saaks you ready you got your quick time going oh yeah let me do that real quick and just a quick note saak Mr Kennedy doesn't have earpieces in so he we just have to be careful of the Cross talk we're talking over each other I'll direct uh questions to each person and then follow-ups you can obviously just use your judgment of when to insert yourself but be uh be gentle on the insertion there because we don't want
that came out wrong um just be uh be gentle when you interrupt God there's your cold open at least if you did it incorrectly it'll be quick okay here we go in three two let your winners ride Rainman David and instead we open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with [Music] it all right everybody Welcome to the all-in podcast as many of you know this podcast has gotten quite popular over the last two years typically in the top
10 or 20 each week and we talk about politics we've got a big following in DC and why are you calling me self-absorbed Cham I me listen to how your co-host opens his show calm down everybody it's okay yeah yeah and as part of that our ongoing discussions about politics and presidential candidates has resonated in particular communities and today we are lucky enough to have one of the top presidential hopefuls in the
2024 election joining us uh Robert Kennedy Jr and we will be inviting all presidential candidates to come on to the all-in podcast and have candid uh discussions that are unfiltered the way the audience would expect them we're going to play with different formats but we decided for this first one we've got a series of topics we'd like to cover and we're going to treat it like any other all-in podcast with that I'll have David Sachs
who has is the most conservative of our panel who has been also the most enthusiastic I think of every every body here uh and one of the most enthusiastic supporters of Robert Kennedy Jr's pursuit of the presidency of the United States so with that Dave would you like to introduce Our Guest yeah let me give uh Bobby a proper introduction here so Robert Francis Kennedy Jr is entering the political Arena as a candidate for
the first time at the age of 69 but it's perhaps no exaggeration to say that he was destined for the mission he is now pursuing he is the nephew of President John F Kennedy and the son of attorney general and Senator Robert F Kennedy when Bobby was 14 his dad was running for president on a platform of civil rights civil liberties lifting Americans out of poverty and opposing the Vietnam War he had just won the California
primary when he was tragically assassinated RFK Jr graduated from Harvard and the University of Virginia law school and became an environmental lawyer who aggressively litigated against corporate polluters and government agencies that were failing to regulate them he has always put the health and safety of the American people at the forfront of his activism and this has made him controversial at times as he has questioned the safety of some
pharmaceutical products and also criticize Co restrictions during the pandemic for this the mainstream media has tried to paint him as a quote conspiracy theorist but given that so many conspiracy theories about Co have been Vindicated tablet magazine wrote quote at this point the fact that Robert F Kennedy is the country's leading conspiracy theorist alone qualifies him to be president but the biggest reason
why I think his candidacy is so interesting and relevant is that it hearkens back to a Democratic party that believed in peace instead of War free speech and civil liberties in of censorship building up the middle class
instead of the donor class and opposing corporate greed especially in the military-industrial complex which is a message you just don't hear much anymore coming from the Democratic side of the aisle so with that Bobby Kennedy welcome
to the program thank you so much for having me so maybe we could start with foreign policy something we've discussed here specifically the Ukraine and Russia's invasion of Ukraine and our support of that war saak would you like to tea up a question for Mr Kennedy I think Bobby's tweets on the subject show that he has a really deep understanding of it he's been saying a lot of the things that I've been saying since the
beginning of the war which it it not just the fact that we're risking World War III over you know getting involved in a in a country that isn't a treaty Ally of the United States it's never been a vital interest the United States but I think your critique goes deeper because you actually understand the causes of how this war started so maybe you know Bobby you could speak to that how how did we end up in this proxy war
with with Russia from from your standpoint well you know F first of all I would let me start by saying this I supported the humanitarian Aid to the to the Ukraine which is what we were told initially was the was the mission although I had I was suspicious of it and you know my son as as I've mentioned actually went over left law school did not tell us where he was going and went over and joined the Foreign Legion um and fought in the k um
uh offensive with a Special Forces Group he was served as a machine gunner he was in engagements with the Russians and but he feels the same way essentially that I do that this is no longer a humanitarian mission that are all the decisions the United States have made made has made since since the start has been about have been about prolonging the war about maximizing the the violence of the war um and being absolutely in
transigent against the many opportunities to actually settle the war if and and that my understanding of the war is that not that zinski is pushing this war as hard as he can but that the neocons in the White House want this war they want regime change with the Russians they want to exhaust the Russian armies this is what uh defense secretary Lloyd Austin said in 2022 our objective is to exhaust and degrade
Russian forces so they cannot fight anywhere else in the world um and President Biden acknowledged that one of his objectives in the war is regime Chang in Russia removing Vladimir Putin well if those are the objectives that is the opp of a humanitarian mission that is a mission to maximize casualties to prolong the war it's essentially a war of attrition and that's what we're seeing and the brunt of this is being
paid by the flower of Ukrainian youth there have been over 300,000 this is something that the US government and the Ukrainian government have worked hard to hide the number of casualties which has been catastrophic this is the most
violent conflict since World War II that's taken place probably any in the world and the casualties are enormous all over 300,000 Ukrainian dead the Russians are killing Ukrainian depending on who you believe at a ratio of
5:1 to 8:1 which was the seven to one in the in the recently recently leaked The Whistleblower leaked um Pentagon documents and the the Russians cannot lose this war we're being told they're losing they cannot afford to lose this War this is existential for them and they have been building up their forces they have a 10 to1 artillery advantage on us and this is an artillery War it's simply and we do not have the artillery
to replace what we've lost up there this is a war that is preceding in a very cataclysmic trajectory and that the the answer to your question about how we got in this War uh goes back you a long way but I would say the the real story starts in 2014 when the US government and particularly the neocons in the White House and elsewhere uh participated and supported the overthrow violent overthrow a couet against the democratically elected
government of the Ukraine and put in a very very anti-russian government this prompted the Russians who then believe that that the US Navy was now going to be invited into the Black Sea to have a ported Crimea it prompted the Russians to preemptively invade Crimea at the same time the r the government that went came into the Ukraine began enacting a series of laws that turned the Russian populations of the Dumas region into second class
citizens they they um they illegalized essentially their culture their language and they began ultimately killing them they killed 14,000 of them and it was a it prompted a civil war in the country and the Russian uh response which was illegal I have no sympathy or um toward Vladimir Putin Vladimir Putin is a gangster and he's a thug but his uh his response in the dumb o was not irrational so I guess the question
becomes if you were elected president would you stop sending armaments to Ukraine I would immediately I I have a ceasefire and I would settle the war and I think it can be settled I don't even know I mean listen the best settlement for this war was outlined in the M Accords in 2014 the M Accords which all the European uh countries agreed upon was when they when the Russians said and the Russian people in Dumas voted to leave Russia and
Russia did not want them Russia said no let's develop an accord an agreement which would make Dumas a an autonomous region within the Ukraine which would agree to not put missile systems in Ukraine NATO missile systems which would agree that Ukraine would not join NATO if zinsky says no I want to keep fighting would you stop sending us weapons I would settle this I would settle this war the Ukraine cannot fight
without us support So then at some point you would tell zilinski if I'm reading into what you're saying correctly hey settle it or out yeah yeah I would settle the war yeah do you think that we somehow allowed to believe that we would allow him into NATO meaning do you think that US foreign policy somehow almost induced this thing to happen I just want to try to understand the boundaries we have been doing integrative military exercises with the
Ukrainian military so we were actively integrating them into NATO forces there was no question that you know the one thing that Putin said from the outset this is a rline you know when my uncle was President one of the things that he said he said a couple of things he said number one the principal job of a president of the United States is to keep the nation out of war and he succeeded doing that during his term in
office he he sent 16,000 military advisers to Vietnam who were not were not authorized to participate in combat that didn't mean that some of them didn't they were not authorized and in fact that that was fewer federal troops than he sent to get James marides into the University of Mississippi so he sent fewer to Vietnam and two weeks before he died he signed a national security order ordering all of those troops home by
1965 with the first thousand to come home that month by November and he died two weeks later so and then of course Johnson came in and remanded the war and sent 250,000 troops over there which is what all my uncle's military advisers wanted him to do yeah and he stood up to them um one of the other things my uncle said and you know the anniversary of his speech at American University which is an extraordinary speech probably one of
the best in American history at Jeff Act is called called it the most important speech in American history um it was a speech to the American people and it was it's an extraordinary speech because if you read it it's asking them to put their their themselves into the shoes of the Russians and understand that the Russians bore the brunt of World War II they lost one out of every 13 Russians died in that war a third of their
country was occupied and leveled to the ground it's like he said it's as if the entire east coast of the United States to Chicago was put into rubble and he described this in detail for the American people to say you know we're all people people we're all on an arc and we need to we need to understand each other's motives and not just vilify each other and what we're seeing now is this formula vilification this narrative
that we saw with Saddam Hussein with you know Putin with every little war that we want to get into those guys are pure evil we're pure good and we're going to go rescue you know the Damsel in Distress just on that could you contrast and compare just maybe the last three or four presidents on this very narrow dimension of that of JFK's promise of what a president should be doing Bush Obama Trump and now Biden
how do you see the things that these guys have gotten right and or very wrong here on that Dimension just on that Dimension you know I've been friends with Joe Biden for many many years Joe Biden is a you know he's a go to warar guy he he was one of the strongest supporters of the Iraq War he's been suppor of every war that's come along and that you know I think that's one of the reasons that you know some of those that that portion of the
democratic party which is a very very powerful kind of King Pickers was very happy with him getting in offices that he never says no to a war I think Trump you know I liked a lot of what Trump said about foreign policy about disentangling us from this knee-jerk reaction of you know of constant Wars and that the cause that that imposes on our country what it's doing it's hollowing out our middle class uh but then Trump did a lot of
things including walking away from the you know from uh um uh the intermediate nuclear missile treaty which is was another provocation for Russia because that treaty you know we're we're putting these intermediate missile systems all along the Russian Border in Romania and Poland and you know and in in uh Ukraine and uh and that those missiles can hit Cuba I mean can hit Moscow in a in a few minutes so there
