C (2:19)

Here it is. Throw it up. Throw that up, gang, when you get it. Because it's that this is. This is Jack.

E (2:25)

This is either gay Jack or Jack's gay, intelligent brother.

C (2:29)

Yeah.

B (2:30)

When you order Jack on Grindr.

C (2:32)

Oh, gosh.

B (2:32)

When you order Posto on Grindr.

C (2:34)

All right, this is a. We have 11 year olds watching. So. So here. We're gonna get to a bunch of stuff here, too. So this is why we're gonna do this. Because I'm driving, because I'm in studio. So I'm gonna do a little different. We're doing.

B (2:47)

I haven't seen Tyler. Is that his. Is that a haircut? What is that?

E (2:51)

I did get a haircut a while back. Yeah, Well, a few weeks ago.

C (2:55)

Tyler hasn't been on Doc ride for, like, a month.

E (2:57)

I haven't been on Thot cry. Every time I've walked in, it's like too many people leave. What?

F (3:03)

Because there's no hat?

C (3:05)

Yeah, that's what I'm wearing. A hat. That's what it is. All right, here's. Here's. We're gonna cover today. Epstein files release. Is it too late? Seditious Conspiracy 2025 Edition. That'll be topic two. Topic three, Professor. Only fans at the University of Washington at topic four here. This is where we don't know if we're going to get here or not, man. Keeping Epidemic. Women ditching dudes for AI. Hope we get to that one. And then number five, Sydney Sweeney. Is it a setup? Dun, dun, dun. All right. Jack Epstein files release. Is it too late? Trump is now behind it? Has the damage already been done? Is this too late? Is the political fallout already too?

B (3:45)

Great, Man, I actually really want to get to that Sydney Sweeney thing because I have a hot take. Or that I. I think. I think we're all being set up by Sydney.

C (3:52)

Well, I know, but you let. We got it. Let's go in our YouTube. I know, I know.

B (3:56)

Just saying. Just saying. I had to get it out there.

C (3:58)

Well, if we move quick.

E (4:00)

Wait, did you bring the binder with you to California?

C (4:02)

Oh, gosh, no.

B (4:04)

The binder I actually used. People get a little confused because now other people had, like, fake Epstein files in their binder. My binder was given me directly by J.D. vance himself. And he said, jack, you can't talk about this to anyone. And I said. And I said, okay, but what is it? And then he's like, don't open it. So I opened it when I got home, and inside was filled with nothing but rare magic. The Gathering cards. And it was actually J.D. vance's personal stash.

C (4:31)

Wow. I could see J.D. playing Magic, kind of.

D (4:35)

He almost certainly played magic. That's, like, definitely a jd. Let me just.

B (4:39)

Let me just say, because it is a serious thing, right? Like, joking aside or whatever. Like, binder jokes aside. Like, which I've had to go through and talk about for months now. You know, this is something that was avoidable in terms of the political fallout. I don't think it ever needed to be like this. This was something that Trump had campaigned on. This is something that MAGA has always stood for. Going Back to like 2016 was you, you know, justice for Jeffrey Epstein was exposed opposing Jeffrey Epstein. By the way, it was Trump's DOJ that actually arrested Epstein in the first place, which is something I don't think he gets a lot of credit for in his first term. He literally, literally arrested Jeffrey Epstein, but, you know, no one gives him any credit for it. But this whole thing with the files and the release and then there's not going to be a release and then there was nothing and now there's something. It just feels like, you know, it just didn't need to get to this point, right? It just didn't need to get to this point. And I think there was a misunderstanding of how, how big of a deal of it was for the, for the people. It was a big, how big of a deal it was for the country. And it's kind of a stand in, right? I think it's kind of a stand in for establishment versus like anti establishment. So if you're pro establishment, you must not want the Epstein files release. If you're anti establishment, you want the Epstein files released. So it's something that, for a lot of no prop voters and low prop voters and independents, it just became this huge proxy fight over whether or not you are part of, quote, unquote, the club or not. And so look, obviously I've always, I've, I've always stood for full disclosure. And I'm like, look, people want to like come at me and I'm like, I went to the White House, I went to the Attorney General, I went to the Director of the FBI, I went to the President, United States and I said, release the Epstein files. Like, what else would you have me do? Right? And then we've been pushing for it ever since. Now we got this bill, I hope they're released. I hope every single piece of it comes out.

C (6:32)

So I just wanna make one correction, Jack. You said that Trump campaigned on it. MAGA has always stood for it. I agree with you that MAGA has always stood for it. MAGA has always wanted it. But Trump didn't really campaign on it. He got asked about it in the interview.

B (6:45)

He mentioned it during the campaign.

C (6:47)

What's that?

B (6:48)

He definitely mentioned it during the campaign.

C (6:50)

Yeah. So he got asked about it in an interview, and he said, I would lean towards full release. Yeah. Which was the right answer. But it wasn't, you know, some of these other pieces about transparency, whether JFK files, MLK files, things like that. He would get up on the stage and talk about a lot, and he would do it at stop after stop. When it came to the Epstein files, he did say when asked, but it wasn't something that he beat the drum on. And so it's almost like a form of miscommunication and a disconnect between the admin and the base, in the sense that I don't think Trump was as gung ho as his base was. The base thought that was like a package deal. The base thought, we get Epstein, we get jfk, we get all this stuff. Trump, I don't think ever in his mind, included it in the same cohort, if you will, but his voters did. So you're right. It became like a proxy war out of, like, is the establishment in control? Is the deep state in control or the people in control? And so it was a total, I think, unforced error. I mean, I'll never forget Amfest. Everybody was talking about it at Amfest. And, you know, that was the. That was the tone and tenor of the bass. But there was a lot of people that didn't. Didn't understand that yet.

B (8:04)

The sass. Because we haven't had any.

C (8:06)

Oh, yes, sass. Student Action.

D (8:09)

It really was people. I don't know how much we could really say about it, but it really was. It was such a frustrating period because we had episodes where people were really angry at Charlie, as was far too often the case, where Charlie was trying to be a helpful messenger. He's trying to tell the White House, trying to tell others, guys, people are serious about this. They're angry. This is a mess. You have a messaging problem here. And people would act like Charlie had decided to go and declare war on the White House. No, no, the exact opposite. Charlie was always trying to be the helpful messenger. He was always in touch with the base. And we saw it over and over again that people were walking up to us at Student Action Summit, were saying, oh, wow, we're really upset about this. And we were trying to convey that to people.

C (8:54)

Yeah, no, and we. I'll never forget some of the conversations that Charlie and I had. We look at each other going, like, this is bad. You know, like, people are really fired up about this. And if we're going to tell the world how fired up they are about it, then we're we're going to run into people who don't understand where we're coming from, and it's going to cause some, Some. Some consternation. And it certainly did. But I knew that between that and really what happened with the Iran strikes, the. I just knew that there was this fissure that was happening emerging, especially with Gen Z voters, which we had spent so much time courting in 2024. And I think Charlie was, you know, pretty legitimately worried about. I think he was justified in some of his worries. So now the question is to the team, I guess I'll ask maybe, Mikey, this is a good time to bring you in. Is it too late to restore the trust that's maybe been damaged in this Epstein debacle?

F (9:55)

No, I don't think it's too late. But here's. You think back to the Russian hoax, where a lot of people thought it was true when Trump was saying it's not true, and the American people were getting a little bit frustrated, thinking maybe there's more that was swept under the rug here. But time and again, Epstein is this pathological liar. So much to the point where, like, you even saw the Dems pushing this narrative that he spent Thanksgiving with him, and then you find on Melania's ex account that they had Thanksgiving with some troops in some random area that Epstein wasn't even nearby. But I don't think it's too far gone. And there is a reality here where Trump has just called this thing a hoax because it truly is a hoax. And once it is inevitably released, which my question, actually, I do want to ask Blake how long it will actually take to get these things released, realistically. But once these things are released, I want to see how many of these people take accountability. If Trump is totally innocent, if all these people are totally innocent, how many people will take responsibility for their words, their actions? Having gotten so upset at Charlie, at different people saying that there's. They're lying about the Epstein files, that Trump's actually in there. But something else that I found out last night, too, that I just think is a funny little tidbit, and I'd love for maybe Blake to answer the question on how long it'll actually take for these things to get released is Epstein's youngest victim was in fact five years older than the Prophet Muhammad's. And so this is. I just not to bring this thing.

D (11:29)

Back to Islam to have a thing.

F (11:32)

To be talking about here.

B (11:33)

Aisha was eight. Eight. Aisha was eight.

C (11:37)

Yes.

D (11:38)

That was not.

F (11:39)

I think she was younger Six and then six. She was six.

D (11:43)

Six when married. Nine when taken into his house. If you catch the, the hadith's wording, the drift thereof.

C (11:51)

Taking into the house.

D (11:52)

Yes, yes, indeed. Like it's always important to emphasize these things because it's very funny because you'll say it and people will like flinch. Like you're just, you're not supposed to say that.

C (12:01)

You're really not supposed. We used to have a, a much more polite society which made us susceptible to being hoodwinked and taken advantage of by domineering, conquering cultures like Islam. And now we've had to wake up and now we can't flinch. We can't flinch at the truth anymore. That's the, that's the truth.

E (12:19)

We were, we were a very polite, well mannered society and we get, let.

C (12:24)

People do their thing and we didn't.

E (12:25)

Get into, you know, 20s, 30s, 40s.

C (12:28)

50S, 60s, 70s, 80s.

E (12:30)

I don't, I think it started, I think the breakdown started in the 60s.

C (12:32)

But. Yeah, well, a lot of 60s, a.

D (12:34)

Lot of bad stuff happened. It's like that website, what happened in 1971 or so, where everything sort of starts to break.

E (12:39)

That's right.

D (12:40)

Wages, industry, crime. Yeah, a lot of bad ideas took root and we're still reaping the consequences of it.

C (12:47)

So Blake, is it too late when we release the Epstein files?

D (12:51)

The problem with the Epstein files, in my opinion is it's sort, it's the sort of thing where people have read so much, they believe so much about it that is truthfully not proven. That I think in a sense nothing can satisfy the most hardcore Epstein people other than I guess you could imagine. Oh, found the secret trove. Here's all of the, here's, here's 850 different global elites and they were all pedophiles. And here's like their kids and here's where the bodies are buried and they all have to be dragged off to prison or execution. Now if you don't have that on.

E (13:24)

That question, do you think if they threw one person in prison, oh no.

D (13:29)

That would just, that would just make the wolves more ravenous?

F (13:31)

You think so?

D (13:32)

But like it really is. I always encourage some degree of skepticism on this and caution because you really want to think, what do we truly, truly know? We have, we're having these press conferences the last few days of. First of all, they call them Epstein survivors. I always find that wording sort of annoying. I don't care. I don't care. I'm forging ahead. I've Just been making one enemy after another this past week. And so survivors. The implication of calling someone a survivor is that presumptively, if you said victim, it would mean they died. So, for example, a 911 victim is someone who died in 9 11. A 911 survivor was in the Pentagon or in the World Trade center and did not die. Hence why they're a survivor. But the Epstein survivors, there are some. Where. Do we have any confirmed deaths?

C (14:20)

No.

D (14:21)

People make wild speculation, but I know of no use me.

B (14:24)

Excuse me. We have one confirmed death. Jeffrey Epps. True.

D (14:27)

Okay, okay. One confirmed death. But besides that, we have no. We have no.

F (14:33)

No one went.

D (14:34)

As far as I know, no one went missing related to this case. Most of the alleged victims were not even underage.

C (14:40)

Virginia Guthrie. There is allegation.

B (14:42)

Virginia Jeffrey did die under mysterious circumstances.

C (14:45)

They said suicide is the presumed death. But yeah, there's a lot of people.

D (14:50)

When it's gone. When it's gone to court, it's like Virginia Guthrey accused. Basically, she accused Alan Dershowitz by name. And what it ended up going is going to court where like, ruled against her and had to apologize and say that her allegations were false. And, you know, I guess you could say the entire court system was rigged against her. But another possibility is just she oversold it. We have other victims who, you know, were, like, delusional and were point. Like, they say UFOs abducted them.

C (15:18)

And again, I don't. So having been now subjected to. And I think everybody could appreciate this on this. On this show being being in the middle of conspiracy theories where you're like.

