yeah.
[131:46] >> And you know, it hasn't worked. And it's
[131:49] it's it's clearly not in the the
[131:51] interest of the United States to be in a
[131:52] Middle Eastern war with Iran. Tons of
[131:55] Jewish people don't believe it is. lots
[131:57] of, you know, uh, people from all walks
[132:01] of life don't believe it, but there's an
[132:03] ideological group of people that donate
[132:06] a lot of money and that are incredibly
[132:08] powerful and they are really pushing
[132:10] this. They're pushing troops and they're
[132:13] pushing nukes,
[132:15] >> or non, you know, unconventional weapons
[132:17] like crazy bombing campaigns. They're
[132:19] pushing troops on the ground. They don't
[132:22] care what it takes. Iran has to be
[132:25] either completely destroyed or it's just
[132:28] got to be a chaos zone, but for the
[132:31] regional ambitions of Israel, they can't
[132:34] it can't exist. So, I mean, again, and
[132:36] not in a paranoid conspiratorial way
[132:38] because I don't like the victim stuff
[132:39] either, as a bunch of people in America
[132:41] being like, I can't get ahead because
[132:43] Jewish people are successful. I think
[132:45] that's a stupid road to go down. That's
[132:46] a victim road. I hate that. I hate it. I
[132:49] hate it when gay people do it or anyone,
[132:51] any group of people. I hate when they
[132:54] drench themselves in victimhood. I think
[132:56] when you become a victim, you lose
[132:57] autonomy over your life. It's insane.
[133:00] But I do think there's a fair there's a
[133:02] fair question to ask about what is, you
[133:06] know,
[133:08] what is the motive of of
[133:12] certain massive big donors? Is the
[133:14] motive the strength and prosperity of
[133:17] America or is it the strength and
[133:20] prosperity of Israel? That's a fair
[133:22] question.
[133:23] >> Yeah. And like what about the rest of
[133:26] the world? Like how how much are we
[133:30] putting ourselves at odds with the rest
[133:32] of the world? Indescribably
[133:36] the worst PR ever. And you know, people
[133:41] cannot
[133:43] justify, you know, you've got to be a
[133:45] very ideological person to justify,
[133:50] you know, southern Lebanon,
[133:52] Gaza, Iran, perhaps Turkey. This is
[133:55] starting to feel like this is like a
[133:57] friend you have who you make excuses for
[134:00] for a certain amount of time and then
[134:01] your wife eventually goes, "They're not
[134:03] allowed here. You can't go out with
[134:05] them. They've they're a problem. They
[134:07] have a [ __ ] up home life. I know
[134:10] they're fun. I know you share values. I
[134:13] know they enjoy each other. You've known
[134:14] each other for a long time. But here's
[134:17] the deal. They're not coming to the
[134:18] house and they can't be around the kids
[134:20] because they, you know, that's what it's
[134:22] coming down to.
[134:23] >> Well, it's even worse than that. The the
[134:24] the thing that drives me crazy is the
[134:26] negotiators. When they get negotiators,
[134:28] then they wind up whacking them.
[134:29] >> They kill all the negotiators and then
[134:31] Trump, stop killing the negotiators.
[134:34] >> Yeah. And I mean,
[134:35] >> stop bombing Lebanon. Is this Iran deal
[134:37] going to work? Is it going to work? You
[134:39] know, stop bombing Lebanon. I I think
[134:42] we're at an odds now. We're we're in the
[134:44] in in the last two years, we are now
[134:46] it's we're at odds with Israel for the
[134:50] first time where Trump is really at odds
[134:51] with them and he's had enough. And I
[134:53] think he is starting to understand that
[134:56] his legacy will be permanently tainted
[134:59] if he doesn't find a way to extricate us
[135:01] from this war. And I think on on on the
[135:04] other side and that's and and Vance
[135:06] again for all the disagreements I might
[135:08] have with Vance about certain things um
[135:12] he is the one of the only people in that
[135:15] administration who does push against
[135:18] the continuation of this war which is
[135:21] why a lot of those neoonservative donors
[135:24] try to destroy him because of that. I
[135:27] don't love his tech alliances. There's a
[135:28] lot of things I don't like about him,
[135:30] but there's a lot of things I think are
[135:31] good about him. I think there's and and
[135:33] it's not like I don't like about him per
[135:35] se. I worry about,
[135:38] >> you know, some of his relationships.