was a very destabilizing system we all signed it and he walked away from it and now I don't think that was a I think that was another provocation we should be deescalate these provocations though you know the why it did NATO this is what George Kennan said after after you know the the the Soviet Union collapsed why do we even have NATO anymore why do we have it why do we have it unless we're going to involve the
Russians in it why don't we do a marshal plan for Russia we won the war they are the losers they admit they're the losers let they want to join the European Community let's make that easy for them let's not continue to treat them as if they're the enemy because that is a self-fulfilling prophecy and that unfortunately is what we did let's pivot then you want to contain and you would force everybody to the table to a
resolution if I'm understanding correctly you weren't explicit in terms of would you remove support but I think we can infer from it you would have a point at which you would stop sending armaments to Ukraine we have tremendous moral pressure and economic pressure and everything else on Ukraine how about this Jason I mean would you be willing to take NATO expansion off the table if it helps W well Biden won't right no absolutely
why are we trying to expand we gave our word and we would not expand Nato one inch to the East and now we've gone into 13 countries you know uh it's a it is a provocation let's talk about Taiwan so we got to stay out of Wars if xiin ping decides Taiwan is strategic and he invades Taiwan what would your response be if you were elected president well my response would be to deescalate that conflict there's essentially a war party in
Washington um that is is encouraging that conflict that is druming up that conflict what I would do is I would I would deescalate it I would stop looking at it as a threat right now and and and allow the Chinese and the Taiwanese to come to their own solution about what kind of relationship they have and I think that that that if we sto our provocations toward the Chinese that that would naturally deescalate and if
China decided it's strategic and we're going in anyway would you if you were president defend Taiwan that's a question that I would not answer I'm curious why not why don't presidential candidates just answer that question because you're committing the country to a war in the future that would be probably the bloodiest war ever fought and it's not something that strategically it's not good strategy to pro pro project your your
intentions you want to leave room for negotiation you want to leave room for all kinds of movements and you want to have a debate with the American people and with Congress Biden's been clear that he would defend it right so that's
an it's an interesting Insight right there freeberg do you want talk maybe a little bit about the economy and the spending that we're seeing yeah so Robert I think my biggest question I've referenced this on the show a number of
times um is this uh extraordinary concern I have about the fiscal deficit and the debt level of the US running deficits north of a trillion dollars a year 33 trillion in total debt some people use the debt to GDP metric which you know at this point is a coing or has exceeded 130% and 52 Nations that have reached that level of debt to GDP only one of them has not had to restructure their currency or restructure their debt
payments obviously with the debt seiling approaching and some fiscal conservatives using this moment as a point to try and generate leverage I guess my biggest question for the country now and going forward is you know do we actually have the ability to pursue all of these interests on a social a geopolitical a security agenda and and do so without having either a balanced budget or a plan that says here are the boundaries
and here are the boundary conditions because in the last couple of years and particularly in the last five years we've seen almost like a bipartisan unmitigated spending spree that you know is largely driven to you know to to do what the electorate wants which is to give people stuff and giving people stuff costs money and that money has to be paid back at some point I guess how do you think about the importance of this and how do you think
about the boundary conditions that you would you know look to articulate and impose uh as you you know think about this role with respect to the the deficit spending and the debt levels for this country in terms of a boundary I I you know I would love to hear arguments about that but I um you know I we as you say I think the the Deb is now 32 trillion uh the GDP our GDP is around 25 uh trillion so that is that's just a
really alarming ratio if you look at why you know the the primary cause are our military expenditures it we're spending eight uh this year I think uh eight uh $8.4 trillion on the military budget this year um but if you throw in the homeland security and all the surveillance and security expenditures at home it's 1.11 trillion a year that's 1.1 trillion a year that is attributable to to essentially to our our you know war
mongering and I don't think we can afford to be policemen of the world anymore we have 800 bases around the world we need to start rebuilding our middle class at home we need to be responsible with our debt and we need my grandfather always said that we should make America too expensive to conquer we should make Fortress America we should arm America to the teeth at home so that no so we're too expensive to conquer and then we
should concentrate on building up our economic power and a robust middle class that's what's going to make America strong and instead of uh projecting military strength abroad we ought to be projecting our economic strength and a Marketplace of ideas and economic power I I you know right now we're borrowing six uh six billion dollars a day mainly from the Chinese and Japanese just to serve the interest on that debt that's
not a healthy thing for America to be and we got to figure out you know a way to uh impose fiscal discipline but I can't tell you exactly what my boundaries would be that's something I need to think about but how do you how do you think about that like I think non of discretionary spending you know defense is is about 800 billion non-defense is about 900 billion and then obviously there's Social Security benefits Medicare
Medicaid in order to get the budget balanced you think cutting defense would be kind of the first priority and you could kind of get there through you know approach but I I there still seems to be a big gap to me on you know given how much we're spending on how do we actually get there are we ultimately going to have to kind of change retirement benefits restructure Medicare Medicaid or are we going to raise taxes
or are we going to do all three to get to this point otherwise we have this obviously kind of NeverEnding debt spiral that that's that's going to cause a massive crisis uh whether it's not this year maybe it's in 5 years or 10 years right now it's projected Social Security will go bankrupt in 2035 203 for around that range so this is coming up fast what are we going to be cutting besides defense and or are we going to
be raising taxes to 70% do you think to kind of bridge this hole I can't answer that question any better than I already have you know I think there there is there are our targets for opportunity and the uh in the homeland security I think once we stop fighting these Wars all over the world there's a lot n less need for us to have a surveillance State at home so the real cost in the military is 1.1 trillion a year not just the 800
trillion that shows up on the book and I think those are targets for opportunity and I I can't you know I have to I need to study more the issue about how to how to get back into a balanced budget I you know one of the things I'd say disturbs me is that I don't think we should be playing Chicken in Congress about raising the debt ceiling um because I think I don't think we should mess around with the full faith and credit of
the United States particularly at this point in time one of the things that's happened in the world Bob is that there's been a couple of countries France is probably the best example that had to raise the retirement age and irrespective of the view that one has on whether that was right or wrong the Practical reality of doing it is just that when these init social safety nets were passed the average life expectancy of folks was 10
15 years less than what they are today and presumably as we keep inventing Technologies folks are going to live to 80 90 100 years on average which may seem implausible but is likely if you look at the trend I'm just curious how you think about the state of our social safety net and what has to change what would you keep the same and what has to be totally reimagined for what the world will look like in 30
or 40 years I would say it's a red line for me to touch Social Security um or Medicaid amican Medicare I think we need to take care of people particularly people who have spent their whole life paying into a system with a promise at the end and have worked hard and uh um and saved and done what they were supposed to do I don't think they you know it's right to they rug out from under them but again I this is an issue that I need to spend
more time looking at uh and studing maybe the next time I come back here a better answer for you guys I think this is my concern is uh sorry but Robert the the the comment you just made is the same comment I hear from both sides of the aisle that we can't touch Social Security Medicare Medicaid because it would be so unpopular we wouldn't get elected and that's ultimately kind of what a democracy like ours may lead to is that folks vote and elect
representatives that are going to create these systems that benefit them but in aggregate we may not be able to support those benefits over time and at scale and we may be facing that moment sooner than any of us want to and I think it's one of the more pressing issues and concerns not just for the United States but for the global economy that if the US doesn't resolve this massive hole talking about social security for
example going bankrupt in the next 12 years as one acute example of that problem set you know we may not be able to turn it around and I mean do you think that politics is set up to solve the structural economic problems that the US is now facing because so much of politics ends up leading towards what additional benefits can I provide to my uh the folks that get me elected here's the thing is we spent $8 trillion in the war in
iraq8 trillion and we got nothing for it yeah that's pretty nuts that's nuts in fact we got worse than nothing we killed more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein we killed a million Iraqis probably uh we created Isis we turned Iraq into a proxy for Iran which is exactly what we've been not trying to do for 40 years um and we drove 2 million refugees with the Iraq War in its aftermath Syria Yen and you know Pakistan and Afghanistan 2 million
refugees to Europe destabilize democracy in Europe and we go ahead so $8 trillion there we spent $16 trillion on the pandemic on the lockdown and it got again got nothing in return um so that's $24 trillion and now we're doing bank bailouts every you know couple of months of the Silicon Valley Bank the FED said that it was uh printing 300 billion doar for that made up for all of the you know deflationary um uh uh uh steps that the
Biden administration had previously taken you go to you know you go to a an American who's been working their whole life and has been promised at the end of the life that they're going to get a few bucks every month and you know I have a friend who I brought to my speech with me who who um during the sameth month that we committed another 750 million during March we sent $750 million extra to the
Ukraine we uh we cut 15 million Americans from Medicare my friend got a call from from the from the government on his cell phone a recorded call saying that your food stamps have just been cut by 90% he went from $283 a month to $25 a month so you try to feed yourself on $25 a month there are 30 million Americans who are starving right now and that to me is unacceptable and it's hard to go to people like that people who have been
honest who played by the rules who have done everything that they were supposed to do with the promise that they would be taken care of that their healthc care would been taken care of an old age you go to those people and say okay now we're going to cut food stamps and try to Fe feed yourself on $25 a month try to feed yourself for $25 a week we're telling them that and then uh and then spending 800 billion to make
a plane how you going to cut the federal budget when you're sending over 100 billion to Ukraine there's you can't you have no moral authority to do it I want to finish that by saying you know you're like tinkering in the engine room when the ship is sinking you know because you know or or switching Tech on the Titanic let's deal with the real problem let's figure out how to make this nation a nation that is really focused on taking
care of our people inside rather than saying okay well in order to pay for the Ukraine war we got to screw every American on Social Security and Medicare we've had by the way the inflation that we've created from you know from from just printing money is making my friend Key's food twice expensive so the the cost of stables in this country has raised by 76% in 2 years and now they're cutting his food stamps and bailing out