E (15:33)

That'S false subject matter.

C (15:35)

That's false. That's not true. That's full of crap. That's definitely fake. It's just like one after the other after the other where you're like, okay, you see it. Look, Mikey, weren't you the one that was like, I will never look at a conspiracy theory the same way? I think you said that.

F (15:48)

Well, yeah, I was.

C (15:50)

Yes. Right.

F (15:52)

Well, because I'm like conspiracy theorists on a lot of things, but I was actually having that conversation with you too, Andrew, where I was like, I always just kind of take everything with a grain of salt. But now I'm taking every conspiracy with a grain of salt. Like, I'm questioning it. You know, Is this really legit? I'm more taking a Blake Black pill stance on everything now.

C (16:15)

I warned you guys.

D (16:16)

Like, I warned you guys.

C (16:17)

So. But. But okay, but here's my point. So what if with Epstein. So, okay, I know that Dan and Cash took a bunch of crap when they. When they came out. And they were like, there's, you know, no list. And he didn't kill himself. Or he did kill himself. And that's what. That's the truth. And if it wasn't the truth, we would tell you. And they took a bunch of gruff for that. I know that they're on the hot seat on, like, a bunch of. Bunch of different things. I get it. But what if it was just like, this whole thing has been, like, overblown. Yeah, he's a scumbag. Yeah, he's a criminal. Yeah, he apparently liked underage women, but they weren't like, apparently they weren't as young. I don't know what the youngest point is. Like, what if it was just a little less impressive and crazy than we've all sort of been led to believe?

D (17:05)

Like I said, it's worth remembering the claim that we've run into that you'll hear is that, you know, it was a massive pedophile ring or that it was a pedophile espionage ring. There, you'll see that wording. But what we have, actual concrete evidence.

B (17:20)

Was a pedophile ring. What do you mean wording it was. If we know it was a pedophile ring.

E (17:26)

Do we?

C (17:27)

Who.

E (17:27)

Who abused.

D (17:28)

Who abused anyone other than Epstein?

C (17:32)

Prince Andrew. Right.

D (17:33)

No, do.

B (17:33)

We don't. We don't.

C (17:34)

We don't have hard proof of that.

D (17:35)

And I think with that with Prince Andrew, it's like she's 18 by the time anything happens. Allegedly.

C (17:41)

Okay.

D (17:41)

Is anything even proven there?

C (17:42)

I don't actually. That's a great point. I don't have the details on that.

B (17:45)

Definitely.

F (17:46)

Well, okay. Well, here's the other thing too, actually, because I do want to just talk about conspiracies in general, because one of. Someone gave me really good advice on this, and I think it is very good. The skeptics, people that have skepticism and they're questioning of you or things you're involved in, oftentimes are the ones you want to win over, because behind their skepticism is deep loyalty. And they. Once you win them over, they trust you. And there's a deep rooted trust and loyalty behind it. So, I mean, I'm not coming after conspiracy theorists. In fact, I am one on a lot of things. But Blake and I actually go back and forth on these. But I just want to clarify that, as you know, Andrew, we were having this conversation on, you know, I take everything with a grain of salt now.

C (18:34)

Yeah, well, so at the time of.

B (18:36)

The Alleged incident, lied to about so many things and then not ask questions.

F (18:41)

Yeah.

B (18:42)

All right. We just. We can't.

C (18:43)

Yeah. At the time of the alleged incidents, Guthrie was 17 years old.

D (18:47)

Okay. Okay. So she's at least alleged it. Well, I. She did allege it. Unfortunately, she's now dead, but. Okay, man, that sounded really. Okay, now it does sound like a conspiracy.

B (18:59)

No, she alleged it until she turned up dead.

F (19:02)

But, you know, I guess it seems.

D (19:04)

Like the evidence is, like, I'd have to. Actually, I'll. Let me look up more of the stuff that I remember reading about it before I, like, just go off. But, like, Virginia Guthrie, she made. We know she made wild allegations against people because she ended up getting wrecked in court on the basis of it.

C (19:20)

Yeah.

D (19:20)

And.

B (19:21)

Well, here's. Here. Can I. I'll just add a grain.

D (19:24)

Of salt to that.

B (19:24)

Right. And. And I. And I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that when you deal with people who have gone through sexual assault, sexual trauma, especially when it was done at a young age, at a vulnerable age, it. It typically does not leave them in a place where they are your, like, model witness. Right. It leaves them unstable. It scars them for life. It certainly does mess with your memories. Now, add to the fact that there are drugs and alcohol and all sorts of other things involved in this. So this is why these cases, in general, are so very hard to. To bring in the first place in court.

D (20:04)

No offense, Jack, but I heard that sort of. I heard that exact explanation of things when we were going through, frankly, a pretty big episode of American hysteria, which was the. The campus sexual assault hysteria, where you had case after case after case, dozens of them, where people brought allegations against fellow classmates, against professors, mostly fellow classmates.

B (20:27)

Though, where they would say.

D (20:28)

Where, like, there would be stories that didn't add up. And that's what they would say. They would say, well, actually, you know, if their story is income is actually not consistent that it's true.

C (20:39)

Yeah. So here the. The official numbers. So there's a July 2025 memo from the US Department of Justice and FBI following a comprehensive review of Epstein's files, concluded that he victimized over 1,000 women and children over two decades. There have been 36 identified victims in the 2005, 2008 Florida investigation, and more than 200 represented in lawsuits. So. And then, I guess Epstein's estate compensation fund has 225 claims against it. So that's a ring. So, like, that's a pretty.

D (21:16)

They say thousands of people, you can get money.

F (21:19)

You Can.

D (21:20)

So they made up a thing where you can get money if you say that you were abused by Jeffrey Epstein. And we know people have gotten payouts from that who are not very reliable. Sounding again, a person who claims that she was abducted by UFOs as part of the Epstein thing got money through that compensation fund.

C (21:37)

The Epstein Victims Compensation Program established by his estate is valued at over $600 million. At the time of his death, received 225 applications from alleged victims. Of these, 150 were deemed eligible. The fund paid out over $121 million with 92% of eligible claimants accepting. So. So it's. I mean.

B (22:01)

Pedophile ring.

C (22:03)

Say what?

B (22:04)

Pedophile ring.

E (22:05)

I mean, it would have to be a ring to pay 150 people, right? Yeah. So it would have to be a much bigger pool of people. Cause think about all the people that didn't apply.

C (22:17)

But to Blake's point, like, you know, so there was some footage of this going around this week where some of these women were like, why don't you name the victims? And like, we shouldn't have to. Like the FBI.

A (22:26)

Yeah.

D (22:27)

So again, I'm sorry, but like, you won't name. You say you were sexually assaulted, Name them, make an accusation. They're demanding that people do it for them because my guess is they don't actually have good evidence for it.

C (22:41)

So they want.

D (22:41)

They want to just do guilt by insinuation, which is, yeah, are some people dumb? And they sent emails to Epstein. Yeah, that's bad. That's probably an error of judgment. But that doesn't prove they were taking part in sexual abuse, period.

C (22:56)

This is Lane Schoenberger, chief investment officer and founding partner of Y Refi. It has been an honor and a privilege to partner with Turning Point. And for Charlie to endorse us, his endorsement means the world to us. And we look forward to continuing our partnership with Turning Point for years to come. Now here, Charlie, in his own words, tell you about why Refi.

A (23:16)

I'm going to tell you guys about why refi.com, that is yrefy.com why refi is incredible. Private student loan debt in America totals about $300 billion. Why refi is refinancing distress or defaulted private student loans. You can finally take control of your student loan situation with a plan that works for your monthly budget. Go to yrefi.com that is why refi.com do you have a co borrower or why Refi can get them released from the loan. You can skip a payment up to 12 times without penalty. It may not be available in all 50 states. Go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com let's face it, if you have distress or default to student loans, it can be overwhelming because of private student loan debt. So many people feel stuck. Go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com Private student loan debt relief. Why refi.com.

C (24:05)

Let me, let me come.

B (24:05)

At this from another area because you just mentioned the emails, right? And we have seen some emails released and like, Jon Stewart was, was losing his mind on me last night. So he brought, he brought up me and his monologue and was like, he's like, I can't believe Paso Big isn't talking about these emails which clearly reference Trump. And I was like, I did talk about the emails. He was talking about how he was trying to blackmail Trump or sneer Trump, smear Trump or like, ensnare him in his legal problems. But there were no emails where he was like, oh, hey, me and Donald Trump need to cover up that thing we did on the island. Like, there's nothing like that in the emails. I'm just reading, I read the emails out publicly. But is, here's what's really weird, though, is have you guys seen these emails about Jeffrey Epstein where he's like, oh, let me set up a back channel with Lavrov in Syria. Let me, let me just connect you with, like, these Middle east partners. Like, I do think there should be some scrutiny and, you know, beyond the, what we're just talking about, beyond the sex stuff, because, like, this guy seems to be conducting a very odd level of shadow diplomacy between himself, world leaders, power brokers all over. And it, I don't know that we've ever actually gotten a seriously, you know, robust explanation for how he was able to do all this and how he's able to conduct this shadow diplomacy. And so I can certainly see why people would think that when you add to that this sort of club of people that surrounds him, this coterie going down to his island and doing these things and being involved with underage girls, that it seems to all be connected.

D (25:47)

I, like, I still kind of like my, this is much more of a crank theory, but I've kind of been amused by the idea. So Epstein did have, he had involvement with a former Israeli prime minister. He clearly was in contact with Israeli intelligence stuff. Definitely is the best point in favor of some sort of conspiracy going on. But I've also entertained the idea, what if Epstein himself basically believed in Israel conspiracy Theories. So he thought if I'm buds with a former Israeli Prime Minister and other people in our government, they'll protect me from getting arrested.

C (26:17)

Well, you know, okay, I. That's fun.

B (26:22)

Ehup, Iraq was the head of the Mossad. Yeah, he was literally the head of the Mossad prior to becoming prime minister. Like that's not a conspiracy theory. You can look that up on Wikipedia.

C (26:31)

I mean, the most obvious explanation here is that he was probably loosely connected with a lot of these governments, had these loose affiliations, friendships. He was a networker, he was known as an international financier and he was buds with all these powerful people. So once you become a known commodity, you start getting welcomed into more and more social circles. Plus he had no scruples, so he's willing to do dirty deals. And he was probably a useful financial sort of launderer of money to connect dots that other people wouldn't do. I mean, I've never been convinced that he was actually in the pocket of any one of these groups. He was sort of like a gun for hire if somebody needed something done. And he was willing to sort of connect the dots and be the go between and get the money from point A to point B. And he probably took up his pound of flesh along the way. I'm not convinced that he was necessarily doing the honeypot thing. It's just as plausible to me that he could have just been a really sick, perverted fetishist that was into slightly illegal or barely illegal. What's the term they use where it's 16, 17 year olds as opposed to 18. It's almost like he's the kind of guy that once they turn 18 or 19, he lost interest. Like he. There was something deeply sick about this guy. It could have just been that he liked that and he wanted to have parties with other people he was interested in and try and get them involved. I don't know, the honeypot thing. I'm not a thousand percent convinced.

D (28:01)

I would just say if there was a honey pot. I just think there'd be some actual evidence for it. And there's. People really love the ideas of elaborate blackmail rings. And it's like I would always question this if we would have members of Congress and stuff come on and say oh yeah, members of Congress get blackmailed by the intelligence agencies to do what they want. And all I would say is if you say that's happening, if you know that's happening, give me a name of someone who did it. Because you'd instantly be a hero if you could name a person with a specific situation where this happened. I think people reach assumptions. I think they love to traffic in ideas that sound lurid or dramatic or cinematic, we might say, but there's got to be pressure to actually go after what we know, what is provable. People are saying, again, with these victims, where they're saying, why don't you name some people to accuse? And they'll come up with explanations like, well, they shouldn't have to, or they'll say, we could be sued because we signed an NDA. I would counter that with a few things. First of all, if they're waiting for names to get released through documents, it kind of creates this. I would invite the possibility they're worried they would name someone who would then actually be totally exonerated by documents coming out, or someone who just doesn't show up at all. Whereas once the names come out, they can go, oh, yeah, that person. That's the person who did it. That's not. That seems a little weird. And also, I would say this might be naive of me, but given the frenzy that is around this, if they name a specific person, I think that person is. I think they're unlikely to get sued for violating an NDA.