[135:41] >> How many how many of these relationships
[135:42] you think are like necess necessary for
[135:44] survival? I'm sure all of them are and
[135:47] that doesn't mean and they but they
[135:48] still need to be criticized and looked
[135:50] at and they 100%
[135:52] >> not not justifying it at all but I'm
[135:53] saying I I have a feeling like no
[135:56] completely autonomous person is ever
[135:59] going to make it through that maze.
[136:00] >> Never. Never. But I think the job is you
[136:03] turn the heat up enough
[136:05] where maybe if they everyone's going to
[136:07] do 10 horrible things, they do two,
[136:09] >> right?
[136:10] So, I think it's it's certainly the job
[136:13] of anyone who looks at this stuff to
[136:15] look at it and go, "Yeah, what is going
[136:17] on? What is happening?" But I will say
[136:20] for all of the tech, you know, things
[136:21] that I find a little, you know, it's a
[136:23] little like, what? I do I do think that
[136:26] to his credit, he's the only one in
[136:29] there. And you can tell, and it's not
[136:32] that I
[136:34] have some inside knowledge, they're only
[136:36] attack he's being attacked the most.
[136:38] >> Mhm. by the people that want the war to
[136:40] continue. Yeah.
[136:41] >> And I think he knows his political
[136:43] ambitions will be completely destroyed
[136:45] by a continuation of this war. So I look
[136:49] at all these people not as human beings
[136:51] even though they are human beings, but I
[136:53] look at them as like they're running the
[136:55] show, they're running the country. So
[136:57] they all have ambitions and it's hard to
[136:59] know their hearts or heads or how they
[137:01] feel from one day to the next.
[137:03] >> It's very difficult. So, I think when
[137:04] you look at them, you look at them and
[137:05] you go, "Yeah, he's a he's calculated
[137:09] and ambitious, but he also is the one
[137:12] being attacked by people that want the
[137:15] war to continue." Tucker Carlson, who
[137:18] again, I have agreements with Tucker. I
[137:20] have disagreements with Tucker. He The
[137:22] attacks on him are insane. The attacks
[137:24] on Megan Kelly are wild because of this
[137:28] issue. It's not a myriad of issues. It's
[137:31] this issue. Yeah, undoubtedly. And it's
[137:35] weird. It's weird because it's so
[137:37] transparent. It's so transparent and the
[137:40] the whole world is seeing it play out
[137:42] and it's like the amount of gaslighting
[137:45] that you have to keep pumping.
[137:47] Yeah. It's it's not sustainable.
[137:49] >> Well, to say that this was not in the
[137:51] interest this was in America's interest,
[137:53] you have to do you have to
[137:55] >> you have to jump around logically so
[137:59] much. Well, this is also the problem
[138:00] with the justification of what happened
[138:02] in Gaza. When people will try to say
[138:04] Israel, like Gad was saying, they
[138:06] they're doing the best they can. Like
[138:10] look at the drone footage. Fly over
[138:11] that. That's the best you can do. That's
[138:13] crazy.
[138:14] >> Like it's better. Is that better than a
[138:15] nuke? Cuz I don't think it is. It's like
[138:17] it's it's inhumane.
[138:18] >> It looks like the damage of a nuke just
[138:20] spread out over two years instead of one
[138:22] blast.
[138:23] >> It's inhumane. It's evil. It's children
[138:26] being killed. It's mothers being killed
[138:28] in front of their children. And by the
[138:29] way, October 7th was inhumane, but I
[138:31] shouldn't have to keep doing that.
[138:33] >> Of course, you shouldn't have to do
[138:34] that. But it's also October 7th, you
[138:36] know, the people that got killed, those
[138:37] are the ravers, right? So those are the
[138:39] people that were anti-Netanyahu.
[138:42] Those are not the people that were
[138:43] >> They also killed I I think probably a
[138:45] lot of like m they dragged people out of
[138:47] their houses.
[138:47] >> Oh, they killed a ton of people
[138:50] situation there.
[138:51] >> Like it's also like why did it take so
[138:53] long to respond to that? Well, this is
[138:55] another very interesting, very important
[138:58] question.
[138:59] >> Yeah.
