Loading summary
Transcript147 lines
- [00:01]
A
What if a few minutes with God could change the direction of your entire Day? With pray.com you can begin each morning with powerful daily prayers, inspiring Bible stories and messages created to strengthen your faith. Whether you need peace, encouragement or a fresh start, pray.com helps you make prayer part of your everyday Life. Download the Pray.com app today. Well, good evening everybody, and welcome to Wired In. I'm Cabin Phillips coming to you live from Daily Wire hq. The biggest Senate primary of the year is going down today in Michigan. We'll get the latest from Abdul El Sayed's camp and take you to Missouri where a former far left squad member who has been voted out of office is looking to make her way back into Congress. Wildfires continue to ravage countries across the globe as and progressives are blaming climate change. We'll talk to a climate expert who says the latest round of hysteria is a power grab. We'll also tell you about a wild intra party feud between two members of Congress who happen to be in laws. And of course, stick around until the very end of the show. For my favorite part of the show, our live listener Q and A. If you're a Daily Wire member, get your questions in the live chat right now. If you're on Apple or Spotify, make sure to sign up now@dailywire.com subscribe. Join the fun. All right, let's do this thing. Roll that graphic. And just a reminder for you lovely folks at home, Wired In Live is now streaming live at 4pm Eastern Monday through Thursday. Get daily coverage of the news happening right now here, why it all matters and talk with experts who are actually in the story. Become a member and join the live chat@dailywire.com subscribe. Well, we had Chick Fil A for lunch today at the Daily Wire offices, but I'm still, I'm still feeling a little bit hungry, so I think it's time for a little rice and beans. At the top of the show. Let's bring on Daily Wire D.C. bureau Chief Tim Rice. Tim, how we doing, man?
- [02:12]
B
I'm doing great, Cabot. How are you?
- [02:14]
A
I am fantastic. Now, anytime I get to see your lovely smiling face, I can't really see your smile because it's a bit blocked out with the mustache. But that's okay. We like it that way. We've been talking for the last few weeks about Todd Blanche, President Trump's pick for Attorney General. It looked like he was gonna get stonewalled for a bit in the Senate, but there's been some movement. How close is he to getting over the finish line.
- [02:39]
B
I'm pretty close now. So he was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee today. What happened was those two holdout senators, the YOLO senators, as they've come to be known, Thom Tillis and John Cornyn, both of whom are approaching the end of their term, ends of their terms, they were bl. Blocking Blanche's nomination, wouldn't even get him out of committee over their objections to the Trump administration's planned weaponization fund. Our viewers will remember we've discussed this. This was a fund that the Justice Department was going to administer to any victim of government weaponization, but who critics both in Democrat and Republican alike worried would be mostly used to pay out to people who were at the stormed the Capitol on January 6th. So this was something that Cornyn and Tillis were opposed to. And even though Trump and Blanche had said that they put the weapon fund on ice, that was not enough at first to secure their votes. So after a lot of back and forth after the president threatening, as we discussed last week, to pull Blanche's nomination until Cornyn and Tillis were out of office, which was a risky move, eventually they struck some sort of compromise. So the weaponization fund is really, truly dead now. And Todd Blanche advances to a vote of the full Senate, where, of course, Republicans have a slight majority with Vice President J.D. vance there to break the tie. But because Tillis and Cornyn were really the only two major holdouts, you know, with the exception of folks like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who you always got to kind of got to keep an eye out on or an eye on, it seems like he should be going to a full confirmation soon.
- [04:09]
A
Yeah. You mentioned Thom Tillis and John Cornyn being known as the YOLO senators. I don't want to make any assumptions, but Thom Tillis is 65, Cornyn is 74. Do we think that either of them know what YOLO stands for?
- [04:25]
B
Oh, no, absolutely not. This is, it's a funny term because it's like they don't know what it means. But also YOLO's like a little bit that's like, that was millennials, right? That was us. So there's clearly, there's probably like some 45 year old journalists somewhere who coined it. And only, you know, half of us are laughing. Yeah, kids probably don't even know.