the same month $300 million the Silicon Valley Bank we gotta I mean it doesn't make any sense and having this kind of conversation how do we screw the poor to make sure that we can you know we can milk them while we're doing all of this great it's this country is acting like the alcoholic who is behind on his mortgage and who takes the milk money and goes into the bar and buys rounds for strangers you know that's what you're
dealing with that's a pretty good analogy shots everybody so let me let me ask a followup question on this dead ceiling fight which is which is a game of chicken and the the country's economy might go off a cliff in the next month because Republicans and Democrats can't agree so Biden's position is I want a clean debt cealing increase no terms on it House Republicans have passed a debt seing increase but it contains things
like a 1% cap on spending growth it claws back unspent covid-19 relief funds and it would halt Biden's student debt forgiveness plan so Robert I guess the question to you would be would you negotiate like what would your posture to House Republicans be would you be willing to negotiate because Biden is basically saying I will not negotiate at all so negotiate or not negotiate I guess that's my question to you you you
you have to negotiate I'm not sure if he's posturing you know or what they have to negotiate they have to you know they have to work out something that's good for our country and that you know and they're going to both sides are going to have to give up something we have to you know we have to put our country first and it's it's insane to play this game of with a you know with this when the stakes are so there's been a lot of
talk Robert about the Deep State the FBI doj CIA your family obviously having dealt with two tragic assassinations your father and your uncle has dealt with this firsthand in terms of just having the CIA information about these assassinations released I'm curious your position on some of the most radical proposals people have this election cycle of dismantling the FBI CIA doj AKA The Deep state do you believe there's a deep State and how
would you as president deal with this intelligence uh operation we have and and then also personally what are your personal feelings on it well um on the you know I have I you I've I have a pretty clear idea about how I would handle um the intelligence agencies and in fact my father was thinking very deeply about that at the time my father who believed his his you know first reaction when his brother was killed was
that the CIA had killed him in fact the first three calls he made on that day and you know I was home uh at the time when John mcom the CIA was right across the street from my house and so John mcom who's the CIA director you would
come to our house and swim every day after work during the Spring and summertime and my father called the CIA desk and talked to a desk officer and said did your people do this that was his first call and he called Harry
Ruiz who was a Cuban uh who was one of the Cubans who had remained friendly with my family my you know while we were surrounded by Cubans growing up because of who were Bay of Pigs refugees my father had got them freed after a year in you know in the uh Castro prisons and um and my father and mother spent a lot of time finding houses for them schools integrating them to the US military finding jobs and so we were all
raised very very closely with the Cuban Community but gradually they turned away from my family but this one Cuban who had been been an engineer had fought with Castro and then turned against him when he came became communist was very close friends with my father the second call that he made was to Harry Ruiz and he said did uh did our people meaning the CIA people do this and um and that was uh and so my father was thinking very very very
carefully about how to handle this CIA he had been you know he had been essentially managing the CIA since he came into office and he recognized that the problem and you know as I I talked about my speech and I think David on this show mentioned this that during the Bay of Pigs invasion my uncle realized that he had been lied to by by Charles gabell and Allan Dulles and Richard Bell the heads of the as well as his Joint Chiefs and
he came out in the middle of the invasion when it turned against them and he realized these these men were being killed on the beach and he said I want to take the CIA and shattered into a thousand pieces and Scatter it to the wind so he recognized that the function of the intelligence agencies had devolved and that they were they had become captive of the military industrial complex and the military
contractors and their uh their function was essentially to provide our nation with a constant pipeline of new Wars to feed the military industrial complex and the growth of the surveillance state and my father when he ran for president Pete Hamill who was one of his favorite um newsmen asked him on the boss during two weeks before he died asked him what what he was going to do about the CIA and he said what we need to do is to we we need
to remove the Espionage division Espionage Branch from the plans division the plans division of the CIA is essentially the dirty tricks um provision that's the the division the action uh division they do the assassinations they fix elections they do paramilitary operations Black Ops torture black sites all of that stuff the Espionage Division and CIA was originally set up by Cuba by Truman as an Espionage agency Espionage means
information gathering and Analysis it's not violence it's about information acquisition and unfortunately the the uh the clandestine action division was wagging the Espionage dog so the function of the Espionage division was to to provide new actions things to do for the glenstein division uh and then covering up their mistakes so there was never any accountability and what my father understood is that
the aspan division should not be working for the for the glendenin services they should be overseeing them and particularly doing accountability oh you know what if the CIA looks the way that the CIA looks at the war in Iraq is it was a success because we accomplished our mission of deposing Saddam Hussein but and you know the CIA was George Tennant who lied to President Bush and said it's a slam dunk so they got us to go in there at weapons of
so as president would you rethink it and then just as a final question as final followup to that do you believe they murdered or were involved in the murder of your uncle what have you come to personally the CIA yes they were definitely involved in the murder and the you know and the 60-year cover up they're still not releasing the you know the papers that legally they have to release um but I don't think there's any
doubt if you look at this huge you know mount Monumental mountain of evidence and confessions and you know so many people have confessed to their involvement and you know we understand um if you look I mean for anybody who has doubts about that I would recommend a book I Jim Douglas called the Unspeakable because I think he's done a better job uh than anybody else at kind of assembling and Distilling all of the
millions and millions of documents that uh have been released over the past 50 years and these things these Revelations are released incrementally and so nobody really takes notice of but when you put them all together the story is very clear so you you would definitely rethink the CIA the FBI doj you know the whole intelligence at a minimum I think what you're saying as well is maybe you would also release the documents that maybe
would at least provide some more transparency I just wanted to build on that because you had a very provocative tweet part of what you're talking about is accountability and we need data and transparency to have that there are people that have whistle blown there are people that have leaked and I think it's fair to say that they've all been treated by the security apparatus in largely the exact same way but you tweeted recently about your
desire to see some of those folks forgiven and pardoned do you want to just take a few minutes just to talk about some of those folks that you think allowed us to actually see the truth if we want to see it and why you think that and what you think should be done with folks like that I mean Julian Assange is an example Julian Assange is a newspaper publisher he published leaked documents you know why are we I mean I if I was
any newspaper the publisher in this country I would be worried about that then now he can go to jail for life because he published League documents of great import to the American people of things that should not have been secret that we should have known about um Revelations that affect our civil rights affect our foreign policy affect things that we have a right to know about and you know it's it's really it's strange that there's any
support for his imprisonment among the press and I think the Press is beginning to figure this out finally the most controversial of those figures is Edwin Snowden but Edward Snowden um released documents that showed us we were all being spied upon and that's important for Americans to know and in fact it was so important that Congress passed laws based upon his Revelations to protect the American people so why are we
punishing The Whistleblower rather than punishing the people who were you know who were illegally spying on us that's what we should be doing we shouldn't be jailing denters in our country we shouldn't be jailing whistle owers we should be jailing the people who break the law to keep this bipartisan do you believe the Deep state is acting to subvert the Trump presidency and that they are framing him on these three or
four indictments that they are working on some that have dropped some that haven't do you believe there's a deep state conspiracy against Trump because you might be facing him I don't use the word deep St I mean I you know I you know I've described how these uh bureaucracies function and it's not that it's not so much a group of people that kind of deep split State implies there's a group of of people in kind of you know
black coats in a smoky room uh pulling strings but the corruption is systemic the these uh you know they all of these agencies are captive agencies the CIA is ultimately working for a for industry like the oil industry the coal industry and the military contractors and that they've always had that tie since the very beginning you know Alan Dulles who had worked for svin Cromwell and ended up doing coupet Tas on behalf
of his former clients like Texico and United Fruit Texico and BP in in uh Iran in 1953 his former client United Fruit when when uh Jacob Harens and Guatemala tried to nationalize United Fruit you know uh the a under dolls went over through the government to protect the interest of his former clients so there's always been these ties to Industry and the ties now and particularly the oil industry and the ties to um to the
military industrial contractors really Drive CIA action and CIA intelligence and we have to you know you have to stop and this is systemic in all these agencies I mean USDA is run by Carill Smithfield um on Santo um Bo Pilgrim John Tyson EPA is right when we sued EPA um we got Discovery documents that showed that the head of the pesticide division Jess Rowan had been secretly working for Monsanto for a decade and you know sending memos back
and forth with Monsanto directing them you need to kill this study you need to kill that study and this unfortunately is not the exception it is the rule most of the people who work for those agencies are good citizens they're good Americans they're honest and they're Patriots the people who tend to rise in those agencies and occupy these very very powerful key positions from decades or years like Anthony fouchy 50 years
are people who are in the tank with industry and what we need to do is unravel that across the government and that's really what people say that's the Deep state that really is what a systemic corruption within our agencies that is that's driven by agency capture can we actually just talk about the Corona virus maybe pandemic for a second and I I just want to tie in two concepts sometimes again there's a lot of mainstream
misinformation about it there is a lot that came out about you particularly as it relates to vaccines I just want to give you an opportunity to set the record straight just on what you think happened Co all that corruption your thought on vaccines the efficacy of our programs how we should change what we keep the same just maybe a chance to clear the year so that we can get some of the gobleg on the internet set
straight I mean it's hard to I you know I wrote a a 250,000 paid book about it and I've written a couple of books and so it's hard to summarize you know what went wrong in in a uh in a second but but essentially we had instead of a Public Health response to a Public Health crisis we had a militarized and monetized response that was the inverse of what of everything that you would want to do if you actually wanted to
protect Public Health we've known you know if you look at who protocols or CDC protocols the EU the NHS and Britain all those they all had protocols for how to manage the pandemic they all said unanimously you do not use lockdowns Mass lockdown you quarantine the sick you protect the vulnerable but you keep Society moving because the consequences of not to of shutting down Society will be cataclysmic beyond anything that the