[139:00] >> Because there's a lot of people that say
[139:03] it's a state the size of New Jersey and
[139:07] the security failures are they're
[139:09] they're pretty wild and there hasn't
[139:11] been a real investigation into them and
[139:14] Netanyahu's kind of prevented that and
[139:17] they've kind of made it illegal to
[139:18] question that in Israel. Like people
[139:20] were like writing about that and going,
[139:22] "What the hell is going on?" But like
[139:23] it's illegal. Well, there was they've
[139:25] made a law and you can look this up
[139:28] about things like this in Israel because
[139:31] during wartime they haven't had an Have
[139:33] they had an election?
[139:34] >> No.
[139:35] >> Since October 7th?
[139:36] >> No.
[139:37] >> Right.
[139:39] >> Right. They haven't had an election
[139:41] >> because of the war. Right.
[139:42] >> Right. And the Ukraine hasn't had an
[139:44] Nobody has had an election. So if I'm
[139:46] living in a country and the leader of my
[139:48] country just wants to be in a war
[139:50] forever, there's no democracy. Well, you
[139:53] know, Clinton said that. Clinton said
[139:55] that about Netanyahu. He said he wants
[139:57] to maintain a war. I mean, he said it
[139:59] openly in an interview,
[140:00] >> right?
[140:02] >> And then a nice chubby intern showed up.
[140:06] >> Oh, I wish.
[140:07] >> And a nice
[140:07] >> I wish I could go back intern
[140:12] was around. He was the first guy to go
[140:14] viral.
[140:15] >> So, I mean, that's the thing. You don't
[140:16] you don't have elections. You don't have
[140:18] people looking into things. And by the
[140:20] way, that's not the only thing that
[140:21] should be looked into. Look into Butler.
[140:23] Look at everything,
[140:24] >> right?
[140:25] >> Where are the 9/11 docks? What happened?
[140:27] Can we know? Why can't we know anything?
[140:30] >> What? Why can't we know anything?
[140:34] >> Yeah.
[140:35] >> You know, this is all of it. It's like
[140:37] release all We're all adults. Release
[140:39] it. Let's see what happened. I'm sure
[140:42] it's fine. I'm sure no one did anything
[140:44] naughty.
[140:44] >> I think this is all kind of breaking
[140:46] though. And I think that one of the
[140:48] breaking one of the things that's
[140:49] happening with AI is like all these
[140:51] things that they are protecting us from.
[140:54] They're we're going to find out that
[140:55] stuff.
[140:56] >> Well, here's the thing. I mean, I met
[140:57] you in 2019.
[140:59] I The first time I met you was 2018. Big
[141:02] Jay Oerson was opening for you in
[141:03] Toronto.
[141:04] >> Oh, wow.
[141:05] >> Yeah. Um but then I met you in 2019 and
[141:08] that's what six years ago, seven years
[141:10] ago.
[141:10] >> Mhm.
[141:12] There were cracks of it breaking then,
[141:15] but almost invisible like you couldn't
[141:18] see them. Now you have fullon
[141:22] like huge sink holes opening into the
[141:27] reality that most people have accepted
[141:29] for their entire life.
[141:30] >> Yes. Big.
[141:32] >> Yeah. Big.
[141:33] >> Big. And you see like this Tulsi Gabbard
[141:36] this press release that she did this
[141:39] conference where she's talking about
[141:40] Fouchy and did and all.
[141:42] >> Yeah.
[141:42] >> All that there's there's we're getting
[141:45] information now that we're
[141:47] >> getting information
[141:47] >> that let us know that the entire system
[141:50] has been completely corrupted for a long
[141:53] [ __ ] time.
[141:54] >> For a very long time. And it won't
[141:56] survive. It clearly can't survive the
[141:59] way we're in. Is it $40 trillion worth
[142:02] of debt?
[142:04] >> It's close,
[142:04] >> right?
[142:05] >> It was at 39.
[142:06] >> No one thinks that's getting paid back.
[142:08] >> Yeah. Who do we owe it to? Tell them to
[142:10] go [ __ ] off.