- [04:41]
A
No disrespect to any of our older viewers who might not know what it means. You only live once. As the noted Canadian philosopher Drizzy Drake has been known to say, let's Stick around on Capitol Hill and get to a much more serious story that I think folks might hear and think this is just petty drama. But it's a lot more than that because there are now enormous political implications here and we might have potentially some Congress members having to resign. So we've got Max Miller, Ohio Congressman, Bernie Moreno, Ohio Senator, they're in laws and there is all sorts of allegations about abuse. Now the two men are sort of feuding publicly. Can you just give us some context here, explain for our audience what's going on?
- [05:24]
B
Absolutely, yes. Of both Ohio Republicans, Max Miller was until recently married to Bernie Moreno's daughter, Emily. Max Miller and Emily Moreno share a two year old daughter. They have since gotten divorced and there have been over the past couple of months we saw some leaked police reports and accusations. Emily Moreno had filed a restraining order against her ex husband, had alleged that he abused both her and their two year old daughter. This all sort of came to a head over the weekend. Max Miller finally spoke out publicly, denied strenuously all of the allegations in a live stream on X, which prompted Moreno to issue a lengthy statement in support of his daughter, insisting that Miller was lying, saying that he was not fit to serve in Congress, essentially calling for his resignation. This has continued back and forth a little bit tit for tat. More allegations are coming out against Miller. Miller denies them. He's accusing Bernie Moreno and his daughter, so Miller's ex wife of conspiring against him. It's very messy. We've covered it in the Daily Wire. I won't go into too many of the details right now. I would encourage people to go read our coverage of it if they want more of the nitty gritty. But to your point, Cabot, two big issues here. One is that you have a senator from Ohio calling for a junior congressman from his own state to resign. Both men, both Max Miller and Bernie Moreno are staunch allies of President Trump who has commented a little bit on the situation. It's been brought to his attention. He hasn't taken a side. He hasn't really weighed in. But the other thing is that Max Miller is up for reelection. Bernie Moreno is not. Max Miller is. I believe they have. Republicans have until tomorrow to replace him on the ballot if that is something that they choose to do. He swears that he's not going anywhere and that he still believes that he can win. But of course we're getting echoes of what just happened with Graham Platner up in Maine. Similar situation in a lot of ways. So obviously there's Rumblings that Republicans in Ohio and at the national party are trying to move Miller off the ballot because they think that given all the allegations, he will almost certainly lose to his Democrat challenger in what's already going to be a very close race in November. So again, a tough story involving some allegations of family drama and potential abuse, but also a real political element to it there as well.
- [07:36]
A
Yeah, just some very, very heinous allegations that are being made. Like you said, we've covered this pretty extensively on Daily Wire. I'd encourage everyone to go read up on that reporting. Speaking of reporting on the site, there was a wild story up in Idaho this weekend that you were on top of. As it was breaking, there was an attempted mass shooting at an In N out that was stopped by a good Samaritan. Tell us about that.
- [08:01]
B
Yeah, really crazy. It was as you said, a guy opened fire and it was a parking lot of a shopping center. I believe there was a movie theater there. So this was, it was, you know, late afternoon, kind of peak dinner and you know, mall going hours and this guy was just walking around. We still don't really know what his motives are. They have identified the shooter, but it's unclear what prompted him. He was shooting people in parked cars, opening doors of cars to, to fire off at some point. I believe at first there were three confirmed dead and officials warned that the death toll was going to rise. I don't actually think it's risen that much higher, which is fantastic. And I think in part it was because of there were two good Samaritans. An off duty cop was on the scene and started firing back at the gunman as did a civilian, a 35 year old guy who had a license for a concealed carry. And again, another story that we've written up, his public statements on the site, it's I'm smiling not because this is obviously a tragedy, but this guy's pretty incredible. He was driving in and out with his girlfriend. He heard the shots. He had taken self defense and concealed carry training. He knew what to do. He said that he had no fear and as his girlfriend was begging him to stay in the car, he just calmly exited the vehicle unholstered his weapon and started firing at the gunman alongside the off duty cop. So really incredible. And go read the piece. The quotes are amazing. He said there was a situation that needed to be handled. I was there to handle it.