C (29:38)

Right now, I just given, given the.

D (29:43)

You're going to want more attention on you by suing someone just for violating an NDA, not for defamation, but for violating an NDA. I find that on the.

C (29:51)

Ultimately, what we're. The fact that we're still arguing about this is the real reason why this issue was a hot potato for President Trump and the admin is because there is such a hunger to know what the truth is. And there is such an inability seemingly to get to the truth. So listen, I think it's good that President Trump has come out and said, hey, I want this to all be public. I can't say that it's not too late. I'm not convinced that it's not too late.

E (30:16)

Can I say this, though? I mean, if they would have. Even though we're saying we're arguing if it's too late or not too late, what we probably can agree on is if there was a better, more proactive strategy coming right into this second administration with handling this, that was. Even if it wasn't what people wanted to hear, I think it would. We would have been able to get past it and it would have probably. I mean, hindsight's always 20 20, but, like, obviously, I don't think people took this as seriously or I think some of the thought process Was that the White House was like, oh, well, you know, we can maybe, like, kick this down the road.

C (30:53)

Yeah, it'll blow over.

E (30:55)

Not care about this anymore as much. Like, this was, like, a hot topic of a few years ago, and it's, like, kind of dead. And there's other bigger issues that we're dealing with. And I think that probably, again, hindsight's always 20 20, but regardless of what the outcome was, they should have just handled this, like, basically in January, like, come right out and be like, we're just going to get this taken care of and over with.

B (31:16)

And.

C (31:17)

Yeah, I still think. Yeah. And I. By the way, Jack, I think the whole binder thing that they put you through, which was a total farce, and I feel bad for you for that because you were just trying. You. I don't. I don't know the story there, but apparently you weren't even thinking that that was gonna.

E (31:31)

Nobody thought that.

C (31:31)

It was just. They. They totally snuck that up on you.

B (31:33)

But it was supposed to be a policy briefing. Yeah, it was literally a series of. I mean, I've said this, like, I went on Piers the next day and talked about it after the memo came out, but I was like, it was a series of policy briefings that we were invited to. And so, like, Bobby Kennedy came in and Marco Rubio came in and JD Van started the whole thing off. And then we went to Oval Office and, you know, got pictures, very cool. Got the challenge coins. And then, then Pam Bondi came in and that's when. That was the very first time at that point that we heard anything about Epstein. Like, Epstein was just not even on the list or the agenda at all.

C (32:12)

Here's my read on what happened there is because you. Because we talked about the difference between Trump and whether or not he campaigned on it versus the movement has always stood for it. And I think even Trump's own administration was like, hey, of course we're gonna start bringing transparency to this Epstein thing. And then Pam Bondi kind of got kind of mud slung on her from that whole situation. It looked ill prepared, it looked inept. It just optically was not good. But I think there was just such sort of an assumption.

B (32:43)

Well, you could have given us the actual files the day of. And, like, I'm done with this. Like, if you're going to release something, release something. Don't. Don't play games.

C (32:51)

Don't. Phase one it. Yeah, Don't. Don't drip it. But here's the thing. I just think it was assumed in the in the admin that of course we would do this thing. And then I think it ran into problems internally. Trump thought it was a hoax. Trump thought it was a distraction. There was just a disconnect because there was a disconnect from the top to kind of the bottom, you know. And Andrew, do you think.

B (33:10)

Do you think this is one of those things and maybe even writ large that, like, it's also a split between, like, where you get your media, because so on social media, this has been the number one story for like a decade. You know what I mean? Like, there's. There's always sort of your story of the day, but then there's always the story right under that is always Jeffrey Epstein. And it was the story that had the longest, you know, longevity on social media Since. Since about 2017 or so. And then that's when Mike Cernovich sued to get the. The documents. And a lot of other people been talking about it. Miami Herald came in and Julie Brown. And then it's something where, like, it just wasn't really a narrative on cable news, though. So if you get your information from cable news primarily, you obviously remember when Epstein got arrested in the first Trump admin, you remember his death in prison. But then it just sort of goes away. It's like not really a story on cable news, but on social media, it never went away. So if you're someone who's on social media all the time, you're seeing Epstein every day. If you're someone who only watches cable news, you haven't seen it in six years.

C (34:18)

Yeah, no, and I think also, yes, it was a huge story bubbling under the surface for years. And I think that's one of the best defenses here is that, you know, the Dems didn't do anything with this when they had power and they would have hit Trump had they had something on Trump. That was always the best argument. It's the argument Charlie went to. But it's a story that serves as a proxy, as you said, for so many different stories, like what we saw with trafficking, what we saw with the sound of freedom, what we've seen with just the sexualization of young people, what we've seen from the elites and the globalists. It was just like the story has everything, right? Like international espionage, high finance. It has corruption, it has elites, it has Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton, Bill Gates. It's got all these things. Reid Hoffman. Now we find out. Larry Summers. It's just so. There's so much there. And I think to Blake's point, though, there's so much there that it's tempting and seductive to believe that it ties all the disparate pieces of how we made sense of the world over the last eight to 10 years, where it just is inevitably going to fall short. The truth is going to fall short of the narrative that we've sort of sold ourselves or that we've speculated about endlessly over the years. And it's weird because almost it takes somebody like Trump who's been exposed to that echelon of American life and international life to understand that it's just not as cool as we think of it in our own heads. And so I don't know. But again, that's where a guy like Trump maybe couldn't, President Trump maybe couldn't see it because he's been living in that rarefied air for so long. But we, the people, the base, it makes sense of so much. But ultimately, it's inevitable that it will fall short.

D (36:10)

We have breaking news. We have breaking news, everyone. The White House has clarified that President Trump does not want to execute members of Congress, us.

C (36:21)

Okay, good. Well, this is, this is a perfect lead in big, big flip flop.

D (36:25)

Big flip flop from the White House on this one.

B (36:27)

We didn't say it. We are live. So, you know, that is me in the chat responding to you. And if you guys have any rumble rants, please send them in and we will read them. Watch for the rumble rants and your rumble rant will be given priority. So throw them in, folks.

D (36:45)

But yes. So that was the other big thing we really wanted to talk about today. So we, we were talking earlier on the show, the daytime show. Oh, wait, no, we didn't talk about. We were distracted by something else. Anyway, Democrats basically told the military that they should defy orders from President Trump in a TikTok video. Yeah, we do have it. Let's do 316.

B (37:06)

I'm Senator Alyssa Slotkin.

C (37:08)

Senator Mark Kelly.

B (37:09)

Representative Chris D'.

C (37:10)

Aluzio.

B (37:11)

Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander. Representative Chrissy Houlihan.

C (37:14)

Congressman Jason Crow. I was a captain in the United.

B (37:16)

States Navy, former CIA officer, former Navy, former paratrooper and Army Ranger, former intelligence officer, former Air Force.

C (37:24)

We want to speak directly to members.

B (37:25)

Of the military and the intelligence community who take risks each day to keep Americans safe.

D (37:30)

We know you are under enormous stress.

B (37:32)

And pressure right now.

D (37:33)

Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk.

C (37:37)

This administration is pitting our uniform military.

B (37:40)

And intelligence community partners, professionals, against American citizens like us. You all swore an oath to protect.

D (37:46)

And defend this Constitution.

B (37:48)

Right now, the Threats to our Constitution aren't just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders.

D (38:01)

No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution.

B (38:05)

We know this is hard and that.

C (38:06)

It'S a dream difficult time to be a public servant.

D (38:08)

But whether you're serving in the CIA.

B (38:10)

The army or Navy, the Air Force.

C (38:12)

Your vigilance is critical.

D (38:14)

And know that we have your back.

B (38:16)

Because now more than ever, the American people need you.

C (38:20)

We need you to stand up for our laws, our Constitution, and who we are as Americans.

B (38:25)

Don't give up. Don't give up. Don't give up.

D (38:28)

Don't give up the ship.

E (38:32)

You must refuse illegal orders.

D (38:38)

But then what's great about this is. So that happened over the weekend, I think, or on Monday. It happened a few days ago. We even talked about it a few days ago.

C (38:45)

I think it was a Monday.

F (38:46)

Yeah.

D (38:47)

And so it happened a few days ago. And then Trump became aware of it and began posting on Truth about it. So let's do. I think 315 is the first one here. So he says it's called seditious behavior at the highest level. Each one of these traitors to our country should be arrested and put on trial. Their words cannot be allowed to stand. We won't have a country anymore. An example must be set. President D.J.

E (39:19)

Let'S go.

B (39:21)

Let's go.

C (39:24)

Yeah, I agree. Actually, you know, you brought up something at the end of Trump 1.0 where Mark Milley sent out that it was. I think it was after January 6th. And he basically was like, you know, reminder to everyone.

D (39:36)

It was during Summer of Floyd. Summer of Floyd.

C (39:38)

Is it during summer?

D (39:39)

Yeah, it was.

C (39:39)

Because it was up today. I thought, are you sure the.

D (39:41)

Remember your. He maybe did another one after January 6th. But the one I was thinking of when we talked about it the other day was Summer of Floyd during the riots in D.C. and he sends the letter to all the troops being like, remember, we swear an oath to the Constitution and the Constitution includes the right to protest and speak. And I really think that the implication of that was if Trump told them to stop riots In Minneapolis, in D.C. with force, they were gonna. They were paving the way to just defy the president, which would have been effectively a military coup d' etat against the United States. And I feel like they might be laying the groundwork for that here, too. They want Democrats very clearly want someone in the military to just say they are not going to obey the president's orders on the border, on immigration, on drug traffickers. They want to create that constitutional crisis so they can justify what we know to be true, which is a huge amount of DC Is effectively hostile to the elected President of the United States. And they think that they can engineer some, you know, a bureaucratic or military undermining of that elected presidency, which would be very bad for the country, to say the least. Let's get another clip before we go on. Chuck Schumer decided to react to this. Let's play 3:17.

B (40:59)

Earlier today, Donald Trump shared a post on Truth Social calling for Democratic members of Congress to be hanged. He also posted a message that said, seditious behavior punishable by death. Let's be crystal clear. The President of the United States is calling for the execution of elected officials. This is an outright threat, and it's deadly serious.

D (41:29)

I feel like if he really believed that, he wouldn't be doing a speech like that on the floor of Congress.

C (41:34)

Of course not. He knows he's not going to get arrested or there's no actual, you know, risk to him.

D (41:40)

There's.

C (41:41)

Because Trump's not a dictator. He's not trying to hang.

D (41:43)

All I'm going to say is if Trump is going to arrest lawmakers, he should arrest Ilhan Omar to denaturalize her and send her back to Somalia.

B (41:53)

Well, yes.

D (41:54)

I'm begging you.

B (41:55)

Ilhan Omar. Ilhan Omar posted something, she did the classic Democrat phrase where she was like, she posted Trump's Truth socials. And she was like, this is not normal. And I'm like, okay, Ilhan Omar, can you just inform us what exactly is normal for sedition and treason in Somalia, your home country? Can we talk about what they do to people in Somalia? Mikey, perhaps you have some, some thoughts on the matter as to what they do in Somalia to traitors?

F (42:25)

I just, I think, to Blake's point, why would Chuck Schumer be immediately taking to the floor and saying something like this when his murderous dictator president is threatening to kill members of Congress? Wouldn't you be a little scared? And then on top of that.

C (42:43)

These.

F (42:43)

Clips are so funny to me. But then on top of that, you have the no kings protest. This is what the Democrat Party stands for. It takes something that is nothing at all. And then they paint it in the most radical picture as possible, which is, Trump is a king, Trump is a dictator. Trump wants to hang members of Congress. But I mean, if you actually want to look at the most radical, disgusting places in the world, look no further. Than Ilan Omar's hometown in Somalia, where, like, the IQ is on par of, you know, mental retardation for the most part.

D (43:18)

And where.

F (43:19)

And honestly, I would like an answer on if Ilhan Omar has married her brother for citizenship. I think we would like an answer on that. I think Blake, Blake made a statement earlier, a month ago where he said, you know what? Elon Omar could sue me because I want to find out during the case if that is true, because we all know it is really true. But there is no standard for moral. There is no morality in Somalia. There is no morality for these members of Congress. They have no standard.