disease is going to impose everybody knew that and so you know we had these these agencies that that had drilled for years and years uh this alternative you know militarized response and instead of you know doing what you want to do which is to get early treatment to people to have I mean you know we we live in the age of the internet we should have had a a grid that connected all 15 million Frontline doctors every country around the world
and figured out what are you doing that works in your country you know and try and then distilling that information and processing it and getting it to other doctors well we knew it was working we knew I mean and hydroxy chloric were working we knew that since 2004 NIH did this study that said hydroxychlor obliterates Corona virus we knew what would work at that time and what was the response they the response was they
could not allow early treatment to occur why because there's a little known federal law that says if there is a drug that is shown effective against a Target disease it is il a drug that is proof for any purpose it is illegal
to issue a a emergency use authorization for a vaccine so if they had admitted that hydroxychlor or IV mton worked against Corona virus it would have destroyed their whole hundred billion dollar vaccine you know Enterprise so
they had to kill early treatments and they went after stuff that they knew worked they this was the first respiratory virus in history where people would go to the hospital and they would test positive for coron vir virus and be symptomatic they were sick that's why they went to the hospital and the hospital would say to them there is no treatment go home till your lips turn blue and you can't breathe and come back
and we will give you two things that are going to kill you rem Desir and hydroxy and and uh and ventilation so people still look at in this country and Anthony foui is a hero and we were doing things a couple miles from me in Malibu there were Police pulling Surfers out of the surf and giving them thousand tickets and telling them to go home getting him out of the sunshine where where Corona virus doesn't spread and lock him in their
home where it does and every time they s some one of these people home from the hospital sick it was a super spreader event oh you look at our record of Corona virus and this is when nobody can explain who is you know defending fouy Etc we had the highest body count in the world by far from Corona virus the our we have 4.2% of the world's population we had 16% of the covid deaths how does anybody explain
that and you go to Nations that didn't do what we told them Nigeria Nigeria is the highest malaria burden in the world so it everybody everybody gets hydroxy chlorin once a week they call it Sunday Sunday everybody in the country takes it on Sunday they had the highest is uh river bline is burden so half the country's on high for meon Nigeria never had an epidemic it had a death rate in Nigeria of 14 people per million population our death rate
3,000 per million population blacks in our countries were dying at 3.6 times the rate of whites why were American blacks dying and Nigerian blacks weren't and uh and then you go to Haiti Haiti had a and by the way Nigeria had 1.3% vaccination rate 80 had a 1.4% vaccination rate and they had a death rate of 15 people per million population these are the countries that Tony fouchy and Bill Gates said we got to get them
vaccinated we got to do whatever we can because they're going to get totally wiped out because their poverty and guess right they never had a pandemic across Africa there was a 10% vaccination rate and guess what they had a death rate of about 340 so some people uh think that the death rate here was overstated because of incentives to do that do you believe that as well so maybe part of that death rate is it was
overed but you believe looking back on this that fouchy as well as the Pharma companies Bill Gates investments in those areas that led us down a path we'll call it the medical industrial the farm industrial complex you believe the farm industrial complex dictated our response to Corona virus and then freeberg I'll let you jump in yeah but you believe that that that's the I I don't have any question I believe this was a you know
it was as I said it was a military response I mean look at who was running the look at who was running the Corona virus response wouldn't you think it would be HHS well when they had when warp speed had to present its declassify its Oran Iz ational charts to show to the FDA committee called verac when they demanded it and warps me went in and show them the organizational CH charts the the the the agency running warp
speed and pandemic response was not HHS it was NSA the National Security Agency ail Haynes is the Director of National Intelligence so she was running operation warps spe and who was manufacturing it wasn't fiser Mna it was
140 military contractors who you know who had lines ready and you say you know and then you know all of this clamp down on on civil rights that we saw the the censorship um the closing the churches the you know the the closing of the
right to assemble the Banning of jury trials against pharmaceutical companies they crushed the Seventh Amendment the First Amendment they closed down 3.3 3 million businesses with no due process no just compensation uh they they obliterated the Fourth Amendment right to you know uh to uh against warrantless searches and seizures with all these intrusive uh you know you you you have to show your medical records to go get out of your
house or to get into a public building freeberg what what is correct here do you believe in what is incorrect about Roberts what's Robert saying if anything well look I mean there's obviously a lot of things I could say by the way I was on the executive team at Monsanto for a couple years so you know I one one thing I will say is I sat on the at the table facing the EPA and the USDA and certainly didn't feel like a very cozy
relationship and at least what I saw in the few years I was there it was it did feel like a very kind of Independent Regulatory and challenging frankly regulatory process that Monsanto had to manage and deal with and go through and and releasing new products you know I I don't think that this notion that there were kind of embedded parties that did our whims and wishes really plays through at least for
my experience sitting there and I'm not a longtime Monsanto executive I built a software company sold it to Monsanto and sat on the exec team for a few years after the acquisition but I guess the the more kind of I think bigger framing question for you Robert is really around vaccines in general I think your your commentary around the the co response and uh you know the influencing forces there didn't start with Co right
I mean you you've you've been a kind of you know outspoken voice on vaccines in general for some time is that a fair statement because I think that that's part of the media narrative around your history and Legacy is that you have been kind of outspoken on vaccines and the you know the the risks and the and the effects that you that you consider to be kind of I don't know if it's implied or explicit with respect to the use and and
wide adoption of of vaccines over time maybe you could share a little bit about your broader perspective in the leading up to co and how that then kind of informed your point of view specifically on Co you know my objective is not to vac I'm not antia I'm fully vaccinated my kids were fully vaccinated um I wish at this point that I had not done that because I know enough about them now but my principal objective is that
vaccines um in this the childhood vaccines are immune from pre-licensing safety testing of the 72 when I got was a I got three vaccines my children got 72 doses of 16 vaccines and the vaccines are uh the one medical product that does not have to go through uh Placebo controled trials where you test exposed versus unexposed population prior to licenser and that there's a number of historical reasons for that that come out of the kind of
military uh Beginnings the these vaccines were regarded as um as National Security defense against of biological attacks on our country so they wanted to make sure if the Russians attacked us with Anthrax or some other biological agent they could quickly formulate and deploy vaccine at 200 million Americans with no regulatory impediments so they they called them biologics rather than medicines and Exempted biologics from pre-licensing
safety tra I've litigated on that issue not one of them has ever been T tested pre licenser against so nobody knows what the you know you can say that the vaccine is effective against the target disease but you can't say that it's not causing worse problems now I I'll just summarize this story in the the vaccine schedule exploded in 1986 the vaccine industry succeeded in getting Ronald Reagan to sign a law and
my uncle was also you know a group that was pressured by wyth which was losing $20 in Downstream liabilities on every vaccine it made because of lawsuits for every dollar that it made and they in in profit they went to Reagan and said we're going to get out of the vaccine business and you're going to be left without a vaccine Supply unless you give us full immunity from liability and Reagan you reluctantly signed that and so today no matter how
negligent the company no matter how Grievous your injury no matter how Reckless their conduct you cannot sue them that caused a gold rush cuz now you've got a product that there's no Downstream liability you're immune from that there's no Upstream safety testing so that's a $250 million saving and there's no marketing or advertising cost so because the federal government is going to mandate this product to 76
million American children whether they like it or not and there's no better product in the world and so there was a gold rush and instead of three vaccines we quickly ended up with 72 and now we're going to you know toward 80 right now and there's no end in sight and a lot of those vaccines were unnecessary they're not even for casual disease cause diseases here's what happened in N beginning in 1989 we experienced a chronic disease
epidemic in this country it is unlike anything in human history we went from having 6% of Americans affected by chronic disease to 54% by 2006 and what do I mean by chronic disease I mean neurological disease that I never saw when I was a kid ADD ADHD speci a language a tick Ted syndrome um ASD autism narcolepsy all of these suddenly appeared autism rates went from 1 in 10,000 to one every 34 1989 was the year this began Allergic
Disease peanut allergy suddenly appeared um food allergies eczema suddenly appeared uh an axis and Asthma you know which had been around but it exploded and then autoimmune diseases like rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile diabetes um I never knew a k I had 11 siblings about 70 cousins uh I never knew anybody with any of these diseases and son why do five my kids have allergies so uh so then if you look at the
manufacturer's inserts for those 72 vaccines there's 420 diseases that have been associated with the vaccines that are listed including every one of those diseases that went epidemic in 1989 and this is the country which the
most heavily vaccinated and this was happening here unlike any other country in the world and so we have this you know and and you know it's good for the Pharma because Pharma now makes 60 billion on the vaccines when I was a kid
they were making 200 50 million now they make 60 billion a year plus 100 billion from covid vaccine Friedberg do you believe that these vaccines are overprescribed and are part of the rise in ADHD and and all this Litany of diseases I'm just asking fredberg who's our resident scientist here do you do you believe this you know explicitly as a scientist I'm curious I don't think there's direct evidence supporting that
relationship I think that there's a lot of environmental fact factors that have been driving changes in you know the rate of problems with autoimmunity it relates to our food prod products our food system it relates to environmental chemistry like Robert has talked about generally I think there's a lot of environmental conditioning that's caused this rise in in in problems in human can I interrupt for a second because I don't
think it's solely the vaccines our children today are swimming around in a toxic soup uh but there's a timeline and actually the a toxicologist that I've used in many of my law it's probably the most famous in the country Phil landan looked at the timeline of the explosion of all these chronic diseases and he said uh there's only a finite number of things that have caused it you know one is glyphosate things that went became
ubiquitous against in every demographic beginning in around 1993 1989 um one of m g is a neon niik toid pesticides pfoas cell phones ultrasound and he made the whole list um and so it's a finite number and the question is and vaccines are are part of that and you know it is suspicious because the vaccines list all of these side effects now I've I've put together books you know one of my books on this subject on
connecting these as 1, 1400 references and 400 studies digested so the the science out there is pretty clear but we NIH refuses to study these things because it knows that whatever wherever they follow the dots it's going to end up with a big shot and so they simply have stopped studying them and they've turned themselves into an incubator for pharmaceutical products and they don't do this kind of basic research I want to