[142:10] >> Right. So, we have a lot of China, but
[142:13] like no one thinks that's getting paid
[142:15] back. The dollar is the world's reserve
[142:17] currency seems to have a limited amount
[142:20] of time. I I don't know, but this is
[142:22] what's discussed. Um, no. I mean, how
[142:25] does this system survive this level of
[142:28] information? people are not going to
[142:30] >> Do you think that this whole race to AI
[142:33] this like Manhattan Project style race
[142:35] that's going on right now like the
[142:37] future of whatever the United States is
[142:39] kind of depends on us getting there
[142:41] first
[142:44] >> right
[142:44] >> I think part of
[142:45] >> if we don't get there first then it's
[142:47] probably a wrap if you really thought
[142:49] about it like if China gets there first
[142:51] >> if control of resources and everything
[142:54] shut off like whatever how what if it's
[142:56] weaponized
[142:57] >> my worry is that in the guise of
[143:00] fighting China, we're going to become
[143:02] China,
[143:02] >> right? Yeah.
[143:04] >> You know, so I I would take the
[143:05] government a lot more seriously if they
[143:06] weren't, you know, potentially having
[143:08] like like saying Palanteer should merge
[143:10] all these different government
[143:11] databases.
[143:13] >> So your health data and your criminal
[143:14] justice data and your tax data all
[143:17] merges. And who's doing that, Palanteer?
[143:19] So you go and then they go, "Well,
[143:20] China's got a credit score." Well, what
[143:22] the hell is that?
[143:23] >> Right?
[143:24] >> What the hell is this?
[143:26] >> What? Right? So when Vance comes out and
[143:27] he goes, "I'm worried about a credit
[143:28] score." It's like, "Okay, hey, buddy.
[143:31] Me, too.
[143:33] What the hell's this?" So, it's a little
[143:36] bit of gaslighting in that sense, too.
[143:38] They're like, "If China gets all this
[143:40] stuff, you're all going to it'll we
[143:42] lose." And you go, "Okay." So, it's
[143:44] almost like China will enslave you. Let
[143:47] us do it first.
[143:48] >> Everyone's going to be on their best
[143:50] behavior.
[143:50] >> That's right. Everyone's going to be on
[143:52] their best behavior. We're going to be
[143:53] watching them. You heard that quote?
[143:54] >> Yeah. Everyone's going to be on their
[143:56] best behavior. This is what these the
[143:58] World Economic Group people like that
[144:00] they don't have an interest in you
[144:02] owning a house or farming land or
[144:05] starting a business or they don't have
[144:07] any interest in that there. It does not
[144:09] serve them at all. It did for a while,
[144:12] but their economic
[144:15] projection is that that's not going to
[144:17] be possible for you. So, what they're
[144:19] going to do, they're building bunkers.
[144:21] They're hoarding all the wealth and
[144:23] they're, you know, heavily invested in
[144:25] all this AI. And one of the reasons I
[144:26] think that we have to strike a deal with
[144:27] Iran is all this UAE money props up
[144:30] Hollywood, all these startups. It props
[144:33] up all the AI, a lot of it. A lot of
[144:35] that money is coming from Qatar and the
[144:37] UAE. And there and our bases are getting
[144:40] blown off the earth in those countries.
[144:41] Those countries are getting attacked
[144:42] because of this war. And they're a huge
[144:44] financeier of American startups and some
[144:47] AI startups. So, like one thing that I
[144:51] wonder about all of this is just how
[144:54] much this just does seem now to be a
[144:56] highlevel chess game
[144:58] about the the future and what is and
[145:01] isn't possible. But the only thing that
[145:04] makes me personally happy is that Jared
[145:06] Kushner and Ivanka Trump just bought an
[145:08] island.
[145:11] >> That gives
[145:12] >> the Romanian people are really excited.
[145:14] >> They're really excited. I see how they
[145:15] were celebrating. I do believe they
[145:16] burned the prime minister's house or the
[145:18] president or whoever. They just start
[145:19] lighting houses on fire. And that's
[145:21] coming, by the way. They just did it in
[145:23] Belfast. That's coming. People starting
[145:27] to light things on fires coming. That's
[145:30] coming. I'm not calling for it. I'm not
[145:32] saying it's good, but it's coming
[145:35] because voting's become fake,
[145:38] >> right?
[145:39] >> Um, no one cares.
[145:41] You know, PEOPLE ARE THREADS.
[145:44] IT'S FAKE.
[145:46] It's fake. It's so obvious. It's fake.
[145:51] X.
[145:52] IT'S all fake. So the only get and you
[145:55] know what? AGAIN, I'M NOT CALLING for
[145:56] it. IT'S BAD. BUT FIRE is real.