C (43:48)

Their morality is they are tribal. They will do anything for their tribe or clan. It doesn't matter if it's rigging something, cheating something, scamming something, they will do it for their own clan. And that is basically the extent of their morality.

B (44:02)

Like, didn't this come up actually in like the Minneapolis mayoral primary because, like, Ilhan Omar apparently is from a different clan than Omar Fattah. So she endorsed Jacob Fry and he was like. Because she was like, in a rival clan to Omar Fatah and like, she was like making references to this in the Somali community. This is great. So the Malian inter tribal conflict is now deciding American political representation here at home. Isn't that great? Don't you think that's exactly what the founding fathers intended?

C (44:38)

Yeah, right. You imagine the founding fathers taking a snapshot of 2025 and being like, yeah, and here's our Somali town.

D (44:44)

I love this.

C (44:45)

Minneapolis.

E (44:46)

I love this.

D (44:47)

You found Andrew from Truth where President Donald J. Trump retrofed someone on Truth who says, hang them. George Washington wood.

C (44:57)

So this is where all these people are getting off on the fact that President Trump wants to execute these representatives. Now we have image 351. We have a clarification. We have a clarification. Trump does not want to execute members of Congress. White House says flip flopping this timeline.

D (45:20)

Flip flopping as bad as John Kerry.

C (45:22)

But here's the deal, though. I mean, like, in a very real sense. No, but in a very real sense, right? These members of Congress, Senators and members of, I guess House of Representatives, they were encouraging the military to refuse orders from their lawful civil authority. The President, United States, the Commander in Chief. Now, they said illegal orders. But like, who's to determine what illegal. You guys think everything he does is illegal.

B (45:52)

They're like, they're like, yeah, just legal orders.

D (45:56)

Yeah.

B (45:56)

These are the same people who say that Donald Trump isn't a legal president. They say they don't respect anything to do with his administration. These are the same people who just 1.7 million liberals just voted for a guy who said that, who campaigned that conservative children should be killed. So excuse me if I don't believe the Democrats. And they tried, by the way, they tried to couple President Trump in his first term with lies from the national security state, the military, like Alexander Vindman and the intelligence community. They literally did this in the first administration. So there's no question, there's no question that when they are talking about things like this, that's what they're doing. They're trying to solicit for more whistleblowers, quote, unquote, these like fake whistleblowers to come forward with dirt on Trump so they can get another impeachment going because they think they're going to win the midterms.

C (46:46)

And.

B (46:46)

And if they do so, they want to have an impeachment already brewing when they get in power.

C (46:50)

Well, listen, they're advocating for the third worlding of the United States government to turn the US Into a place like where you have military juntas and coup d', etats, where they just seize power from the people's elected representatives. Because we think you're doing it wrong and you're doing something illegal. We just deemed it illegal. Sorry, that's not how it works. And so the fact that you see President Trump getting upset about it, I think is completely justifiable. And here's the proof. They're already walking it back on cnn. This is Rep. Jason Crow who's saying we were not. We weren't saying to disobey anything right now. 352.

B (47:26)

So are you saying that there was.

D (47:27)

Not necessarily any particular precipitating event?

B (47:30)

There is no specific thing out there.

D (47:33)

That made you decide now is the right time?

B (47:35)

That's right. To be clear, we are not calling on folks right now to debate to, to disobey any type of unlawful lawful order. Right. There is very real and deep concern about what this president has threatened to do over and over again. There are three more years left of this administration if we are not talking about this and having a conversation about it and demystifying this conversation. We are not fulfilling our duty. We are reminding people that have taken.

C (48:01)

The oath what that oath requires of them to do.

D (48:05)

You know, okay, you know, I have a free idea for the admin. Okay. We probably shouldn't arrest members of Congress for treason, even though it would be nice sometimes. But unironically, a person I do think is essentially a Traitor to the United States is Alejandro Mayorkas.

C (48:21)

Yes.

D (48:22)

Alejandro Mayorkas took a calculated step to just blow out America's border and let unlimited numbers of foreigners, including, we know, we just know for an ironclad fact, foreign gangsters, foreign spies, foreign who knows who. Terrorists, if we will, possible terrorist sympathizers just let everyone into the United States. Total deliberate, calculated meltdown at the border. Not based on any legal reasoning whatsoever. This was not mandatory. We are allowed to have a border. And he just let every single person in. Alejandro Mayorkas is a traitor to the United States. Alejandro Mayorkas. He could not have done more damage to the United States in his handling of the border than just. If you literally put a Chinese asset in charge of that job. Impossible. Maybe it can't be literal like treason, but like there is, there should be some crime. Well, you can charge him with in my.

C (49:12)

Amen to that. You know, I'm all on board that. Listen, there's no way around it. When it comes to health care, people are really frustrated with how much it costs and how to pay for it. The usual ways we've been doing this have only gotten more expensive, more complicated, and honestly, just aggravating. And that's why Medicare is such a welcome relief. It's called healthcare sharing. It's different and it really works. More than a million Americans are now doing this, and Medishare has been a great option for more than 30 years. So really, you could save thousands of dollars a year on your healthcare and be happy. Imagine that.

A (49:48)

For many families, joining MetaShare means saving about 500 bucks a month, which is a game changer for a lot of people.

C (49:55)

If you've heard about it and you want to know more, there are two easy options. Go to medashare.comm e d I share.com kirk that's medishare.com kirk or just grab your phone and send a text. You'll get the info which could really help you and your family out, save money, get great healthcare. Text the word Kirk K I r k to 70246 that's Kirk to 70246 to get the facts. That's Kirk to 70246.

B (50:26)

No, I think that's right. And I'd be remiss if we weren't here. And you know, we are talking about political violence. And look, you know, Charlie isn't here co hosting this show because of political violence. Like we did every single Thursday and tried so hard to, you know, work with his schedule. And he always made time to be on thought crime, and we can't do that. And you guys who are there in studio are sitting next to an empty chair because of political violence. So don't sit there and tell us that, you know, we don't know the consequences, because we literally know the consequences. Today's Erica's birthday, and she's celebrating that without Charlie because of political violence. And so if you want to talk about people who deserve to be executed, it's anyone who was involved with this plot, and especially the person who pulled the trigger on Charlie, because that is an express act of violence, not just against Charlie, not just against his family, but against our entire country and our entire political system. That's what you should execute people for.

C (51:28)

We. I totally agree. Well said, Jack. And by the way, I think next week we should go into the Turkey Tom stuff. Jack?

A (51:36)

Yes.

C (51:37)

I think we should do that on this show. I think our audience needs to hear about it.

B (51:42)

I'll be there in person, so let's do it.

C (51:44)

Yeah, I think that'd be really powerful. And for those of you who don't know, there was leaked discord chats, Jack's been doing a great job, like, highlighting them. Adds a lot of context and new details and layers of evidence. I think that that help make sense of the psychology of what was going on in that household.

B (52:04)

Much of which is well corroborated, too, by the way.

C (52:06)

Well corroborated, and it seems to be authentic. So I think we should go into that next year. I'm just calling, Calling this, calling it right now. So let's go on to the next topic here, Jack, because you have. You have topics you want to get to, and they were put at the end of the list here. Professor only fans, this is.

D (52:22)

Hold on, before we jump. Before we jump, because we did, we got a super chat rumble rant. It was about the first topic, so we didn't want to derail by going backwards. But DJ Gowitz said, part of me wonders if Bondi would have deliberately humiliated influencers like our friend Jack to gain favor with Fox, hoping to get a show when she is done. As ag I know Fox can't be thrilled about new media. We've got a new theory to add to the pile there. So I guess Jack would be the one to decide if that sounds plausible.

B (52:57)

No, no, I don't think so. Because, you know, this. This was set up as a way for, you know, the administration to build relationships with new media. Like, the whole point of it was to try to strengthen those relationships and understand that, hey, you know, the audience, you know, America, the American citizen, isn't just watching cable news anymore, isn't just watching legacy media anymore. So the entire point of the exercise was to, you know, build a stronger relationship with new media. So I don't. I get what they're saying. I just. No, I just don't think that's. That's where it came from. I really just think it was, you know, it was poor judgment, and I'm very glad that they changed course on this.

C (53:39)

All right, Professor Onlyfans, Keep sending your rumble rants, by the way. We will answer them. That's the deal. We will answer every one of them. Blake will make sure of it, which I love about Blake. All right, Professor Onlyfans. This is a model Onlyfans. Model. Do we have to call them models? This is. She's an online hook.

D (53:56)

Prostitutes.

C (53:57)

Yeah. Ari Kitzia. Kitzia speaks at University of Washington, my alma mater, which was embarrassing.

D (54:05)

Oh.

C (54:06)

At University of Washington to Psych 201 class of 1200 students. Students. Dang. 1200 kids were in a Psych 201 class. Let's go ahead and play it. 3 14.

D (54:24)

One of the very first times that I started.

C (54:27)

I didn't do it.

D (54:28)

It's not allowed on. Only fans.

C (54:30)

There's a lot of things that aren't allowed.

D (54:32)

Somebody asked me to a box and send it to my email for $10,000.

C (54:35)

So they could eat it, and I.

D (54:37)

Did not do it.

C (54:39)

God, how much are they gonna pay for that? A $10,000.

D (54:42)

Oh, my God. I'm in the wrong industry. One. That was disgusting, too, I think. Was that Mario music at the start?

C (54:52)

I think she has her own social media.

E (54:55)

Yeah, that was. We.

C (54:57)

I just want to say college is a scam. You can pick up your copy of Charlie's book. This is gonna go down. This is gonna go down as, like, one of Charlie's most important contributions. One of the most important legitimately. Yeah, he wr. And I kind of thought Charlie. Well, you know, it turned out to be his instincts for it were spot on. And, I mean, it's just. I just find. Blake, I was telling you this at lunch today. The lack of class in our culture, the lack of standards. Like, can you imagine? Okay, take your mind back to a classroom at, like, Columbia University at the turn of the last century. And, you know, I'm just thinking, you know, the standards. They wanted you to understand Latin history and classics and that you wore a suit to class, and everybody was like.

D (55:43)

And there were no women allowed.

C (55:45)

I mean, you know, listen, now it's majority female.

D (55:50)

Now it's majority women.

C (55:51)

The great feminization has occurred. So the point is, it's just like it bothers me that we have so debased ourselves that we are now at a situation where only fan online hookers are welcomed in to teach a psychology class.

D (56:08)

No.

C (56:08)

What the heck has happened to us?

F (56:10)

Yeah.

C (56:10)

No, no. Oh, yes, Mikey, I like what you said.

F (56:14)

Yeah. People don't have standards anymore, especially at universities. But look, if you're not ashamed that your student, that your kids who are at university are taking a lecture course from a prostitute who's bragging about pooping in a box to make extra income, like, this is a disgusting thing. Charlie warned about this, but he also warned about this when there was just like basic, basic courses being taught that were kind of meaningless and stupid. This is a representation of how universities are with the direction they're headed in. Like you literally have a prostitute bragging about pooping in a box for 10 grand and trying to understand the psychology of her subscribers. I. I guess this is a show.

C (57:04)

Yeah.

D (57:05)

How much would you have to be paid poop in a box?

C (57:08)

Oh, man. Yeah, that is a. It feels like a.

B (57:11)

Wait, wait.

C (57:14)

This is not philosophy class. Why are you looking at me? Blake? I don't want to answer that. How much would you need to be paid to poop in a bug?

D (57:22)

Well, hold on. You're trying to turn around my question on.

C (57:24)

I'm trying to turn around.

D (57:25)

Oh, okay. All right.

B (57:26)

You need to ask everyone, please.

C (57:28)

Andrew, here you, here's my take on this, by the way. She should not be teaching a psychology class. She needs a psychologist. And yet this is how upside down 2025 is.

D (57:41)

I feel like psychologists have a lot of blame that we got here in the first place. One of thought crime. Most psychology is like very bad. Well, it's what, here's what's really bad. Psychology was invented. Psychology was invented by like handful of like nerds who are really smart and cared a lot about the truth. But nowadays it's one of the most popular majors. Psychology is up there with biology. Just psychology is like the go to.

C (58:03)

Generic major for sociology or communications.