just give you guys one example the most common vaccine in the world is called the dtb vaccine deia Tanis and ptosis we gave it in this country in beginning around 79 it was killing or uh causing severe brain injury and one out of every 300 kids who got it UCLA study funded by NIH that found it so they got rid of it that's what caused all the lawsuits that eventually precipitated the passage of the vaccine we stopped it here they
stopped in Europe but Bill Gates and who are still giving it to 161 million African children every year it's the most popular vaccine on Earth Bill Gates says publicly it saved 30 million lives he went to the Danish government and said we've saved 30 Million Lives will you support this program in 2017 the Danish said show me the study that shows that it saved all those lives he couldn't do it so they went
down and they conducted his study West Africa with the Danes operate all these health clinics and they looked at 30 years of data and as it turned out in a nation called Kenny Basel half the kids in that country at the age two months had received the vaccine and half had not it was a perfect natural experiment and they looked at 30 years of data and what they found was that the kids who received the vaccine were not dying of
dearia tetanus and pris but girls who received the vaccine were dying at 10 times the rate of unvaccinated girls and they were not dying of anything ever anybody ever associated with the vaccine they were dying of of bardia malaria anemia uh minor cuts and scrapes and mainly pulmonary respiratory diseases and and pneumonia and what the researchers concluded and this was a a study funded by the Danish government and Nova nordis which is a vaccine
company and the scientists were all Prov vacine what they said is this vaccine is killing more people than the disease ever were nobody knew it because nobody Associated the people who were dying because they were dying all these different things were only the unvaccinated kids so the vaccine had saved them from D theia tetus and P but it had ruined their immune system so that they could not defend themselves against other
diseases and that's the danger of not having Placebo control trials prior to introducing the product particularly when you're going to mandate a product for healthy people let's um with with our remaining time here move on to energy you and the environment you've got an incredible track record I remember growing up in New York the amazing work you did for the Watershed project and I'll let you expand upon
that in a moment uh but the only confounding thing I I found in your position and I'm curious if it's changed or not is that you spend decades trying to close the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant in a time when clearly nuclear power has gotten safer and is clearly I think the world believes and certainly everybody who's on this panel believes nuclear is a key Point uh in the transition to Renewables so what is
your actual position explain it to us as basically as you can on nuclear power and do you regret or have you rethought your position on Indian Point uh no I mean Indian Point is leaking trium into the in the Hudson every every day I don't see how you can say it's and you know they they still haven't figured out what to do with the waste so they're now storing it you know it's it's 18 miles from Midtown Manhattan um if a you know the the the
shack where they were sto storing uh the fuel rods had the structural Integrity of a Kmart a terrorist attack against it would you know would uh basically render New York inhab uninhabited for you know the next 5,000 years or so so to have to to put to put something that risky so close to you know 10 million people doesn't make any sense now nuclear power I'm all for it if they can ever make it safe or if they ever make it
economical and it's not me saying it's unsafe it's the insurance industry they can't get an insurance policy if they can't get an insurance policy then I would say I don't want it the nuclear American nuclear I mean you go look at what Fukushima they're poisoning the Pacific every day with huge amounts of really deadly radiation and they and now their only solution to it is to suck the water out of the groundwater and store it in
these big tanks and if you just go on the internet and look at a picture of the Fukushima water tanks and they go onto the Horizon and there's no end to it Robert can I just make a point the thing with nuclear that's worth separating is it's not the fun m al technology there that's broken in either example that you use but it's the proident motive that caused both the industrial engineering of both plants to be subpar
because Fukushima for example was engineered not to the seismic levels that you really needed or elevation yeah even coning all that here's what I would say is that you know in our country there's nuclear is regarded as so dangerous that they can't get insurance so the industry had to go to Congress in a sleazy legislative maneuver in the middle of the night and get the price Anderson Act pass so that there so that to shift their accident
burden onto the American public so if they plant goes up I and I and I was 10 miles from that plant then I'm going to have to pay for it so I don't think that's free market capitalism I believe in free markets and I can tell you this there is no public utility on the face of the earth that will build one of those plants without massive public subsidies not one nobody will ever do it and then they have to store the waste for the next 30,000 years
which is five times the length of recorded human history and if you tell me how that you know if they had to amortize that raate up front there's no way anybody do it number two or three or four or whatever I've gotten to it caused now between 9 and $16 billion to build a nuclear power plant just the construction cost and then you got to get the technitions and then you've got to get you know the waste disposal and
the regular outages and all of this there's no way that it could compete in a free market I believe in free market capitalism I am a radical free marketeer I believe that our Energy System should reflect the marketplace and they right now you can build a solar plan for a billion dollars a gwatt you can build a wind plant for $1.2 billion a gwatt a coal plant will cost you about3 and5 billion dollar a gwatt and then you
have to pay for the fuel by cutting down the mountains of West Virginia poisoning 22,000 miles of the streams burning you know putting Mercury that gets into every freshwater fish in America sterilizing the lakes of the Appalachians if they had to internalize that cause coal which says it's the you know it's or nuke which says it's too cheap to meter it turns out it's the most expensive way to boil a pot of
water that's ever been divided I'm just trying to make the point that if you look at the levelized cost of energy now what you're saying is exactly why solar and wind are winning it's just so much cleaner it makes so much more sense
there's no fuel cause and if the impediment is distribution is that we don't have a grid system that can effectively you know orchestrate uh variable power and that's what let let me provide a counter that maybe it's not
about distribution but it's about scaling production capacity so you know if you look over nearly any historical time scale since we've had industrial energy production on Earth for every 1% increase in GDP per capita you see a roughly 1.2% increase in energy consumption per capita and so if you forecast out by the end of the century the GDP per capita estimates in the US and around the world we need to increase
global energy production by roughly you know anywhere from 5 to 10x and you know the current system of pulling carbon out of the ground and burning it up and pulling heat energy out of it doesn't scale doesn't make sense obviously put aside the carbon effect problem and there appears to be you know a reasonable chance of a pretty serious material shortage for renewable sources by the middle of next decade so what do
you think is the right answer to long range energy security and what sort of Technology should we be embracing and do you think that they scale fast enough to kind of allow us to have our economy grow in the way that it needs to to support the the population demands over the next Century I mean I'm agnostic about the energy sources and I think you need to you know you have to be eclectic about it and a lot of them are are you
know make sense locally but we I mean we have enough ener we have enough wind energy in North Dakota North Dakota is the windiest place on Earth outside of the Arctic North Dakota Montana and Texas we have enough wind energy to produce five times the amount of our entire grid um the problem is the North Dakota wind farmer cannot get his product to Market because it dissipates in a you know we have an an anti an or
Antiquated grid system that simply will not efficiently move electrons across country and we need a DC grid system that you know with off ramps in the big cities Etc that can do that in North Dakota if you have an acre of Farmland it's worth about 300 bucks if you put a wind turbine on it it's worth about 3,200 bucks so every farmer in North Dakota wants to put wind turbines in their corn fields and the problem is
they cannot get that energy to Market that is the only choke point and if we and the same is true you know in in uh in you know we have great solar power in this country um we we have you know we have an abundance of of renewable energy in this country and the power the problem is the incumbents were were were were operating on rules under rules that were written by the incumbents to reward the dirtiest filthiest most poisonous
most toxic fuels from Hell rather than C cheap clean green wholesome fuels from heaven and we ought to reverse that and and make it make them all competitive it seems like technology and economics have reversed that in a way yeah yeah one last question on this so as president would you support initiatives that could advance and allow approval of safe nuclear fision production systems to be built here in the US well I I will like like I
say I support nuke and new technologies of nuke that are safe you know where they but but as as long as they can compete in a Marketplace you show me and by by the way I think we should be doing science even when there's no you know economic end to it so we should be looking at this stuff but I would not promote nuke if it's not competitive in the marketplace and it's you know and and that means you know cleaning up your
mess after yourself which you know is a lesson we were all supposed to learn in kindergarten they have to show us what they're going to do with the ways how they're going to internalize their cost rather than what they're doing now which is to externalize their cause and internalize their profits okay we have covered a lot of territory and I hate to get to uh controversial ones like culture wars but it's going to come up
in the presidential election I personally don't think this is what's important in the presidential election I think the fiscal stuff the energy stuff the the wars and political stuff we've discussed today are much more important but I'm curious your take on the issues around Disney to s trans uh and this cohort of issues which have become an obsession it seems between certain members of certain political parties or both parties the
media and certainly it's taken over a lot of discussions amongst the generation on social media what's your take on all this and when you get caught up in these debates in the presidential debates about trans athletes as put one example do you think a trans woman who was a biological man should be able to be put in a female prison do you think they should be able to play on a female basketball team and change with a bunch
of 15-year-old girls in a high school locker room I've already said first one want to say this I think that people I believe in bodily autonomy and that people's choices about what they want to do with their body should be respected and people should not be shamed I do not believe that uh that somebody who was born a biological man should be able to compete later on in life whatever choice they made on a
woman's team I mean I have a a niece who is uh playing softball at at BC she has worked uh she has devoted her entire life to getting that scholarship and it's it's consumed her and I've watched you know during my lifetime women's sports go from essentially nonex consistent to to Equitable mainly with men's sports and I think that's important and I don't think that you know um uh women should lose ground um in in any way so I would you
know I've said I'm I I don't believe that that's the right thing but I think everybody should be respected let me ask a question then uh about parents who are struggling with this issue at what age should a doctor be allow owed to perform gender reassignment surgery on a individual you believe adults so at what age should you be able to have gender surgery because this is going to come up multiple times in this debate I think
adults ought to have that choice uh I don't think a child should have that choice um except with you know certainly not without parent parental permission and I really don't you know uh I know that the um the I you know it's a and let's start by saying this this is a difficult issue and it's an issue that we should not be judging people on and we should not be hating people about we should be trying to solve people problems and give people as