[146:07] If you ask the people at Palage or
[146:09] Malibu and whatever RIP, I like the
[146:11] Palisad that stupid mall. I liked it.
[146:13] But this is real. People are going to
[146:15] start realizing that this all this
[146:17] technology has just been set up to give
[146:19] you this idea that you have some effect.
[146:22] And all the while Jared and Ivanka just
[146:24] go buy an island. That's what's
[146:27] happening.
[146:30] But maybe it's fine.
[146:31] >> Have you gotten any invites to any
[146:32] bunkers?
[146:33] >> No. No, they're not.
[146:36] >> Do you think you'd feel differently if
[146:37] you did?
[146:38] >> I don't know. I would
[146:39] >> I know you've had invites to do
[146:41] interesting things. I've had invites to
[146:42] Teal and I've said no because I would I
[146:45] think you know he'd probably sit me down
[146:48] and go, "Listen to me, you fat [ __ ]
[146:51] You're gonna shut your mouth." And I'd
[146:53] sit there and I'd go, "No, I think it's
[146:56] I think if they were going to invite me,
[146:58] someone goes, this is the guy who
[146:59] dressed up as Christy Gnome's husband
[147:01] with fake tits."
[147:03] And they go, "We can't have him here."
[147:04] But by the way, absolutely. If somebody
[147:07] said to me, "A few people are going to
[147:08] survive and it's just going to be you
[147:10] and these people and everybody else is
[147:12] going to die."
[147:13] >> It's tough. How fun would it be, though?
[147:16] Is it fun? Is it fun if the whole world
[147:19] dies and I'm just sitting and having
[147:21] dinner with JD Vance and his wife?
[147:27] I mean, is that the f with Peter Teal,
[147:29] me and Usha and Jay just eating steak?
[147:32] >> Yeah. I mean, is that is that what we
[147:34] want? I don't know.
[147:36] >> Probably not.
[147:37] >> Probably not. What's the best case
[147:39] scenario? The best case scenario is a
[147:42] new era of enlightened people and
[147:43] enlightened thinking and soulfulness and
[147:47] spirituality and a and a and a healthy
[147:49] attachment to technology and religion
[147:51] and you know people's people's you know
[147:55] a common kind of a sense of morality and
[147:59] togetherness and love for community
[148:01] that's not enforced by governments,
[148:04] corporations and armies.
[148:09] I'm not betting on that, but that would
[148:11] be good.
[148:13] >> Well, there's a battle, right?
[148:15] >> Yeah, there is a battle.
[148:15] >> It's not it's it's not like one side is
[148:19] clearly going to win. We're moving in a
[148:21] very weird direction of uncertainty, but
[148:24] humans today are way better at being
[148:27] people, way kinder and nicer despite all
[148:30] our problems than we have ever been in
[148:32] the past.
[148:33] >> Yeah. Society is generally, at least in
[148:35] first world countries, safer than it's
[148:38] ever been in the past.
[148:39] >> Yeah.
[148:39] >> And it's also there's more opportunity
[148:43] to do things now because of technology
[148:46] that's ever existed before. So, but this
[148:48] it's not worse, but it's not moving in
[148:52] the best direction possible. Like, if
[148:54] you had to choose between living today,
[148:56] the way we're living now, or living in
[148:58] 1976 in San Francisco, I'd be like, "Go
[149:00] [ __ ] yourself. I don't want to shitty
[149:02] breaks and live with these [ __ ]
[149:03] people that don't know anything cuz no
[149:05] one has the internet. [ __ ] that.
[149:06] >> You You're better off living today. The
[149:09] communication.
[149:09] >> Then you you would go see Janice
[149:11] Choplain,
[149:12] >> right?
[149:12] >> And you'd be smoking weed and a burrito
[149:15] would be 50 cents and then you would go
[149:18] into a park and [ __ ] and then die.
[149:22] >> And it might not be as bad as one
[149:26] thinks. And who knows? I didn't live
[149:27] during that time. So I'm sure there was
[149:29] a lot of pitfalls. you get stabbed,
[149:30] whatever. Like, New York was more
[149:33] culturally interesting when there was
[149:35] crime. I'm against there being crime
[149:37] because New York couldn't have existed.