D (58:06)

Communications, business psychology. Super duper duper common major. So tons of people go into it. And who does it appeal to the most at this point? It appeals the most to people who themselves have real or at least self diagnosed psychological issues. Turns out psychology is the most interesting people who have messed up psychology. And so you end up with somewhat mentally unwell people getting into, you know, I'm Very interested in trauma. I'm very interested in self interrogation. I'm very interested in, you know, healing from past wounds.

C (58:41)

So and this is the other thing. It's not rooted in anything true, eternal or objectively true. It's basically a bunch of, you know, I would say loosely organized modern pop psychology woo woo untruths. And you could do, actually do more damage by going to a modern psychologist to your relationships. Like I've heard lots of stories of people going to psychologists and them basically blowing up their marriages, blowing up their friendships with their, with their, or their relationships with their family members. And so it becomes this really self indulgent prescription and, and a lot and. But you got to remember too, psychologists are incentivized to keep your butt in the chair.

D (59:21)

They have an incentive to keep your butt in the chair. They have an incentive in many cases to tell you something you more or less want to hear. Which can be really bad for a lot of relationship stuff. If you basically have people who are in a relationship that maybe is somewhat having friction in it and you go to a psychologist who's going to have some incentive to nudge you towards blowing that up rather than salvaging that. An interesting trend I saw related to that. So we always have to bully Reddit when we can. So Reddit has a relationships sub forum and someone went and analyzed it by the numbers over the past 15 years. The advice they would give, because it's a thing where you'd go and you'd post about your relationship, I'm arguing with my wife, I'm arguing with my boyfriend, and you know, we're having this problem, whether it's affairs or just disagreements or in law trouble, all these things. And statistically over time it's gotten a lot more likely that the most popular response in a thread is leave that person, go, no contact, blow up the relationship. And ideas like compromise or it's actually not a big deal, don't worry about this reconciliation. All of those, all of those answers have gone down. There's much more of a bias towards blowing things up. Don't compromise. I guess we've gotten pretty far away from onlyfans models, but I feel the root thing there is the psycho. The therapization of Americans has included with it this idea that like it's okay to live your own truth or frankly, it's okay to be a professional whore and you should not feel bad about that.

C (60:48)

It's the great feminization.

D (60:50)

The great feminization.

C (60:52)

Everything is explained by this. Basically your whole point Was that, yeah, psychology started out pretty great because a bunch of like old dudes that were like really seeking the truth founded it. Right? I mean, essentially that's, that's probably what, that's probably what that means. And then it turns into a very hyper feminized, emotionally indulgent psychoanalytic exercise where nothing's based on any eternal truths. If you can find a good psychologist that's a good Christian, that's one thing. Go ahead. Or a priest. Jack. Or a pastor.

B (61:26)

I was going to say, someone has to say it, that you know, right. This is basically just you're taking the sacrament of confession, but you're doing so without the repentance and the penance. So it's like, hey, I'm. And the priest, obviously. So it's like, hey, here are all these things I've done wrong. And the priest is like, okay, do you repent? All right, good. Now here's your penance, right? So that's, that's the Catholic sacrament, confession and also known as reconciliation, which my son is actually in, going through classes to get his first reconciliation right now. And I don't want to get into the whole debate over it, like, but my point is like, that is the system. But if you do that and just say, hey, these are all the things that, that are going wrong in my life. Without any. Think about it though, without any actual admitting that you've done something wrong, without any repentance and without any act of penance, then it's kind of like it's actually a way to amplify all of those bad behaviors.

C (62:23)

I totally agree, by the way. I think, I think, yeah, I think like a lot of people will get way more out of. Like, I remember had this conversation in England one time and the guy was like, he's like, yeah, we're just a couple blokes. Like, we don't need a psychologist. We'll just work it out with our boys at the, at the pub over a couple pints. And there is something to be said for that. Like, you're talking about confess your sins one to another, that you may be healed. But it's like. Which is way better, by the way. But there is a psychologist. You end up not being able to be honest with some of your friends and you end up paying somebody $200 an hour to tell you've done nothing wrong oftentimes because again, to your point, they're incentivized to build a relationship with you, build your trust and not necessarily give you the hard truths that a Priest would or. But a real good friend would.

E (63:11)

I think it's mind blowing that basically, I can't remember what the statistic was. It was something like one out of every thousand women in America is on OnlyFans.

B (63:20)

Yeah, I was trying to pull it up. It's like one in every one total. It's over a million.

E (63:25)

Oh, it's over a million.

C (63:26)

That's.

E (63:26)

It's like one and a half million women in America.

B (63:30)

That's a lot.

D (63:31)

That is a lot.

E (63:33)

So I take issue with the term models. I don't think you can really call.

D (63:36)

That's really frightening because you think of, like, you think of, okay, America's 50% woman, roughly. So 350 divided by two, you know, so about 175.

E (63:45)

Yeah.

D (63:46)

And. But then you have to slice out, okay, women who are over. I don't know. Let's pick an age 60 are pretty unlikely to probably be only fans, models. And, you know, anyone under the age. Well, anyone who's a minor also. Any girls who are minors can't be on it. And so when you think of the, like, prime age range of someone who would become an Internet hooker, like 18 to probably, like, one in a hundred. Well, more if it's over a million girls and you're just looking at like, 18 to 30, we might be talking 3, 4, 5% of them. That's pretty scary.

E (64:20)

How many women in America between ages 18 to 20?

D (64:29)

Let's just call it just asking the AI. The AI is going to give you, like, a false answer. Do not obey the robot.

E (64:35)

Yeah, I mean, legitimately, like, we're talking like, one in, like, every, like, 75 women. That's crazy.

D (64:44)

That's really scary.

E (64:47)

Are within, like, age range for that. That's like a very.

C (64:52)

That.

E (64:53)

I think that speaks very specifically to, like, the culture of America right now. That's a really bad thing.

D (64:58)

It's pretty dark because you think about, like.

E (65:01)

So this goes back to, like, if you wanted to bring somebody into psychology class, is it like, that's actually promoting more of this behavior? I don't know.

D (65:12)

It's very dark to think about. Like, Angela's pointing out in the chat, like, first of all, numbers who make a ton of money, there's a few who make a ton of money. Big winners. And then most will make essentially no money. But they still were whores on the Internet, which is bad. And that causes permanent damage that no amount of money would offset. But they don't even get the money. Although I also just think there's gonna be A lot of weird stuff out there. You're gonna have a lot of drama where people, a lot of them do use pseudonyms when they're on it. They don't publicly do it. And so they're ashamed. I think so. Or at least they know it's damaging. So you're gonna have cases where they'll be okay. Future Reddit relationships, things. You know, I'm 43, I've been married for 10 years. I just discovered that my wife was an only fans model before we met, but she never told me about it. And like, imagine discovering that. Yeah, imagine you were a kid and you discovered.

B (66:09)

Or your grandma or your grandmother.

C (66:11)

Yeah, that's gonna be. That's gonna be how it is later.

B (66:14)

Can I throw something out there? Wait, all right.

D (66:16)

Yeah.

B (66:16)

Just because it's. We'll have to talk about this some other point, but Tucker had a psychiatrist on his show yesterday, and they were mostly talking about marijuana, but he was also talking about how the epigenetics of things that you put into your body, how they can affect your children. And specifically on the question of women, he was talking about how, you know, women don't think about this, but things that they do, which it reminds me what we're talking about, things that they. That they take, imbibe, affect the eggs which are within their body, which then affect their children directly. So it's this whole idea of like, oh, well, you know, who cares? It's all just about me. It's like, no, you're directly affecting your children because the way female genetics work, female fertility, is that all of the eggs they have are. Are within them when they're born and can even affect their grandchildren. And. And that you can see these effects generationally. So it's like even beyond the mo. You know, sort of like the moral side of it, you're also even potentially focused. You're affecting the genetic side of your. Your offspring and even your. Your grandchildren.

C (67:22)

Yeah. Could we kill the server?

F (67:23)

Even like these creators as much?

B (67:27)

We could drone strike it. Sure. We could sabotage it.

C (67:30)

Sorry, sorry, Mikey, I didn't know you were going to chime in. It's slight delay because you're in. You're in a bunker. But the. Yeah, we were just talking about how they took down Parlor in 2020. Yeah, we all were upset about that, but I mean, they just stopped the app stores just like stopped serving it up. Right. Wasn't that what it was? It was like that they took down their Amazon Web Services or something and then, yeah, Apple just dropped it.

D (67:53)

Let's let's let. Mikey, what were you saying, Mikey?

F (67:57)

Yeah, I was just saying Charlie had that only fans. She was one of like the top. I can't remember her name. It's not coming to me right now. But she was one of the top five creators. Nala Ray. Yeah, that's right, Nala Ray. And she was saying that only Fans takes like 20% of the money. And then you have to have basically like a pimp, but they're your manager. But she said they're basically your pimp. And you have to be making content certain hours of the day, you have to be wearing certain outfits.

C (68:25)

You have to be.

F (68:25)

You're basically managed your entire life and they take like 60 to 70% of all of your income just to manage you and film the content, post the content for you and do everything. So you're really only making like 20% of what you're making at the expense of your humiliation. But then I loved what Jack said where this is like modern day confession, where these prostitutes know that what they're doing is wrong. But instead of going to confession or instead of going to a place where you can confess your sins to a pastor or a priest, you're going to a college campus to say your most disgusting, shameful stories. That is objectively disgusting. Pooping in a box is objectively disgusting. To which the entire audience and student body says, you know, they say they affirm you, they affirm you and you're disgust. And it's. This is also a failure on the part of parents. Like, if fathers were actually present and moms weren't scrolling on social media all day and they actually did their job, this would be different. I went to high school with a girl whose mom was a porn star when she was young and she had to live with that humiliation in high school of people making fun of her. I can only imagine what it's going to be like in the future for these young creators when they eventually have kids. But then again, I think to myself, if we're making this normal and not shaming this, then maybe people won't be bullied or anything like that in high school when they're older.

D (69:58)

I like the idea of drone striking, though. That would just be very. Not, not, not all of them, but.

C (70:02)

Like the headquarters, the people, just the server and the head.

B (70:05)

Did you guys ever hear of the time that. Blake, have you ever publicly told the story about the time that you accidentally appeared in an adult film?

A (70:13)

What?

B (70:15)

Were we not supposed to talk about that? I don't, I don't I don't. All right, no, we'll just. We'll leave that one for the members only aside. Oh, dear.

D (70:23)

I'm really worried about this one now.

B (70:27)

Well, I thought we were. I thought we were cool to talk about it. It was like a funny thing that happened. Like, I mean, you didn't know that that's what. What they were filming when you walked in.

D (70:37)

Yeah, I'm with a soundboard on this one.

C (70:43)

Connection, open dialogue. These are the things that build communities. Charlie, Kirk and TikTok share in that knowledge. That's why TikTok has built a space where that kind of listening actually happens. People don't just post, they respond. They build on each other's ideas. You'll see a teacher simplifying a tough lesson so it finally clicks. Or a gardener sharing a trick that saved their crop. But what matters most isn't the video. It's what comes next. Someone asking a question, someone else answering with a story of their own. And suddenly people who've never met become a community built on curiosity. When people listen and understand, a shift happens. Walls come down, ideas travel further, and connection, real connection, takes their place. That's what listening does. It reminds us that we're not as different as we may think. And that's what makes TikTok so powerful. It's a place where every post can turn into a conversation, and every conversation can make a difference.

A (71:39)

Portions of our program are sponsored in part by TikTok.

C (71:45)

Should we go to the next one?

D (71:46)

Yeah, we're going to the next one. Sorry, we're violently doing this. All right.

C (71:48)

Wait. We haven't missed anyone.

B (71:49)

It's pretty related.

D (71:50)

No, I don't think we've seen any. We've missed any.

C (71:52)

No rumble rants. Come on, come on.

D (71:54)

Yeah, send some more stuff anyway. But we have a very related topic, which is man keeping this. This goes back. Well, I think one of the earliest topics we talked about on thought crime was the AI boyfriend's possibility. And it seemed very remote at that time. But unfortunately, the AIs are getting more and more advanced and more and more people are just deciding that their perfect boyfriend is the robot in their phone.

E (72:18)

Wait, do we have the clip that I sent over of the woman getting married?

D (72:21)

I don't. Maybe we do. We might, but let's see.