much leeway as possible to and as much respect as much leeway to exercise their choices and much respect those choices as we possibly can um within that framework I don't believe that it's uh that a child without their parental permission should be allowed to choose that kind of surgery because what if their parents agree to it should a 15-year-old be able to be I that that's a very difficult question and I I don't
feel like I'm equipped to answer it I'm not gonna you know interfere there yeah I think this panel agrees with this is a very difficult issue and you know people should be yeah what do you think about things like critical race Theory
and maybe we can just use that as a way to just talk about the state of us education in general are we preparing our children for the task at hand and what is the task at hand maybe in your eyes and how does it need to
change if at all you know I think critical rise Theory as much as I understand it um is you know though listen we should not be hiding from people we should be honest people about the history in this country of genocide of racism and those things you know we need to be honest about that with each other not to shame people not to make people people feel badly not to make people feel guilty but to understand the
Milestones that we never want to go near again and to move forward with those things I you know in I I don't really understand the battle over critical race theory in in schools but you know to the extent and somebody would say that this has to that that theme has to dominate all historical um teaching I would be against that I think it's very very important you know America our country has has done wonderful things in the world we have a
history of idealism we have a history of moral Authority and Leadership and we have a history of doing bad things to but I think for children for the sake of our national Unity for the sake take of you know for we need to instill children with a sense of optimism and hope and love and also a love of history I mean I grew up learning history and learning you know kind of the heroic aspects of History which I Now understand are not
the only parts of History um but it's really important for children to have have role models to look up to and to have an optimistic view of our country and to have to understand what the shared values are and by values I mean aspirational values you know the things that our country is supposed to stand for when we are at for example Robert in the in San Francisco we canel advanced placement classes because it
made people feel bad do you think that was a good decision in the name of equity no we should be inspiring our children towards excellence and we should be able to as adults give the measures of what mean we mean by excellence and you know that inspires kids and inspires the best out of them and you know we need to we need to have those kind of metrics so that doesn't make any sense to me then what's your view on for
example just educational diversity in charter schools and your just position on the teachers unions yeah I mean my view is that we ought to be putting huge resources into public schools and making them the best schools in the world and I think if we uh uh you know right now we're making stealth bombers for a billion dollars that cannot fly in the rain and I think if we just cut production of a couple of those we can make all our schools the best
schools in the world do they need competition do you believe in vouchers uh and um parents getting to choose which school they go to because it does seem like there's not a lot of competition and that these teachers unions have a shangle hold on these schools I have to look at that issue more I mean my inclination is that we should be putting resources into making our Public Schools the best schools in the world but you said you believed in
free markets with regard to energy why not free markets in regard to education well it it's it has an appeal I I need to look at okay fair enough yeah let's talk about censorship let's talk about the media one of the things that happened during the covid pandemic is that a lot of people grew suspicious of the mainstream media even more suspicious than they already had been it seemed like the media was carrying water on
certain issues it was almost impossible for the media to take seriously the idea that the virus might have come from the Wuhan lab for example people who put forward that I think reasonable explanation were called conspiracy theorists the media didn't want to look into why for exam just as an example fouchy lifted Obama's moratorium on gain of function research couldn't get the media to really cover whether you know
masking toddlers in school did anything positive and then you know when we found out that the MRNA shots didn't prevent Co the way they said they never even really asked the CEOs of fizer and these other companies when did you know this when did you know that the vaccines didn't do what you said they're going to do and I remember at Davos you had a rebel news it was this Guerilla media out outfit that accosted Bera the the
CEO of fizer out in the street and they were just asking him questions that the media is supposed to ask like you know when did you know what did you know and when did you know it with respect to whether the the vaccines prevented the spread and you couldn't get the New York Times or any of the mainstream outl to cover this at all so it fell to this Guerilla media outfit so any event that's a long windup but you know Robert
what's your take on the media why why can't we get what seems to be honest media coverage how does this fit into your theory of regulatory capture who are they caring water for and why you know I in 20 um 15 I wrote a book on therasol and there was a a documentary that came out that time called Trad mounts it was a really good um documentary on the the Mercury uh based um uh preservative that was in a lot of vaccines at that time and it's
been removed from most except for the flu vaccine now um but I took that I had a very close relationship with Roger hes who was the founder of Fox News I had this weird relationship because when I was 19 years old I spent three months in a tent with him in East Africa and um we you know he would like when when he started Fox M he became like Darth Vader to me and we were anesthetic on every issue but we always he's was a very
funny guy and very clever but and he was also very loyal to his friends and he would make all of the host of Fox News put me on so I was the only environmentalist who was going on Hannity and Bill O'Reilly and Neil Cavuto ET said regularly like weekly and he made them do that but I went to him with this with this um this movie and showed it to him and he found it compelling and he had a relative who he believe was vaccine
injured a very very close relative and he bought he believed what was going on and what the documentary you know the thrust of the documentary was and he said I cannot let you talk about this on Fox News I'm sorry the first time he ever saw me this and he said um if I let you if any of my hosts let you on to talk about this I would have to fire them and he said um and if I didn't F I'd get a call from rert within 10
minutes and he said to me at that time that 70% of the revenues for his not on network work news on um on Prime Time were pharmaceutical ads and that um that he said of 22 ad spaces that we sell on the network news on the Evening News 17 of those are pharmaceutical the we cannot afford to um to offend our biggest um our our biggest uh funer advertisers and you know I had this interesting experience with Jake Tapper
where when I worked on my Rolling Stone article deadly immunity which was about this secret meeting that took place in Simpson with Georgia by CDC and all of the vaccine companies and FDA Etc where they decided to hide the autism effect from the American people and we I got the transcripts for him and published in Rolling Stone and um and Jake Tapper worked for 21 days with me on a on a doc on a exclusive story and he was going to add
simultaneously with with rollingstone publishing it and tap her the night before it went on he called me in total distress and he said it's been pulled by corporate the whole thing is gone he said never in my career as corporate killed one of my stories and I'm really angry and then I called him back the next day he's never spoken to me again but you know there are consequences for these newscasters who depart from the Orthodoxy
and they know it you know if you look at Anderson Cooper He's got a now probably a $13 million a year salary but if you actually do the math probably around 10 million of that comes from fizer which sponsors his show so you know that's he's working for them he's not working for us and you know they know who they're working for explosive stuff uh and I can't disagree with you as having been a publisher my whole career
there why why even why even have pharmaceutical ads on TV I mean only doctors can prescribe them yeah it was illegal prior to 1997 so there's only two nations in the world that allow pharmaceutical advertising on TV one is
uh New Zealand and the other is the United States we both have you know these huge pharmaceutical sales so we take three to four times the amount of pharmaceutical drugs as a European takes and we have the worst health results we
79th in terms of you know Health impacts you know Health outcomes among all nations and so you know and also pharmaceutical drugs the third biggest killer of Americans after cancer and heart attack so it is not helping when when they when FDA changed that rule um the AMA was against it like all the Medical Institution said you can't do this it is going to destroy Health in America and but you know they did it and
and the problem is that these um that the pharmaceutical companies now no not not only can you know have this platform for broadcasting their product but they also control content on the ask question as far as I can tell I think the left just to be blunt hates you more than the right and so do you want to just comment on your ability to get the mainstream media to pay attention particularly folks on the left and give you the air
time so that you can get your message up and how much the party matters in this process for you I don't know that they're going to I mean it was kind of traumatic what happened this week to them not to me because I'm used to it that ABC you know one of their the a person who describes herself as the journalist journalist and gave me a long talk when I got to ABC um that uh when I got to The Green
Room that she was not somebody who would ever censor or cut and they're not working a cherry pick cuz I said to her I don't I'm very uncomfortable doing a taped interview with you I know what you guys do when I tape an interview you cut it up you cherry pick it you Dice it and you do and you then you play things out of context and she said you won't do this see that from me I'm a journalist journalist I don't take orders from
anybody I do and then she asked me she says you know in the interview I didn't want to talk about vaccinees I'm not going around the country talking about vaccines if you see my speeches I'm I don't mention vaccines I but if somebody ask me about vaccines I'm going to tell the truth I'm not looking to talk about them I know a lot about them but I'm not leading with that because I I'm interested in a lot of other issues oh
she says um everything you've said about vaccin about vaccines and autism has been debunked and um you know vaccines is clear do not cause autism what you have to say by that and then I said by who and then I went into a long diet triap where I cited the cases the dates the Publications and the studies that show that yeah obviously it caused autism and she cut out that whole section and then and then so she had her question which
stated at the industry talking point and then she brackets the the news report on me with something at the beginning that says you know he's known to be a chronic liar and a disinformation spreader and in the end she said we had to remove things he said because they were false the whole thing was so weird that she has gotten criticism even from the left because you know I mean what is a news caster supposed to do are they supposed to
manipulate public information is their job to protect Americans from dangerous thoughts are the audience a es do they have such contempt for their audiences that they think that the audiences can't make up their own minds and what is their whole Vision about the traditional role of the American Media as the Guardians of free speech in the first amendment in this country well you can be sure our commitment to you is to not
take out one sentence of anything you said there's some stuff I'd like you to take out I mean I also found that a crazy decision for them to make if you're if they believe that what you're saying about vaccines which they put on the table is incorrect or what you said about autism or covid is incorrect they should be trained enough to rebut it and have a thoughtful debate about you I'll be even more blunt my my short takeaway
about you Robert is that you are this odd person which is Born and Raised by The Establishment but raising a lot of very uncomfortable questions about the EST lishment and I think that that's very complicated for people to deal with and I don't think that folks will be very supportive you in the mainstream and I think the reason is because it'll cause them to question all these systems that they put a lot of trust into that they work