[149:40] It It can't be 1983 in New York. Now,
[149:42] >> Times Square is a mall. Time Square
[149:44] right now is a TGI Fridays,
[149:47] >> but it used to be chaos.
[149:49] >> Used to be chaos, but it can't be chaos
[149:51] forever. But again, in that city, do you
[149:53] get the Ramones? Do you get
[149:55] >> all of that stuff? Probably not. No,
[149:58] >> probably not.
[149:59] >> No, you need some chaos for art for
[150:01] sure. You don't get chaos. You don't get
[150:03] chaos from TGI Fridays. You don't get
[150:06] that kind of chaos.
[150:07] >> But I do think that there's a time for
[150:08] certain things and there's an inertia
[150:10] that moves certain things forward.
[150:11] Meaning like it would be crazy to think
[150:13] about New York in the 80s today.
[150:17] Like no one's built for that life today,
[150:19] >> right?
[150:20] >> No one's even built for that. Like one
[150:21] of the reasons that wars don't work
[150:22] anymore is we're just not built for it.
[150:24] We're not built used to be built for
[150:26] war. People used to be built for war.
[150:27] They were built to like just be like,
[150:29] "Yeah, I'm somebody calls me and I just
[150:30] go die." You know, there's like a
[150:32] petition on the door and it's like,
[150:34] "Report here. We're going to war."
[150:35] People were built for Nobody's built for
[150:37] that now. People don't file complaints
[150:39] with Door Dash. I filed complaints.
[150:41] >> 1981, Rolling Stone magazine called West
[150:44] 42nd Street, located in the heart of
[150:45] Time Square as the sleaziest block in
[150:48] America.
[150:49] >> Yeah.
[150:49] >> Now it's probably prime real estate.
[150:52] >> Yeah. I mean, listen, there's there's
[150:53] parts of it that are, you know, it's all
[150:55] prime real estate there, whether people
[150:57] like it or not. It's not necessarily,
[151:00] you know, better. It's better because
[151:02] it's safer, but it's worse because it's
[151:04] safer. Nothing's all one thing.
[151:08] Nothing's all one thing. There's still
[151:10] great art there. There's still great
[151:11] music and comedy and theater and all
[151:13] that stuff. Is it as good as it was? No.
[151:16] No.
[151:18] But again, it's just because the people
[151:20] that that that are are are doing it are
[151:23] amazing and they're and they're and
[151:25] they're talented, but like culture is so
[151:28] decentralized now and fractures. It's
[151:30] nothing can stay cool. everything that
[151:33] pop. You know what's depressing me about
[151:34] New York is it's become like it's become
[151:37] a place where people just go on
[151:38] Instagram and post a you know when you
[151:41] used to go to dinner in New York City
[151:42] you would eat French food or food you
[151:43] could never make it home you've never
[151:45] even seen you didn't hear they would
[151:46] treat you like [ __ ] it was fun. Now you
[151:49] go to these places cuz Taylor Swift went
[151:51] there you have like they they just do
[151:52] like a high-end version of like a
[151:54] Totino's pizza roll. They put truffle
[151:56] oil on it. Here's a French dip. Here's a
[151:58] burger. People with their burger. It's
[152:00] just a basic [ __ ] mall city now. That's
[152:02] really what it's become. That doesn't
[152:04] mean there's not a lot of psychopaths
[152:06] there making lots of money and good for
[152:07] them. But it's becoming a suburban city.
[152:11] It's a city where people talk about
[152:13] chicken salad. It's a city where people
[152:14] go to Wegman's. It's just a different
[152:16] city. It's Pilates and toddlers. It's
[152:19] all great. It's fine. I don't want to
[152:20] see people getting shanked, but it's not
[152:22] what it was. It's just not what it was.
[152:24] It doesn't have that same magic. And
[152:26] nothing does. LA does. Nothing really
[152:28] does. And it and it won't come back.
[152:31] No, I don't think it's coming back. And
[152:33] I don't know if that's good or bad. If I
[152:34] live there, I mean, who knows what the
[152:36] [ __ ] going to happen now with mom
[152:37] Donnie as mayor. I mean, that'll that
[152:40] weirdness where what is that guy's name?
[152:42] Ken Griffin. The guy the billionaire guy
[152:44] who's in front of his apartment. Yeah.
[152:46] >> Billionaire guy lives here. He's got so
[152:48] much money. We're going to take it.