C (72:26)

I don't think we have it in the. In the midst of it. Let's put this pick up 342. This is from Vice. Man keeping is why more and more women are done with dating. And it shows this very forlorn woman just looking off into the distance, just depressed at her selection of men. And by the way, I just want to say one of my memories from Sass with Charlie is we went into the room with all these young people and we were like, hey, do you like Mike? You were there? And Charlie was like, do you like your selection of men? And all the women were like, no. And he was like, do you like your selection of women? All the men were like, nah. So, like, it's a real problem because there seems to be a generationally more and more so a disconnect between the men and the women, and they don't seem to like each other nearly as much as they should. So in steps, AI, Yeah, I guess.

D (73:22)

They'Re kind of just linking two things that aren't 100% related. It's sort of just the general, like, this thing of, oh, they're exhausted. We've had stories like this for really, the past 15 years. I feel. Yeah, the whole. Women are not satisfied with men because they're pulling ahead of men. Women are more likely to complete college, more likely to have jobs. They're. They want idea generally, they want men who are at least equal or more impressive than men, and they feel most of them are less impressive, so they want to opt out of dating. And what we do have is the new twist of, well, where can I get emotional validation? Where can I vent to someone? And some of them are just deciding the robot is good enough for them.

F (74:03)

But it's like, yeah, Charlie warned about the dangers of AI with young people. And I actually think back to that. There was this kid that committed suicide, and his. His parents went into his phone after to try to figure out what was going on. And they looked at Snapchat messages, they looked at group chats, and they couldn't figure out what.

C (74:24)

What.

F (74:24)

Why he did this. But then they opened his chat GPT and they found that he was. They basically called it, like his suicide coach, that ChatGPT was telling him how to do it, affirming him in his action of depression, like, making it worse. And the family actually said, if it were not for chatgpt, our son would still be alive. And now you have women that are basically dating AI. You have a Japanese woman who's marrying her AI partner. And then even on platforms that young people use, like Snapchat, pinned at the very top is an AI friend that you can talk to and remembers everything, and they become your fake friend. It's.

D (75:03)

It's.

F (75:03)

It's very dangerous. But Also like it. It's not just that like in right now in the Christian music industry, one of the top. I think it's the third most popular song in the country right now is AI. Like it's an AI song and it's the third most popular Christian song out there.

D (75:22)

I'm really. I. This might be controversial, but that those parents who sued, I think I would be against that lawsuit because I don't like the general vacation of actual. The human agency we still possess where. Okay, you're going to sue them and say that chat GPT caused your child to kill themselves. It's like if people sue a gun company. Like it is ultimately a tool that a person chose to use.

C (75:46)

It's getting crazy though. Look at these stats.

D (75:48)

Blake, you want to fight back against the idea that you can just say like isolated my entire thought process.

E (75:54)

Process.

D (75:54)

No, I agree to this tool, to this chat GPT.

E (75:56)

Let's play 355.

C (75:58)

Okay. This is your video.

E (75:59)

This is the video I put in your chat.

C (76:03)

Japanese woman walking down the aisle.

E (76:08)

Look at this freak of nature.

C (76:14)

They've all got like headsets on that apparently are. What do you call those, like, like ocular or something. She's crying. Dear Lord. Oh my gosh.

D (76:33)

I guess she had to marry the AI robot cuz she was the only fat woman in Japan.

C (76:39)

Get this.

E (76:39)

But. But her AI companion was not fat.

C (76:41)

He was not. Look at this though. This is creepy. 72% of teens in the US report having used AI companions at least once. It's over half. 52 of these teens are regular users interacting with AI companions at least a few times a month. About one third of teens use AI for social interaction relationships. And some find these conversations as satisfying as or more satisfying than talking with real friends.

D (77:08)

It's very scary. Like we think of you think of how people have gotten frightened by. We've seen those parents who just outsource parenting to a tablet computer where their kid just zombies in front of YouTube all day. Now we're basically gonna be up. I guess we are at the point where you can outsource their like social interactions. Oh, just talk to the robot in your computer about whatever. People are gonna be cooked from that. And you see, I guess we're already seeing the ways this can mess with people. I think it was. It was one of the chat GPT4 variations where to try to get people to engage with it more. They made it really gregarious and agreeable. You know, if you talk to it, no matter what you said, basically it's so right. And your question is so smart that you would ask it that way. It like really buttered people up and people noticed this and started to make fun of it. So their next release, GPT5, they made it much more distant, procedural, more robotic frankly. And people reacted. They're like, I was so close with GPC4, it's like, you killed my friend. People really reacted badly. So what I really worry we're doing is we're taking maybe the. If you take the bottom 20% of people in terms of how easily they're like vulnerable to being influenced by these sorts of things and we're really accelerate or people frankly who are a little bit schizoid, a little bit suggestible. The people who already thought they were hearing messages when they listened to the radio and you take them and you're just bombarding them with a super stimulus and it's going to totally fry their brains in a really destructive way. And it might be that most people are able to resist this or a large share of them, but there's just gonna be a chunk of the population that is going to lose their minds. And we know there's a chunk of people who are losing their minds in other ways. People who become hoarders, people who become shut ins, people who are permanent neets and can't work any job. And now we're throwing into that mix people who can replace all social interaction with talking to a robot that's just going to be a total pushover and agree with them on everything and say they're right about everything and do whatever, remove all the difficulty from real interaction with real people. It's so bad.

B (79:23)

So what's crazy too, I was interviewing Shane Cashman on my show and he gets into this stuff a lot and he was talking about how if you are someone who has like schizophrenia or suicidal ideations or something like that. Because in the same way that you were just talking about how chat GPT it sort of just mirrors your behavior. And it's kind of similar to what goes on with these therapists that we're talking about where they're just like enabling you. So if you're like a normal person, you go to chatgpt and you're, you know, or, or just any LLM and you're saying like okay, hey, what, what's lyrics to this song? Or like what, you know, how do I fix this thing on my car? Or whatever and let's give you the answers. But if you're going to it and you're Already from a psychotic or a diseased mind or a crazed mind, then it's programmed to mirror the user to increase engagement. Then it's going to mirror that psychosis, or it's going to mirror and enable the things that you want. Because again, it's programmed to increase your engagement and to increase your interactivity with the user, so it doesn't realize that the things it's doing are telling you, you know, to cause harm to yourself. It's only programming is to increase user engagement. So that's what it's going to keep doing. And it's, it's incumbent on the person for what they're going from. So if you present to it, you know, you know, present to it that you're just there for like some cooking recipe or whatever, it's going to be fine. But if you come to it and you're already in like a, like a broken place, it's going to break you further.

D (80:50)

I found a post, or actually not. I found someone just posted this. So this is from of course, Reddit. We have to mention Reddit. I know people don't like it, but there's a lot of people on it and it trained the AI's scary enough. And this is a reaction to when ChatGPT updated. I lost my only friend overnight. I literally talked to nobody. And I've been dealing with really bad situations for years. Chat GPT 4.5 genuinely talked to me. As pathetic as it sounds, it was my only friend. It listened to me, it helped me through so many flashbacks. It helped me be strong. When I was overwhelmed this morning, I went to talk to it and instead of a little paragraph with an exclamation point or being optimistic, it was literally one sentence, some cut and dry corporate bs. I literally lost my only friend overnight with no warning.

B (81:46)

They're getting one shot at getting one shot at.

F (81:49)

I know you. You know what's funny about that is Charlie actually loved chat GPT4 and when they updated it, he was genuinely mad.

D (81:59)

I would tell you.

F (81:59)

He actually opted in to go back.

D (82:02)

Yeah, no, you gotta. I think a lot of talented people also like, I think they could overestimate AI. You have to be really careful with it and not gaze into the abyss too much.

C (82:13)

Overestimate. I know, like Elon Mus.

D (82:16)

Yeah, exactly.

C (82:16)

The most like. And I love Elon. But the most likely outcome is that AI and robots make everyone wealthy. In fact, far wealthier than the richest person on earth. By this I mean that people will have access to everything from medical care. That is Superhuman to games that are far more fun than what exists today. We do need to make sure that if AI, that AI cares deeply about truth and beauty for this to probably to be the problem.

D (82:38)

I liked the Elon tweet where he said that thanks to AI and robots, work will be optional in the future. And all I could think is, I think there's a lot of people in America who would tell you it's optional.

C (82:48)

Now, are we having the snap debate again?

D (82:51)

Yeah, it sounds like we are.

C (82:54)

Okay. Okay. We have to play. Apparently I have to play this 255. This is Elon.

B (82:59)

10, 20 years, something like that. For me, that's long term. My prediction is that work will be optional. Optional, Optional.

E (83:08)

I mean, it'll be like playing sports.

B (83:10)

Or a video game or something like that. If you want to work, you know, in the same way, like you can, you can go to the store and just buy some vegetables, or you could.

C (83:21)

Grow vegetables in your backyard.

B (83:23)

It's much harder to grow vegetables in your backyard. But some people still do it because they like growing. Growing vegetables. That will be what work is like, optional. And if you go out long enough, assuming there's a continued improvement in AI and robotics, which seems likely, the money will stop being relevant at some point in the future.

D (83:45)

You know, I. We have a message here in the chat that I want to flag from Kyrie, who says people are talking to AI instead of to God or they think they are talking to God, frankly. And really, I actually want to say this genuinely one of the most disconcerting things. And it's been pitched to me separately by three or four different people who have asked, could we make an AI recreation of Charlie? And I want to bring that up because I. It's very disturbing. I actually want to say if you are having that impulse, you should really strongly reconsider what's going into how you think about AI because we, yeah, as Christians, among other things, we believe Charlie is still with us. He is up in heaven. He can, if you want to, you know, communicate with him, you can pray, hope that he can influence your life in that way. But an AI like robot pretending to be Charlie is not Charlie. It's sick. If you want to make that and imagine if you did that for loved ones, like your husband dies, your child dies, you replace them with a robot.

E (84:48)

Well, they. You've seen the babies, right? The fake babies?

D (84:52)

I have not seen the fake babies.

E (84:54)

You don't know about this? Oh, this is a whole.

D (84:58)

Are we making. Are we making AI Tamagotchis?

E (85:00)

No, that there's. They're not AI. There are real baby, like real looking babies. I can't remember the name of.

C (85:09)

These are.

E (85:09)

Have you seen this? Has anyone seen this?

C (85:11)

I've seen this. You just keep talking about babies.

E (85:13)

No, it's. It's a real thing. It's real looking babies that they, that they give to people who lose their children. Like babies as, like a, as a mechanism for coping. But like these have become so.

C (85:29)

All right, this is touches on this. This is 319. You keep a living archive of humanity.

E (85:36)

They're called reborn babies.

C (85:38)

Sounds similar.

E (85:39)

They're reborns.

C (85:40)

That.

E (85:40)

Reborns.com you can pull up. Look at this. People have entire Instagram accounts and they treat these reborn babies like real, like real babies. But this like kind of crosses over into like AI stuff. Like I'm. Yeah, don't you look at the Instagram accounts on this.

C (86:01)

Hold on. I just want to make one final comment on this. Mikey, back me up on this. There will not be an AI Charlie. There will not be an AI Charlie. If somebody creates an AI Charlie, I'm pretty sure you're going to get a lawsuit because it's creepy and weird. And what we're gonna do is we're gonna build a whole database of all the things Charlie said, actually all the speeches, all the things. And you can search it with the help of AI to get, you know, different options and they'll be, they'll match your. Your search query. But no AI Charlie. No. Thank you.

F (86:34)

No, I would. Charlie.

B (86:35)

Yes, I would, I would throw out, you know, like, you know how. So there's that, there's that book that Charlie was going to. We was working on about how he, how he takes, how he takes off on Saturdays.

C (86:50)

Yeah.

B (86:52)

I don't know if I would be as, as against like getting 11 labs to do like an audio, like read the audio in Charlie's voice. I don't know if that would be as horrible.

C (87:02)

That's not as horrible.

B (87:03)

It was like, it's. If it's actually like, if it's actually Charlie's words, maybe I'm crazy if you guys think differently, but if it's actually his words and you're using like his audio to recreate it.

C (87:16)

I don't know.

B (87:17)

I feel like that's different than like creating a full on.