within and so I I'm not even sure whether they're trying to play gotta journalism about vaccines or which is a much bigger thing which is here is a guy that I do think it's very similar to Trump that says he came out of the house and told us what was happening in the house and it actually turned out that was happening the Dave Chappelle quote from Saturday Night Live I think you're a very different person than him but
that comment is very much the same I think people are attracted to the truth and the confirmatory evidence about when they think that there's frankly corruption and when it's laid bare in plain English I think it's validating for those on the outside because we're like we knew it and then for folks on the inside they're like we need to bury it and I think that that's what you're going to be up against this entire election cycle so whether it's us
whether it's Rogan folks that'll give you the chance for you to just lay your case out for millions of people who can smartly and intelligently make up their decision I think that's what it comes down to so I really just want to say thank you for giving us so much time and just being as honest as you were and transparent as you were Sax's closing thoughts here with yeah I agree with that I mean I think I think that's a a
great reference jamath to to the Chappelle quote I think that the ABC news interview was really telling because I think it's one thing if they had edited the interview for time and just cut certain things but they didn't do that they cut out your side of the conversation and then declared you guilty of misinformation but not letting the audience hear what it is that you said they simply declared you guilty of it and I think in that
case I think this is an example of how dissenting views are labeled as misinformation as really a suppression tactic you know they they can't prove that it was misinformation they didn't give you the chance to to say your your side of it and I think this is a tactic now of the elite to declare certain inconvenient truths or viewpoints out of bounds they don't want them being considered and I think what's very
interesting about your campaign is you are going to force I think Elites and you know various kinds foreign policy Elites Anderson Cooper political Elites media Elites Financial consider views that you know whether you agree with them or not I think you've made them in a very articulate way and I know enough about certain of your views like uh with respect to the origins of the Ukraine war to say yeah I I agree with that I
believe that's true so I don't think they can dismiss you today's conspiracy theories sax as we've talked about are tomorrow's piters today's conspiracy theories are tomorrow's piters go ahead Jamal I really think that this is what's going to scary as if you're as this election kind of rules forward the contrast and compare on the Democratic side is going to be very Troublesome to The Establishment and I just encourage you to
just just keep sticking to it and telling people what you think freberg any final thoughts as we wrap can I say one last thing in my defense and I I want to because this is such a great platform what I've always said to people you know if I'm if I'm promoting misinformation which I'm constantly accused of show me what it is identify don't just say I'm an inform misinformation promoter show me the piece that you don't agree with or that
you know I I made a false statement I would say that I have not promoted any misinformation if if unless misinformation is just a euphemism for anything that departs from government orthodoxies every po I have probably the most robust factchecking operation in North America because I know these attacks are coming so we have 300 over 320 MD Physicians PhD scientists on my Advisory Board who see everything that
goes out and everything that I posted on Instagram was cited or sories for to a government PA database or peer-reviewed publication I don't let anything and by the way that doesn't mean I won't make a mistake at some point but guess what if I made a mistake people would point it out and you know what I would do I change it and apolog change your opinion in the face of new facts exactly I you show me fact that's the only thing
that'll change my opinion show me facts and I will change it so fast but you know you need to show me facts so just on on the competition between you and Biden for this nomination I want to say that the Kennedy family has been involved in public life for for decades and many Kennedy has served in public life and I honestly don't remember one time with any candidate who served in public life where they've been accused
of receiving money from a foreign government not once and we're now up to 12 bidens I think who've received a payment you know from foreign governments potentially in this larger Hunter Biden scandal do you have a point of view on that I mean the fact that it appears that Hunter Biden and other members of the B and family receive payments from foreign governments is that how do you interpret that is that something that you think is
fair game in this campaign to talk about I I you know I don't know enough about it David to be able to render judgment on it I don't know the intricacies of those relationships I I think the Optics are are unfortunate um but uh you know I would leave it I think it is fair game for people who are looking into it to to criticize and question it I don't know enough about I'm not in the position to be able to do that all right on that I
would just like to say I grew up in a Catholic household Irish Catholic in Brooklyn on the wall in my grandmother and grandfather's dining room were three people Bobby Kennedy Robert Kennedy and Jesus Christ it's been an honor to have you on the program and thank you for giving us two hours of vibrant debate we wish you well and we'd like to have you on again and perhaps if this platform allows sep for debates and they will not
host you on the debates we will here on the all-in podcast I'll let you go and uh on behalf of all the besties thank you for giving us two hours and deeply engaging on these topics fantastic thank you I really enjoyed it all right this I think went spectacularly well let's go around the horn here and get immediate reactions fredberg I want to start with you because I think you on the science issues maybe held back a little bit and
let him speak yeah we didn't have much of a dialogue with him say we we we all kind of had a few opening statements but let him kind of speak his mind I don't know we'll see how the episode plays with listeners it was really him having a platform to speak his mind for the past you know two hours and you know it's interesting I mean obviously he's a candidate that's challenging the the current sitting president for his own
party's nomination so you know really kind of you know interesting moment to participate in and you know but we did kind of give the platform to kind of speak his mind I think my observation is this guy Robert clearly has a very deep rooted anti-establishment energy and that plays through in many of his Points of View anti-establishment kind of energy I think manifests as both conspiracy theories where you know as
people have kind of classified some of his claims which typically you know invol involves looking at call it correlation or circumstance but not necessarily having the causality or the tie to demonstrate or or have proof of of point or or evidence of point and I think that that's really where he trips me up on a couple of points personally which ones would you say are the points that trip you up most Where Were You Like H I
think the general statement that there are kind of you know embedded interests in government is a good general statement then when you start to try tie together different kind of correlations or circumstances and say that's evidence it's not really it it doesn't resonate true with me as someone who who likes to kind of see empirical truth kind of be demonstrated I think some of these points around we know that pfoas one you
know one of these products one of these chemistries he talked about that's in the environment they are very damaging to the environment they're very damaging to human health and there are others that he makes claims around that don't have that same level of evidence but they all get kind of bucketed together that all this stuff is bad that all nuclear is bad because there you know is a a facility that was built in the 1950s
and 1960s that had some degree of bad engineering and what some might argue isn't necessarily a major hazardous radioactive leak but has above kind of standards of radiation leak and therefore all nuclear is threatening those are the sorts of things that kind of trip me up with him that one Tri me up a little bit yeah as well the nuclear issue the thing that matters to me this is all just [ __ ] talking rambling about social issues and
you you know like what the [ __ ] are we going to do with education and Wars none of it [ __ ] matters if we cannot solve the debt and budget crisis problem in this country we are running into the ground the United States isic I know you do and and I think the US is in a Titanic unack that then your key issue so for me this is the thing that I told you guys I'm focused on with every candidate is how much do you think
about the prioritization of the fiscal the federal budget how do you think about the level and how do you think about the boundary conditions and it's clear that that's not really a concrete part of his platform nor is it by the way for any other candidate that I've seen so far so that's kind of where I sit and it's very unpopular chamath let's have your response here too to opinion I just think that your opinion
is an opinion and you present it as this canonical fact and that's what I have an issue with I just think that's intellectually not accurate so I respect the fact that you think that that's an issue but I think there's a lot of smart people that would say that's not the issue that you think it is and there are other issues where did you find yourself chamath in this process agreeing with him or disagreeing with him all political
candidates at some point have a fork in the road which is that they're going to be a truth teller of their own truth or they're going to be conformist to talking points to try to offend the least amount of people okay and the first path is much riskier but it actually has much larger discontinuous outcomes I.E Trump the other path is a good antidote to the first path when the first path is what's in
power and you saw Biden take that path so for me I don't agree with some of the things that he said in fact there are things like nuclear which I just think he's wrong about sure but what do I appreciate is that there is a version of his truth that is researched and reasoned from his own lived experience as well as history and facts and then he's also willing to say I just don't know enough about it so let me rethink it and then
come back to you I thought the comment about you know school choice was an example right and and I think that that's healthy so on balance I would rather have candidates in that first bucket which are truth tellers that have the potential to cause disagreement versus the platers who say nothing and this is where I do agree with freeberg whatever the issues are that may be important the point is plating doesn't work anymore and you
need some kind of Confrontation on hard topics for there to be any progress now and so I prefer those kinds of people that are able to draw a hard line agitator non conform and I personally am so I've always been and I have been very anti-establishment the idea of tearing down all these institutions of power gives me Glee I find it gleeful saxs when we look at this this incredible you know almost two-hour conversation we had
here I I think we did hold him and force him on C certain issues more than you would normally get an an interview without being Sensational we didn't lead with vaccines we didn't lead with culture wars we talked about really
important issues where did you find yourself in most agreement with him and where did you find yourself in least agreement with him well I I want to make sure we see the forest for the trees here because I think you can disagree
with this or that tree or you can get lost down the rabbit hole of some of these very technical scientific debates but here's the farest is you've got this Sion of wealth and privilege who comes from the most prominent famous Democratic family and he was set in his life to go become an environmental law who go fight against big corporate environmental polluters and somewhere along the way he realized it wasn't just
big corporations was the problem it was the the agencies the government agencies that were supposed to be regulating them and he realized that there was a revolving door going on between industry and these agencies and so he ended up litigating not just against big companies but against government agencies I think that's a really interesting place for a candidate to come from and what you heard him say or what what I took away from it is that he
has a very sophisticated critique of regulatory capture and it goes beyond just the environmental area it goes also to Big Pharma and it goes to the military-industrial complex when he's talking about all these unnecessary Wars that the United States has gotten into and who can doubt that after we spent 20 years and8 trillion bogged down in Forever wars in the Middle East who can doubt that the military industrial