[152:49] >> Well, they tax him.
[152:50] >> Well, here's the thing. It's all fake.
[152:52] It's all fake. Mom Donniey's Trump. He's
[152:54] smart. He's sharp. He's good-looking and
[152:56] young. He just It's all crap. It's
[152:59] YouTube. It's like, look, billionaire
[153:00] guy. Ken Griffin's in Palm Beach
[153:02] building a house worth a billion
[153:04] dollars. You're not going to do anything
[153:05] to Ken Griffin. You're a city employee.
[153:09] The mayor is fake. Like, it's like he'll
[153:11] raise taxes maybe if he can get it done,
[153:13] but he can't. It'll get dirtier. Crime
[153:16] will go up or it won't. It's kind of
[153:18] whatever.
[153:20] It It's just not, you know, I I think
[153:22] it's not it's it's more just the
[153:24] corporations rule and guys like him.
[153:27] It's like Bernie Sanders. He's the
[153:28] version of the socialist you get. What
[153:30] does it even mean? He has a bunch of
[153:32] military-industrial complex jobs in
[153:33] Vermont. Sweetheart of a man, but has
[153:36] not gotten one goddamn thing for 30
[153:37] years.
[153:38] >> Worth millions. Has three homes.
[153:39] >> Worth millions. Has three. The Clinton
[153:40] sandbag him because they're working for
[153:42] God only knows who. The Goldman Sachs
[153:44] and the devil. And
[153:47] And he goes and says, "Hillary's great.
[153:49] They're all great. It's all great. The
[153:51] system's fine. I lost." He got
[153:52] sandbagged like twice. And he doesn't
[153:55] and he doesn't burn it to the ground.
[153:57] won't burn it to the ground because
[153:58] that's the version of a socialist you
[154:00] get in America. And I'm not even like a
[154:02] socialist, but I'm saying like that's
[154:03] clearly this is to you throw the bone to
[154:05] plate someone.
[154:06] >> It's also they're playing a game and his
[154:08] game is to stay relevant. Keep being a
[154:10] politician. Keep being a senator from
[154:12] Vermont.
[154:14] >> You stay there forever. Everybody loves
[154:15] you. Ben and Jerry's. Yay.
[154:16] >> Vermont is a lily white state
[154:20] >> uh of of
[154:21] >> frozen people. of frozen people and it's
[154:23] just a bunch of lesbians and I think
[154:25] Alec Baldwin now cuz he shot someone.
[154:27] >> Does he live there now?
[154:28] >> I think he does but I don't know. And I
[154:31] like him. Shout out to him. We've all
[154:33] moved on.
[154:36] But I think, you know, Sanders is doing
[154:38] what he has to do to please that
[154:40] demographic of people.
[154:42] >> What do you think happens in 2028?
[154:44] >> I think I think the donors want Rubio,
[154:47] but Rubio is kind of a buffoon.
[154:49] >> Why do they want Rubio? because he's not
[154:51] Vance is more isolationist than Rubio
[154:53] and I think Vance is more in league with
[154:55] the tech people whereas Rubio
[154:58] maybe the central banking cartels of
[155:00] intergenerational pools of capital that
[155:02] are more invested in the war industry
[155:04] and might be slightly more aligned with
[155:05] Israel like Rubio like there are
[155:08] different fftfts of the super rich I
[155:10] think the tech guys are relatively new
[155:12] not that they don't get involved in war
[155:13] of course they do but it's not all hunky
[155:16] dory you know if you had a banking
[155:17] empire for years and centuries and
[155:19] you're like now all these new tech [ __ ]
[155:21] are here and you're like what is this
[155:23] and you're like we make our money with
[155:24] war and so do the tech people by the way
[155:26] but they have other ways to make money.
[155:28] Um
[155:30] so I I do think Vance will get the
[155:32] nomination. I don't think Rubio I used
[155:33] to think it would be Rubio but I've
[155:36] watched Rubio recently more and I don't
[155:40] think Rubio he's he's he's just he's too
[155:43] buff it's a I can't take him seriously.
[155:47] I don't know why
[155:49] >> Trump again suggests a Vance Rubio 2028
[155:52] presidential ticket or perhaps Rubio
[155:54] Vance.
[155:54] >> So this it'll probably be those two.
[155:57] >> Interesting.