- [09:26]
A
Yeah. And it seems to be little doubt that he prevented the loss of more life. And we actually have some video that came out recently. He Spoke to ABC for the first time. Let's play that clip and just hear this guy who is a hero on the right hand side of that sign closest to the road. And that's where I saw the individual with his rifle pointed at the vehicles. Authorities believe those heroic actions drove the
- [09:51]
C
shooter from the scene and likely saved lives.
- [09:54]
A
He seemed unusually comfortable aiming that rifle at those cars. And then as soon as some rounds started coming at him, everything changed immediately. All that, you know, all that bravado he had immediately crumbled. Yeah, a heroic stand there. And as he said, criminals don't like rounds coming their way. Tim, before we go, we got 45 seconds. You've got a new piece on the Daily Wire talking about nine books for people's summer reading list. Give us one or two suggestions. What should people be reading?
- [10:28]
B
Oh, man. All right, off the top of my head, the Last Kings of Shanghai, which is one of the coolest history books I've ever read. It's about these two Iraqi Jewish families, rival business families, who basically built modern Shanghai and did a lot of heroic. Speaking of heroism, a lot of heroic things, rescuing about 18,000 Jews from the Nazis during the Holocaust. And then, of course, I recommend Chuck Klosterman's book on football. It's a love letter to the American game. And let's be honest, as much as everyone's enjoying these last few days of summer, we all can't wait for football to be back in the fall. So it'll tide you over for the next couple of weeks before college football's back at the end of this month, I think. But, you know, we still got a little bit ways to go before it's really football season. Something to. Something to keep you keep you keep. Keep you patient.
- [11:13]
A
Only Tim Rice is capable of. Of talking about the Iraqi Jewish families who built Shanghai. And then also the greatest personalities of football. That's a eclectic selection if I've ever heard one. And that's why we love you, Tim Rice.
- [11:31]
B
Something for everybody.
- [11:32]
A
Something for everybody. And that's what you bring to this show. Something for Everybody. Daily Wire D.C. bureau Chief Tim Rice. Great to have you as always.
- [11:40]
B
See you soon, Cabot.
- [11:41]
A
All right, let's jump across town and bring on Daily Wire opinion editor Ben Domenech. Ben, it's great to have you back before we get going, talking about these big races. I hear you tore your rotator cuff. What's going on, man?
- [11:55]
D
I made that. So. You know, Cabot, you have children, you make the mistake sometimes when the baby gets to a certain Size, you have the decision about whether you're going to take them out of the car seat before you remove the car seat. And I made the wrong decision.
- [12:13]
C
So
- [12:15]
D
that was the cause. I'm fine. Not a full tear, but it's going to be just a. You know what? This is just what it is. When you're too old to be having children go on vacation with you. You just have to grin and bear it and understand that it's for them. But more importantly, I have to say I can't believe that Tim Rice thinks that you want to be reading about those kinds of things on the beach. My stack of books that's over here for me to take to the beach is entirely Ian Fleming. So we have very different approaches to beach reading, let's put it that way.
- [12:46]
A
I'm with you. I just kind of crave a day at the beach where I actually the ability to read and not be chasing a two year old who's going to go throw himself into the waves. But one day I will be able, one day I will be able to read.
- [12:58]
D
That day will come.
- [13:00]
A
And speaking of the days that have come, it's primary day. It's finally here in Michigan. We've got far left progressive Abdul El Sayed facing off against Congresswoman Haley Stevens for the Senate nomination. This has become the most expensive Democratic primary in history. What are we going to see tonight?
- [13:17]
D
El Sayed gonna run away with this? I mean the only reason that he wouldn't get to double digits is if the youth vote comes in far below the prognosticators assumptions. And what, what does that really mean for national Democrats? It makes Michigan a much more difficult question for them all. And it's going to be, I think, something that is going to be used against a lot of Senate Democrats who are running in other states. You know, particularly I would say, I look at the state of Texas, for instance. All the questions that are going to be answered by El Sayed when it comes to the extremism that he embodies, whether it's getting rid of the Electoral College, getting rid of the Supreme Court, you know, or packing it, getting rid of the presidency and effectively the Senate, all these different things that he, that he has advocated for, that the DSA program has advocated for. Those are going to be questions that are going to be put to people like James Tallarico. It's going to be put to people like Roy Cooper in North Carolina. It's going to be put to all of these different candidates in Ohio and Iowa and other states where the issues are far less supported than what you might find in the radical base in Michigan. It's going to elevate El Sayed to being a national figure in short order.