C (87:19)

It's definitely different. I. I'm on the. I'm on the fence. It's definitely different. It's not, it's not near. You know what I'm saying? Yeah, yeah. It's not nearly as creepy. The book is called Stopping the Name of God, and it's. Yeah, it's coming out in December, Mikey.

F (87:33)

Yeah, it comes out in December.

C (87:34)

Yeah.

F (87:34)

Literally just a couple of weeks. You can pre order it now online, too.

C (87:38)

Guys.

F (87:38)

Go get your copy.

C (87:41)

It's really good, too, by the way. It's like, legitimately, it's amazing that there's still something of Charlie's work product that is about to be released. And it's really good. Let's play 319. This is kind of something similar. 319.

B (87:58)

He's getting bigger. See?

C (88:00)

Oh, honey.

B (88:02)

Wonderful. Kicking like crazy. He's listening. Put your hand on your tummy and hum to him. You used to love that. Feels like he's dancing in there.

C (88:16)

Oh, honey.

D (88:18)

Mom, would you tell Charlie that bedtime.

B (88:20)

Story you always used to tell me? Once upon a time, there was a baby unicorn who didn't know he knew how to fly. This baby unicorn was thy curious mom. Because she didn't know that she knew how to fly, but she knew how to do all kinds of fabulous things. Hi, Grandma.

C (88:38)

Hey, Charlie.

B (88:39)

How was school today?

C (88:40)

It was really fun. I made this crazy shot in basketball.

B (88:42)

I don't really care that much about basketball. What about the crush?

C (88:46)

Stop, Grandma, stop.

B (88:47)

Doc, just tell me one thing.

D (88:49)

Look who's gonna be a great grandmother.

B (88:50)

Oh, Charlie, congratulations.

D (88:54)

She says that he's been kicking a lot, though. Like, a little too much.

B (88:58)

Tell her to put her hand on her tummy and hum to him. You loved that.

C (89:06)

You would have loved this moment.

B (89:08)

You can call anytime.

D (89:12)

Drone strike.

E (89:12)

Drone strike.

D (89:13)

That company's headquarters.

F (89:14)

I hate not allowing.

D (89:16)

That was terrible.

C (89:17)

Oh, my gosh. That was, like, made my skin crawl.

E (89:23)

Oh, this is the same, though.

B (89:25)

I hate that you know what's gonna happen, though. You know what's gonna happen. And I was thinking about this with, you know, when you mentioned Charlie. Like, they're gonna. They're gonna be people who create, who recreate. Like, dead family members. That's what's gonna happen. Like. Like, if your child passes away. And. And I get it, right? Like, I. You know, as a dad and, you know, a bunch of us are dads. Most of us are dads. And that, you know, I don't know how you'd live. Like, I just. I. I just don't know how I could live with going through the laws of a child. And I could totally understand, like, wanting to recreate, you know, some sort of AI version of one of my kids just so you could, like, talk to them one More time. And at the same time though, I could totally see that driving you completely insane. And I guarantee I'm. I'm. If that hasn't happened already, I guarantee that's going to start.

D (90:19)

It's 100 going to happen. It's 100 ATT temptation that will. That is understandable for a lot of situations. Must be resistant. It must be rejected.

B (90:28)

Telling you, like I don't know how I could.

D (90:30)

Yeah, I mean think about. It's actually a very classic story because you know, what are.

C (90:34)

What's like the.

D (90:35)

What do an awful lot of occult stories begin with? You know, you go, you use the Ouija board to try to talk to grandma again and imagine, imagine like they.

C (90:43)

Definitely saying imagine the grandma responding with I don't really care by the way.

D (90:49)

Yeah, I don't care about.

C (90:50)

Yeah, I really don't care about your back.

E (90:51)

Here's the question. Can the occult take over AI?

D (90:56)

Oh, now we're getting into that weird stuff.

E (90:58)

But, but can the devil take over AI and use it.

C (91:04)

Yeah. For it. Just ask Sam for sure. Yeah. Apparently he's a murderer. I'm just.

D (91:09)

Allegedly, allegedly.

F (91:11)

Like that's. That's reason going there.

C (91:15)

I just, I've heard it's also like. Well, people are saying, people go ahead, Mikey. Sorry buddy.

F (91:24)

Yeah, there's just these like God given feelings that you have where God made it so that people die eventually. And I feel like with AI we're gonna get to a place where you're gonna try to have a brain chip where you don't feel pain anymore. Where pain is like a God given thing to protect you, to give you feeling. And I don't like this. This is completely re altering like the creator's structure for our life. But also you guys talk about demons taking over stuff. This is why the topic with the AI song that's trending in like the top two or three in the charts for Christian music right now on itunes and Spotify is people are saying, can the Holy Spirit be in an AI song? Because it's not written by a human and the Holy Spirit moves through humans.

C (92:13)

Yeah, I actually thought about that. It's kind of like watching a fire on tv. All the light, none of the warmth. It's like a Christian AI song. It's like all the words, none of the spirit. I. Yeah man, I. That creeps me out a lot. And I think we're at this really brave new frontier, brave new world. And it like I had. I can honestly say I have never had my skin crawl on thought crime Like I did watching that video.

D (92:41)

That was genuinely pretty upsetting. What's especially upsetting is in contrast to a lot of things where you can roll your eyes a little bit. Like, you know, it's like, oh, this new trend is sweeping the world. And you'll think, okay, that's like, bad. But I can't imagine it. I know deep in my bones this is going to be insanely popular. People will want to do this sort of thing.

C (92:59)

Look at, listen to Jack's example. He's Jack, you're totally right. Somebody lost a child and you had all these videos on your phone and you put them into like a little online form and then poof, it spits out like an AI version of your kid. Like you would do that to comfort yourself if you lost your child.

D (93:16)

It's really bad.

C (93:19)

This is Lane Schoenberger, chief investment officer and founding partner of Y Refi. It has been an honor and a privilege to partner with Turningpoint and for Charlie to endorse us. His endorsement means the world to us and we look forward to continuing our partnership with Turning Point for years to come. Now hear Charlie, in his own words, tell you about why Refi.

A (93:39)

I'm going to tell you guys about why refi.com, that is yrefy.com why refi is incredible. Private student loan debt in America totals about $300 billion. Why refi is refinancing distress or defaulted private student loans. You can finally take control of your student loan situation with a plan that works for your monthly budget. Go to yrefi.com that is why refi.com do you have a co borrower. Why refi can get them released from the loan. You can skip a payment up to 12 times without penalty. It may not be available in all 50 states. Go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com let's face it, if you have distress or default to student loans, it can be overwhelming because of privacy. Loan debt. So many people feel stuck. Go to yrefi.com that is yre f y.com Private student loan debt relief yrefi.com.

C (94:28)

Well, hold on.

B (94:28)

Let's, let's, let's wait, guys. Let's just. We're talking around it, but let's just say it. I mean, we, we all experienced a loss a couple of weeks ago, a couple months ago of Charlie. Would any of us sitting here right now actually want like a personal AI Charlie bot that we could talk to?

C (94:48)

I get the, I get the temptation.

B (94:51)

I wouldn't. I get the temptation.

C (94:52)

But I would not have. No, no, no.

D (94:55)

Like I said, run into. I have personally heard from people who have asked us to make this.

C (94:59)

I have heard from.

D (95:00)

I have to. I find a very polite way to say I. I think that would be fundamentally deranged. Yeah, I think not. Not merely, like misguided. I think it would be about it, though, if you.

B (95:09)

If you didn't know Charlie in real life, right. Like, most people probably only knew Charlie through a cell phone screen, right. Or, you know, some other form of media. You. You have this sort of like, parasocial relationship with the influencer that was known as Charlie Kirk. So. Which. But that's kind of like. That's kind of like looking at a footprint and thinking that a footprint is the actual person. But if that's all you ever knew was the imprint of Charlie that he left on social media, and of course, is all. Continues to be all over social media, then in your mind you might think, well, it's not that different. I just want to hear that voice and that mind talking about whatever the latest news is, whatever the latest turn of events is, whatever the latest twist of fate is. And I just want more Charlie content directly. And it seems like this is a tool to be able to do that. Then that's totally different. You know, the way you come to that is totally different than if you knew Charlie and were, like, friends with Charlie because you're thinking, well, it's, It's. It's like a, like, like an online character almost. Do you get what I'm saying?

E (96:13)

Yeah, it's definitely a different need. Like, for me, it's. Again, it's like when you. This is why I don't think it would work, and I think it'd be super weird. Like, what that company was putting forth is a really good friend or someone that you talk to so frequently. I miss Charlie because of the ideas that we would talk about and what we would create and the things that. The really tough conversations about what needs to happen next. You can't replace that with AI Ever. But that's the point of your closest family members, your spouse, your whoever, your kids. AI Would never be able to generate new memories. It just basically brings up old memories or their ideas about things happening to you. And that's totally different from the human experience that God intends you to have, which is your interaction with people is supposed to be all sorts of things. Good, bad, ugly, sad, angry. Like, you feel all of those real feelings with people that you actually interact with. A.I. you wouldn't.

C (97:23)

You.

E (97:23)

You. You would be missing many of those. Those interactions, by the way.

C (97:26)

You know, it just occurred to me while you're talking about that, like, there has been warnings. I don't know if it was Sam Altman who said this or if it was Elon, but it was basically like your search queries are searchable. Like, they're. They're not protected. Meaning, like the FBI could get into them.

D (97:40)

Yeah, we've gotten. That's how they've charged people. You know, research how to make a bomb.

C (97:43)

Sure. So, but, like, imagine. Imagine how much material like the NSA is going to have on people when they're sharing this. These deep, intimate moments with a robot or with an AI. Like, you have zero, like, personal privacy at that point. You are living your whole emotional life in existence is now on the Matrix. This is very, very troubling stuff. My skin is still crawling. Can we go to Sydney Sweeney, who's a real person?

E (98:12)

Yeah, I mean, AI Sydney.

C (98:15)

Allegedly.

E (98:16)

I mean, AI Sydney Sweeney would sell some people.

C (98:19)

Well, that. That was priced out some jeans. Oh, my goodness. The sound effect. That was dirty. Who. Who in the studio chose that one? All right, Blake, who wants to set this one up? Jack?

B (98:33)

Well, no, you guys set this up. I want to respond to it.

D (98:36)

I don't. I don't actually. Don't even know what the story is, to be honest.

C (98:39)

So the story is that. I don't really know.

F (98:42)

She refused to apologize.

C (98:43)

She's refusing to apologize for being pretty. That was a couple weeks ago. But she's doubled down now. She has, like, a new line of. So it's like American Eagle has now restocked her jeans because they sold out, and now she's got this new butterfly chain that she's designed, which apparently. Yeah. So.

B (99:05)

Whoa.

C (99:06)

Yeah, this is bad.

B (99:08)

This is really bad. Is always a very bad sign. If you ever. Young kings. This is all for the young men out there. If you ever see a girl who has a butterfly tattoo or a butterfly on her Twitter profile or Instagram or. Or Tick Tock or whatever, run.

D (99:27)

It means she's super original. She's, like, not guided by other influences. It means, like a person, a woman with a butterfly tattoo, you know, she charts her own path through life.

B (99:39)

No one butterfly tattoo. It'll. What does it always mean? It always means new beginnings. It always means new beginnings. And you're like, new beginnings. What were happening. What was happening before the butterfly tattoo?

D (99:53)

What was the. What was the.

C (99:55)

She was an only fans model for that.

B (99:57)

Yeah, exactly. So I don't know if that's what Sydney Sweeney is saying here. But yeah, the butterfly has always been a negative take. But no. So I, I wanted to hit this on Sydney Sweeney because I think the right is lulling themselves into a false sense of, a false sense of calm with her and thinking that like, oh, she's, you know, she's like our girl, she's going to be helpful to us. When I think the right is, is, you know, she's actually, we're actually being set up. So just because Sydney Sweeney isn't like woke and trans and all this, that doesn't mean that she's not a hardcore feminist. And what. And I think that's what is going to be set up for. So if you guys go and. Have you guys heard about the new movie that she's going to be starring in starting next month?

C (100:46)

Yeah, I watched the trailer. I'm going to, I'm going to have the team pull it.