[155:58] >> But do you think that people are going
[156:00] to want to buy into another Republican
[156:02] party?
[156:02] >> No. No, it'll be a Democrat. I think
[156:04] it'll be a Democrat. It'll
[156:05] >> Who do you think wins?
[156:06] >> I don't know. I think it's somebody that
[156:07] we don't know who it is yet. I think
[156:09] it's somebody that we don't know who it
[156:10] is. I think I don't think it's Newsome.
[156:11] I don't think it's AOC. I think it's
[156:13] somebody that comes from a red state
[156:15] who's a Democrat governor, a purple
[156:16] state, who we don't know who they are
[156:18] yet. They pop up, they're boring. I
[156:20] think we need boring. I think a boring
[156:23] person's going to come in and just be
[156:26] like, "Hey, I'm the president."
[156:28] >> Reasonable.
[156:29] >> The show's over. Michelle Obama's a
[156:31] woman. And then a lot a few you'll hear
[156:33] some of the country go
[156:36] >> because Trump's a drug and you got to
[156:38] detox from that. And this whole last
[156:40] decade has been a drug. It's been the
[156:41] craziest decade that I've been alive. I
[156:43] remember sitting with you on election
[156:45] night. I remember me, you and Alex
[156:46] sitting down. I remember all these
[156:47] things where we're watching these crazy
[156:50] point. I remember the I remember when
[156:52] when Trump was shot. I remember, you
[156:53] know, tragically when Charlie Kirk was
[156:54] shot. I remember all of these things
[156:56] that have happened that are just so
[156:58] crazy and now seem so far away and like
[157:03] they're so far in the past.
[157:06] >> Gavin Newsome is
[157:06] >> they like this guy John Oaf.
[157:08] >> Who's that guy? Uh, I just looked him
[157:10] up. I didn't know either. He's a
[157:12] youngest incumbent senator out of
[157:14] Georgia.
[157:14] >> Yeah, he's having a moment. You just
[157:17] nailed it. You just nailed it.
[157:18] >> He could be him. Look at him. There he
[157:19] goes.
[157:20] >> That looks like a president.
[157:21] >> Just put him in. Okay.
[157:23] >> Yeah. His neck is medium. It's not too
[157:26] thin.
[157:27] >> It's not too thick. He's got that face.
[157:29] >> Terrio's neck is a little too small.
[157:31] >> Yeah.
[157:31] >> Yeah. Yeah. I' I've Yeah, that's true.
[157:34] >> A little bit more square jawed.
[157:36] Conservative Georgia radio host endorses
[157:40] John Osaf for US Senate.
[157:41] >> If they want to win, they they just have
[157:43] to go, "Hey, everybody remember
[157:45] healthcare. Don't you want that?"
[157:47] >> Is he uh Republican?
[157:50] >> Democrat.
[157:51] >> He's a Democrat.
[157:52] >> He's a Democrat, but he's going to LAR
[157:54] as a Republican in the same way that
[157:55] Spencer Pratt's like, "I'm actually a
[157:57] Democrat."
[157:58] >> You know what I mean?
[158:01] >> Worked as a national security staffer.
[158:03] >> Yeah. He's a spook. Put him in. Who
[158:05] cares? It's fake at this point. We all
[158:08] know it's fake. How much more evidence
[158:10] does anyone need?
[158:12] >> Jesus Christ, Tim Dylan. Sorry.
[158:14] >> I'm glad you're out there.
[158:15] >> I'm glad you you have me in here.
[158:17] >> Your podcast rules.
[158:18] >> Thank you, brother. I really appreciate
[158:20] it.
[158:20] >> It's such a great escape.
[158:21] >> Thank you.
[158:22] >> It's It's so beautiful because the just
[158:24] the way you're able to
[158:26] >> just combine reality with humor is very
[158:29] rare.
[158:30] >> Well, thank you, dude. I appreciate it.
[158:32] It's very It's It's a very unusual thing
[158:34] you're doing. It's very insightful
[158:35] political commentary and social
[158:37] commentary mixed in with hilarious takes
[158:40] on things that's very nihilist.
[158:42] >> Well, I'll keep doing it until I'm put
[158:44] in a jail.
[158:46] >> Thank you, brother.
[158:47] >> Appreciate it.
[158:47] >> Appreciate you. Bye, everybody.