complex has played a malign role in our foreign policy and we've got you know all these generals when they retire from the Pentagon they go right onto the boards of these defense contractors so there's enough right about his critique that I think you can't dismiss it you can't just say this guy's a conspiracy theorist or a nut he's saying too many things that I know to be true and there's a lot of other areas where I
don't know what the truth is but he is making I'd say sensible arguments and he's presenting data and he's asking you to challenge him on the data so in event I think he's got this very interesting critique of regulatory capture what he's basically saying is that we have a ruling Elite in this country that is managing the country for its own benefit and that is screwing the middle class and that critique actually is very
similar to what Trump and disantis and people on the right are saying the only difference is that I think people on the right are blaming ideology they're saying that the ruling Elite is following this woke ideology what Kennedy is saying that is that the ruling class is is following the money but you know what they could both be right I think these critiques are very compatible so look you might disagree with this or that part of it but I think
that this overall critique the forest you know forget about the trees I think this Forest could find purchase with the electorate because I think people just feel like there's something true about this what I will say is this is exactly how Trump got elected and there was a great piece I think it was in the Atlantic when he was running the first time around that talked a lot about the psychology of his appeal that he comes
from wealth he comes from the system but he is the anti-stem system product that he came out of this machine of wealth this machine of Industry this machine of influence and he said this entire system needs to be torn down and if by the way the psychology that they highlighted and and it speaks to Trump not necessarily to Robert but what they highlighted was if you look historically at the rise of authoritarian regimes um coming out of
democracies it's typically the folks that come from an influence of from a point of influence and from the point of privilege and power and they then decided they wanted to tear down the system that produced them and you trust the bully that comes out of the machine versus The Outsider who doesn't really know the machine and doesn't really have access and that's partially why I think maybe he has a shot at being the
anti-biden alternative more so perhaps in this go around than Trump is look he he's not a bully and he's he's not going to tear everything down listen I and I've heard him on other interviews and what he said is we need a peaceful Revolution we need to reorganize these government agencies so he's not saying like so maybe that's why he does win over Trump right maybe he becomes the less extreme he's not the bully but he's
like I know how to dismantle and and you know are quite they're incredible Free Speech supporting the rule of law burgeoning the middle class I mean these are not things that are really controversial in the end they're good moral very morally grounded I think my concern is just the framework for how you kind of rationalize and make decisions if you're allowing kind of influence in uendo and correlation be kind of the
driving force instead of having you know make sure you just at least gather and and sort the empirical evidence to make those decisions that's what he's doing he just reached a different conclusion than you yeah he's just exactly cuz he's saying that the other conclusion is just the Orthodox conclusion which is nothing to here yeah by the way I'm not an orthodox guy and I'm not like following orxy folks have said you're pushing
RFK because you think he's a weaker candidate against the Republicans your response no I don't necessarily think he'd be a weaker candidate for all the reasons we're talking about I think he'd be preferable to to Biden in a lot of people's views so so look for me this is not like partisan I just think he's really interesting I think he is a breath of fresh air I think there are many aspects of his critique of our
system and the corruption of our ruling class that hit home I think regulatory capture is a huge issue I think a lot of these agencies do need to be reorganized well it is the invisible hand that we don't know how to quantify well in all these other discussions that we have and he does put his finger on this really ugly uncomfortable truth which is there's a cloistered set of insiders for which there's a revolving door between
power and money and that's going to be very awkward for a small small number of people to hear that message as he gets more attention which is probably why the media industrial complex will not you know will do his best to prevent that message from getting out there the media is going to block this guy at every angle because when he said podcast could play a huge role just like in 2016 social media broke through and played a
huge role I think in 2024 I think that podcast could break the way that unorthodox candidates get their message out could Cates get message out because if after 2 hours of this you don't want to learn more about him or you're not going to consider him more fully I think it's impossible because he's so well spoken as you said he's got a moral compass he's got a track record and he's got critique what he isn't saying is he's not just
throwing bombs and there may be things that you can debate with him about his interpretation of what he looks at you know and that's very fair criticism I think but his critique is well reasoned and so you have to unpack the nuances of it to understand why he got to it and also to try to prove him wrong that is very powerful because it's not just him randomly screaming about how things aren't working no and and I the moments
I thought were very important here and especially for the listeners who are listening who are making important decisions and want to maybe change the political system there were multiple times on the issue of trans surgery and I'm going to be very nuanced here with the permission of the parents he said I need to do more research on it on freeberg challenging him about spending spending he said I need to I need to
give that some more thought but broadly speaking you know I think we can take money out of the military budget and billion dollar planes that don't fly in the rain there were many moments where he he conceded I I need to give that some more thought I need to be thoughtful about that that's not something that you typically hear but in a platform like this with you know the Nuance that we've created on this platform having discussions and the
audience also being nuanced and having depth we know the fans of this podcast are in a lot of positions of power I'm sure 100% or very high percentage of the people who listen to this podcast actually vote and are very influential within their own circles I think this kind of platform we have a very deep discussion and somebody can say you know what I need to go deeper on that and think about it when I asked him about
weapons in Taiwan and then I said hey why wouldn't you give an answer that you would defend Taiwan Biden gave it said well I don't want to tip my cards you wouldn't want to do that that's a really good answer by the way the official the official policy of the United States towards Taiwan is strategic ambiguity which means we don't say whether we'll defend it it depends on the circumstances and and Biden when he he's
now said multiple times that he would defend it and his own staff walked it back because they said we're not changing strategic ambiguity so yeah I mean the policy he said in that case actually is the United States policy so let me ask you guys a question if he won the Democratic nomination and he's up against Trump who do you vote for obviously at this point yeah of course RFK and I think sax would have a hard time he wouldn't say who
he's voted for previously I think sax would vote RFK is not gonna say are you are you gonna say or no saak doesn't like to say he's justan I'm reserving judgment on the general until I know who both candidates are okay he won't even sax won't even tell us who vot who he voted for I would love for RFK Jr to be on the ballot and have that choice for sure and and it's possible I would it's possible I would vote for him it depends
who the other person is is it really CU you wouldn't even tell us who you vot for or if you voted in the last election well that's my right Jason I don't have to tell you I just think it's it's intellectually dishonest since you talk about politics so much that I do I think you should tell us who you voted I talk about issues how I decide to balance those issues because every candidate is a complex mix of issues
that's ultimately my decision somebody who injects everything to not just say inject it I'm not the one injecting so to follow up on the question I asked I would love to see Donald Trump come on the show and give him an opportunity to have a conversation and see if folks can have a different point of view coming out of that as well as Joe Biden and maybe some of the other candidates running for the Republican nomination
and I want to see if the the points of focus for us can you know maybe uh match up with one or more of these candidates so far n will come on right with think yeah so Nikki Hal's in and then Trump will do it and then Biden will not Trump will do it I think Trump would do it because he somebody would I mean he had he had he did something with Bart stol right Jason do you wanna do you want me to do the announcement on the The Summit oh please okay
so we are confirmed and signed on our venue and so we are confirmed for Allin Summit 2023 in Los Angeles September 10th through 12th secure the bag baby let's go we'll put out the um and I think it's going to be really exciting because we'll have an opportunity to at this point in the year we have a lot of time to put together a really high quality agenda for conversations we each want to have with really amazing people
so I'm excited about that we've kind of started to put together some ideas on what we want to talk about who we want to invite to have those conversations with us put out some invites so very good job by the way and you'll be leading your lead this is your AI Summit so so I'm I'm handing everything off to you I'm helping with the parties basically but you're driving congratulations your team is exceptional I just want to let the audience know
we're doing we're doing it together and I'm I'm I'm stepping back and letting you drive I consider this like your I care very deeply about content and I want to you know make sure that we chance to have yeah the experience and have a chance to have the conversations we want to have with the folks we want to talk with so nothing could be better than you building on top of the first one and then we just keep going from
there chamath and sax if they want to build on it from there there'll be three this is what everybody wants to know is tickets there's going to be three ticket tiers there'll still be a VIP one for 7500 that gets you into the dinners oh sorry yeah that that's that's an important point the VIP experience this year we got some feedback on the last go around um that we needed to make sure there was a degree of differentiation so
the VIP experience will include special VIP dinners early access to the theater gift bags special sections during the parties so hopefully it elevates the experience a bit for folks that are able to pay the higher ticket fee which actually helps support the whole program no bottle service I mean bottle service if you bring your card but hopefully as a as a way to kind of support the overall program and keep the cost down
for everyone else and then it's $1,500 general admission pass which includes access to the parties and then we'll still have the scholarship class can I tell you guys a funny story yeah when I joined the ownership group that bought the Warriors I heard a rumor which was that when we were competing it was us versus Ellison to buy the Warriors and Ellison had an idea I don't know if this is true or not this is what I heard that
he had a he had had a idea for a new stadium and he's like he wanted to make it an ultra VIP stadium and so there's only 5,000 seats and they all were like Singapore Airlines first class seats so you go into the stadium to watch but it' be like everybody would be like up close and you could touch and outside they also had a thousand guillotines so you could just yeah I mean it's hard enough for a family to go see I don't know if
that's true or not but I I thought it was very funny tickets are crazy expensive now it's like cra hundreds of dollars for no bleed seats for the dictator Troth poopaa for David saaks who set up this episode and fredberg the Sultan of science uh we hope you enjoy this it's the first of many to come we will still be doing regular dockets we might have to go to two episodes a week on weeks like this who knows but give us your
feedback share the show and we'll see you all at the all in Summit let your winners ride Rainman d [Music] and in said we open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it love [Music] youen besties are that's my dog taking driveways oh man we should all just get a room and just have one big huge orgy cuz they're all usess it's like this like sexual tension that they just need to release Som we need to get merch [Music] our going in