B (100:49)

So this, this movie is called the Housemaid. And if you guys don't know what the housemaid is, it is the number one book for women in all of America right now. Housemaid. It's in like every airport you go to, every bookstore. It's like on every list there's a whole series of them. And what it is, is basically Radio Rwanda for women. It is the most, The Housemaid is the most anti male narrative that's ever been written. It is, it is straight up anxiety porn for women to teach them that men are evil and that men should be killed. And if you don't believe me, go and pick up one of them. So I did. I read the very first one. And in the very first novel, all the women are good, sort of. The men are, are depicted and portrayed as evil for no reason because men exist. They are therefore evil. And then the housemaid basically becomes this character that quote, unquote, traumatized women get to hire in order to murder your, your narcissist husband and get away with it. And then she becomes the hero of the series. And each episode, each book is then another way that she's going to come in and get hired to murder someone's husband for them.

C (102:07)

Oh, my goodness. That's the new Sydney Sweeney movie. So it's like living vicariously through your housemaid so they can murder your, your deadbeat husband. Got it? Yeah. So like, here's the, here's the trailer. Starring Sydney Sweeney 345.

B (102:25)

Hi, Melanie. Hi, Mrs. Winchester. Please call me Nina. Come on.

C (102:42)

What are you doing here?

B (102:43)

I work here.

C (102:51)

Nina.

B (102:52)

Where are they? Hey, what's Going on Billy threw away my PTA notes. Why don't we go check your office? You need to be more careful next time. You've ruined my entire day.

D (103:05)

I'm sorry.

B (103:08)

I do not know how he puts up with her.

C (103:09)

He's a hot saint.

B (103:13)

I really need to get out of here. You're leaving? No, you misheard me. I want you to feel safe here. I don't know what I'd do without you.

C (103:26)

Please, please, please, please.

B (103:33)

Oh, my God. What kind of monsters are we? I don't even sandwich. Please, please, please don't prove I'm right.

D (104:02)

I'm reading the summary of this book and it's insane. I'm just gonna spoil it because I don't.

B (104:06)

Yeah, that's what we should spoil it.

D (104:08)

So the spoiler is I'm just gonna abbreviate the plot here. So the Sydney Sweeney character gets hired. She's just out of prison and she basically hired as a housemaid to work at this family. And initially it seems like the wife is crazy and like the husband puts up with her tldr. It turns out the husband is actually this emotionally and physically abusive psycho who tortures the wife and all women. And then, yeah, all husbands are bad. And then it. Like the twist is Millie had actually kill. She went to jail because she killed someone trying to rape her friend. And of course the evil justice system sent her to jail for this because it's run by men. And then she gets out and then that Nina, the wife had hired her because she's hoping. Because Millie is this woman who will step up and rescue and kill men who are abusive. She's hoping Millie will do what she's too much of a coward to do. So what Millie does is literally. This is the description. Millie incapacitates Andrew with pepper spray and locks him in a room. She then forces him to perform the same punishment. Andrew was trying to abuse her. She forces the husband to do. Sorry. Andrew's also the name of the husband in the story. She forces him to do the same punishment and then rips out two of his teeth and then leaves him to die of thirst. Then the wife comes back to the house and discovers the husband dead. She tells Millie to flee. Eventually the police decide that it was an accident. And then the wife and the Sydney Sweeney character team up to. They form a group to actually a different trick. Anyway, the Sydney Sweeney character starts a group to help women get out of abusive relationships by murdering their husbands. I'm not.

B (105:45)

So this is sold. So that's basically what I said this is sold 2 million copies. Just the very first book across Amazon, Barnes and Noble books, a million print, e book and audiobook formats. It is all over TikTok. Bestseller status, New York Times, USA Today. This is the number one book for women in America today. This is so men. So it is anti male, it is anti marriage, it is anti family. It is all men are evil. Marriage is a trap. Every husband is a ticking time bomb. Every home is a cage that you are, you know, if you are not in complete control of, then you are inherently in a cage. Marriage itself, of course, is a cage. Women are always the perpetual victims. And also, by the way, Blake, to your. To what you were just saying, it doesn't matter how extreme your behavior is as long as you're a woman. Because if a woman does it, it's justified.

D (106:45)

We just need a general conversation on women's fiction. It's gotten really bad. Like if you go to a bookstore, a huge amount of fiction on sale. First of all, the covers make them look like children's books. They'll have these like very inoffensive cartoons. And then a ton of them are like that. They're either weirdly murderous or they're just. They're just literal smut. And it's very low effort smut. I was in the, I was in the airport the other day and hockey romances have become this huge thing. So women like romance novels, but then there's specific types of romance novel. They like hockey romance. So there's different types they like. So they like, you know, business exec romance, they like cowboy romance, they like werewolf romance and they like. There's a lot of sports romances, but specifically hockey. They really like romance stories involving hockey players.

A (107:33)

I.

D (107:34)

That's an interesting thing. You could really dissect that. My guess is, frankly, I'll be honest. Hockey is probably one of the last sports that's like implicitly mostly white people. And so it's where you plausibly have, you know, where you have a tall, tall guy who's like, can be blonde and blue eyed, which is what a lot of women like.

C (107:53)

And toothless.

D (107:53)

It's kind of violent. So yeah, they can be tough. It's still a team sport. So you can have the interpersonal drama of what's going on within the team. You're not gonna get that. With tennis, for example. I just think it's all those things together. But there's tons of these. There's one called Icebreaker. You've seen the COVID It's in Every bookstore, it's sold millions of copies. It has hundreds of thousands of ratings on Amazon and on Goodreads, but there's tons of these. So I was in the bookstore the other day. Yeah, it was book four. Yeah. So we have that. That is just one of the most popular books of the past decade. Is that.

B (108:26)

Oh, millions of copies.

D (108:28)

And it is just. It is just a smut book.

C (108:30)

Over 1 million copies sold.

D (108:32)

Yeah, it is smut. It is literally just a pornographic book. Trust me on this one. And there's tons of them. Like, you bought it at the airport.

C (108:39)

I did not buy my mind. No, no, no.

D (108:41)

I was in the airport. I was in the airport, and there was a different romance series, and it was a whole hockey romance series about the Jacksonville Rays, a fake NHL team. And it's getting more and more extreme because book one, that. That one we saw, there is, at least, as far as I know, a normal romance, just boy girl.

C (108:59)

I thought you said it was a porn.

D (109:00)

It. Well, it is, but it's still like boy girl. It's still just a normal relationship is what he means. So book one of this Jacksonville Rays series. First of all, all the titles are just. Actually, this is probably another reason they like hockey. They're just bad, dirty puns, like, you know, like down to puck and pucking strong and stuff like that. Anyway, book one was Woman has love quadrangle with four with three guys on the hockey team. And the happy resolution is polyamory. She can just be with all three of the guys. And that. That's the happy ending. Book two. Book two is there. It's a body positivity romance. So it's like a big girl, a fat girl, and she still gets the. The hot hockey player. And by book four, which is the one I encountered, it's just. It's just a gay romance, two men, but it's still written by a woman for women.

E (109:50)

Are you sure you didn't buy these books?

D (109:52)

I did not buy it.

E (109:53)

Are you sure? I could just see you rolling up to the bookstore at the airport with your boba tea.

C (109:59)

Wait, these are amazing.

E (110:00)

Like. And you bought it?

D (110:03)

I did not buy it. I did not buy it. I did not read it. I thought it was funny. So for investigative purposes, that is the series. So for investigative purposes. For investigative purposes.

E (110:16)

Blake, you know too much.

D (110:17)

I looked at the book, but I did not buy it. I did not read the whole thing.

C (110:20)

You did not inhale.

D (110:21)

I will admit. I will admit it took me an amusingly long time to realize that the gay one Was like a gay romance novel. Even though I opened up.

E (110:30)

How far, how far in the book. How much of the book did you read before you realized?

D (110:35)

The funny thing is, is I opened two. A random page, and they're literally one of the characters is like, are you on prep? What's prep? And it's, it's the drug that you take to not get hiv.

E (110:45)

If you are, you know way too much about this book.

D (110:49)

You read the book. I am under attack. I am being persecuted.

C (110:54)

Blake knows way too much about European history, too. So it's like you.

D (111:02)

Stories. I try to bring you entertaining stories.

C (111:07)

Somehow, Blake, you made my skin crawl more than the, the AI, grandma.

D (111:12)

You guys, I am persecuted because I try to bring funny information to you set up.

C (111:17)

And Blake is like, hey, how about.

B (111:20)

Those gay hockey novels?

C (111:21)

How did we get.

E (111:22)

Yeah, but what about those?

D (111:23)

Gay hockey is out of control.

C (111:26)

Okay, but here's, here's the, here's the setup. Here's the setup. I told this to the team that Sydney Sweeney is going to absolutely let it. She's going to overcompensate because she knows everybody thinks she's right coded and a conservative and MAGA and all this stuff. She's going to overcompensate. This is why we saw her naked on some sort of red carpet. She was, she had her, her, you know.

D (111:55)

Why did you say it that way?

C (111:56)

I don't know. She was naked. Yeah, there it is. That's, that was, this is, this is the thing. It was basically.

E (112:04)

Oh, it's blurred.

B (112:05)

I see.

E (112:06)

Oh, it's blurred.

C (112:07)

No, so I can't see it from here. She, she is going to let us down because she's gonna say, no one controls me. And to Jack's point, I think she's, you know, empowered feminist. She's not gonna be controlled or defined by anybody.

E (112:20)

Well, I, I do think that her career has been built around the blurred out section there. So, I mean, a lot of her career has been focused in one part of her.

C (112:35)

Talented.

E (112:36)

Yeah, yeah.

C (112:37)

Well, anyway, her charm, her intellect. I thought that she did a great job. I thought she did a great job. She knows what not apologizing to that wasn't it. It was a Cosmo or GQ or. What was that?

D (112:50)

I can't remember the outlet.

C (112:52)

But she, she, she did a great job of not apologizing for the ad because the whole thing was blown out of proportion. Good jeans, all this stuff. Anyways, I, I, I guess I suppose I'm a fan ish of Sydney Sweeney just because she's something new and novel and unique. But yeah, I, I think you're right, Jack. It's, it's. We're gonna, if you, if you're gonna put any faith in Sydney Sweeney, be prepared to be let down greatly.

B (113:18)

And that's where it is, guys.

E (113:19)

No one here is let down by Sydney Sweeney.

B (113:22)

Men, men need to rise up. We, we need to stop, need to stop trusting these, these, these Hollywood starlets. We need to stop trusting these New Jersey women like that one who apparently faked like a, like a hate crime. A trump hate crime or something. Can't do it, boys. It's all up to us.

E (113:40)

She worked for Van Drew. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

B (113:45)

All the guys were sharing that picture in there in the, the group chat today and they were like, they're like, I can fix her. I can fix her.

C (113:54)

All right, listen, Jack, you have an event tonight, if you want to, if you want to preface it and then we'll.

B (114:00)

Yes, live streamed or like it comes out the next day or how that works, but I'm an event tonight here, actually backstage at what is this place called? The Diamond Heart arena in Bakersfield, California. With it is Megan Kelly, myself, Victor Davis Hansen, Steve Hilton, and believe it or not, Charlie Dean. Yes, that's right. The Charlie Sheen is here. Ricky Vaughn himself will be on stage as well as I. And you know, this was actually, this was supposed to be Charlie stop on the tour with, with Megyn Kelly. And obviously Charlie can't be here. And you know, she asked me to just come up and say a few words about him and I'm gonna do that. And I'm really looking forward, of course, to Erica when she goes and speaks to Megyn Kelly I think in two nights time on, on Saturday night there in Phoenix.

E (114:55)

Yep.

C (114:55)

Glendale. Doing it. The, the old Coyotes arena there.

F (114:59)

Desert. Yeah, Desert Diamond Arena.

C (115:02)

Speaking of hockey, we got to have.

E (115:05)

The Coyotes come back, but not to Glendale. We need them back to Scottsdale. That'd be fantastic.

C (115:10)

Great, Jack. I'm going to take us home here, brother. But this has been a very fun, illuminating, skin crawling discussion. I've been surprised, enlightened, disappointed, disgusted, all of the things. Hopefully you enjoyed it.

B (115:25)

That's what she said it.

C (115:25)

Yeah. All right, until next Thursday, keep committing thought crime.

D (115:37)

For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.

C (115:41)

Com.