- [14:29]
A
Assuming he does win tonight, do you see him moderating ahead of the general?
- [14:35]
D
Not really, because there's only so much you can do. What I do think that he's going to do and do well, as opposed to potentially other candidates. You look to the governor's race in Wisconsin, for instance. I think that the whole approach that this DSA group has adopted when it comes to their attempts has been to focus on the nicest sounding or most normal sounding version of their agenda. So what are we about? We're about Medicare for all. We're about thinking there are too many billionaires and they need to pay more. We're about, you know, the fact that inequality and, and inflation has made, you know, your costs and everything else rise. And when you look at the commentary from young voters, for instance, man on the street type of interviews in Michigan, that's mostly what they're emphasizing. So they're leaving out all of the radicalism. They're basically saying that's something that we're only going to talk about inside the Democratic tent. We're going to battle with the, you know, John Fetterman's, with the James Carville's of the world in that space. But we're going to leave that off the agenda that we use in front of the voters. That's what the smart people do. The dumber candidates, they're the ones who roll out things like, let's get rid of Thanksgiving.
- [15:40]
A
Yeah, we'll see how smart he ends up being. By some accounts in this race, Stevens has outspent El sayed by a 10 to 1 margin throughout this primary. According to CBS, $30 million has come in from AIPAC and its affiliated groups. That's the most they've ever spent on a single race like this. And El Sayed has really leaned into that fact in recent appearances. I want to play this clip and get your take. I want to play the clip. I don't know if we have it. Do we have the clip? Guys of. We don't have this clip.
- [16:12]
B
Oh, that's.
- [16:13]
A
That's Liz, baby.
- [16:14]
D
You can just tell me, you can just tell me what he said. Well, I actually, I think I know the clip that you're talking about because I think I've seen it before. So let me, so let me just run through this. I think that the thing that people are underestimating is how this money is being spent really matters. We look, for instance, again, looking at Texas, at a situation there where you had the most expensive, you know, Republican primary between Ken Paxton and John Cornyn, you know, people who are fighting it out, duking it out for that Republican nomination. Cornyn was spending all this money on television. He was running ad after ad after ad. Haley Stevens has done something relatively similar when it comes to the approach of spending money. And of course, this outside group supporting her have come to spending money in the state, and I think that that just doesn't work anymore. In contrast, Elsayed last yesterday was holding court around a pool party that had a group of influencers overwhelmingly, by the way, not from Michigan, from New York, from California, people who had flown in to support him, people like Hasan Piker, but others who don't have maybe the same prominence, but have huge followings online. The money has shifted in politics, especially on the Democratic side, to these influencers, to boosting their numbers, to. To base, basically taking everything that they're doing on Instagram and TikTok and every other social platform and raising it up. So that's what people who are especially younger voters see. We have to move beyond the level of analyzing this when it comes to just the overall number, because that overall number includes a lot of consultant fees and a lot of spending on television that doesn't really matter as much anymore.
- [17:48]
A
And to that point, we've got the clip. Now, I do want to play this because I think it's. It's really illuminating what Sayed is, our El Sayed is saying about this race. Let's roll that tape. You know, when AIPAC watches this, come for me, see what happens.
- [18:01]
D
Come for me.
- [18:02]
A
Like, you know, I know you keep coming, but, like, you picked, like, literally the least capable candidate in America, right?
- [18:08]
B
And then Chuck Schumer doubles down, and
- [18:10]
A
then AIPAC doubles down, and part of me is like, okay, look, if you think you can beat money out of politics, money in your pocket, Medicare for all, come. But I'll tell you what people don't want. They don't want money in a foreign government. They want money here. So, Ben, do you think we've reached a point within the Democratic Party, at least, where support from these pro Israel groups is actually harmful to a candidate?
- [18:30]
D
100% CAVETT. And the truth is that you wouldn't want their endorsement at this stage in the Democratic coalition that would be viewed as a negative, depending on where you're running, a significant negative. And I think that that's something that we need to Understand that is how radical of a change that is from the past, particularly given that aipac, despite the fact that they are a significant fundraiser and, you know, an action committee, et cetera, they are dwarfed by the spend other groups. They are not as big as people try to make them out to be. The other thing that I think that people need to understand about this is this is a true rift within the Democratic coalition that they don't have an answer for at the top, the people who are in charge. He mentioned Chuck Schumer in that clip, Hakeem Jeffries, you know, the DNC leadership, everyone else who is sort of in that leadership bubble. They are now beholden to this new energy that is on the left. I think it's truly dangerous. I think it's loathsome. I think that what they're engaged in is really evil and they're trying to pull the wool over the eyes of a lot of young people who quite frankly, are listening to their message and responding to it because they feel depressed and they want change. And that's something that makes sense for a lot of young people, especially in this economy.
- [19:42]
A
Yeah, resentment politics. It is popular right now. Before we go, let's get to the other big primary in Missouri today where Cori Bush, the far left squad member who was voted out of office, is looking to win back her seat. Do you think she will? And if she does, what does it say about the direction of the Democratic Party?
- [20:00]
D
Well, I think that what you saw, you know, after sort of this initial squad invasion of the Democratic Party was pushback from the establishment, and they were able to successfully do that in a number of different cases. For instance, while she was not an original member of the squad, you saw the way that the whole Jasmine Crockett thing played out. The thing that I think is going to be interesting is is this now basically the wave returning or is this something different? I think Cori Bush, you know, has a good shot at winning. I don't know if that it's harder to look at those those races and have a sure beat on it. But it's one of these situations where I think that people underestimate how much Congress is going to change. Capitol Hill is going to change, regardless of how many of of these people ultimately end up elected, because the vast majority of them are going to win. They will be part of this next Congress, whether they're part of a majority or a minority. And that's going to have enormous impact on D.C. and you know, sadly, I think it's going to have an enormous impact on the way that we talk about some of the most important things in America. The Overton window is shifted and communism is back on the menu, boys.
- [21:08]
A
Yeah. Is that a Lord of the Rings reference?
- [21:11]
D
Gavin, come on.
- [21:14]
A
I don't know what it is. I'm assuming it is. Meat's back on the menu, boys. Ben Dominant, Mitch, we appreciate you as always. Everyone go to dailywire.com tonight we will have the latest results on all these races.
- [21:25]
D
Better dead than Red Cabot.
- [21:27]
A
Thank you, Ben. Again, another man of eclectic references. Ben Dominant, Daily Wire Opinion editor. Well, our next guest is a woman who built a career helping to elect progressive Democrats. But now she says the party she once loved has abandoned what it once stood for. We're joined now by Evan Barker, author of the new book Nothing Confessions of a Democratic Operative. Evan, it's great to have you on. Thanks for joining us.
- [21:52]
E
Thank you so much. I'm so glad to be here.
- [21:55]
A
I have a million questions for you. I've been reading your stuff. I've been watching some of your appearances. So let's just start with a little background. Tell us about your work in the Democratic Party over the last decade.
- [22:07]
E
Yeah, so I actually started working in the Democratic Party in 2008 for Barack Obama's first campaign for president. And I think the party was kind of a lot different back then. I got engaged because I was born with a preexisting health condition similar to cystic fibrosis. So I struggled with finding health insurance even as a child. That's how it was before the aca. And so Obama promised me health care. And that's why I was activated and got, you know, into his campaign and working in politics, I was able to go to college. Fast forward. Later, I briefly worked for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign in 2015. And then, you know, after Donald Trump was elected, I really got reengaged in politics. I ended up going to the east coast and I worked for an establishment Democrat there. And it was during that time that I started to feel kind of disillusioned with the establishment wing of the party. I just felt like they didn't really stand for much besides being anti Trump, you know. And the person that I worked for there was very out of touch. And, you know, she was, you know, just like, she didn't really talk about issues. And so I got disillusioned with the establishment. It's kind of like this is my turning right. I'm getting disillusioned, disillusioned. And then I find Bernie's Movement. And I went back home to the Midwest, back to Kansas, started working for a labor lawyer there. And he was endorsed by AOC and Bernie in 2018. And so I was actually with AOC and Bernie the very first day they ever met, the very first iteration of what you're seeing play out right now. And then from that campaign, I was kind of, like, sucked up into national politics. I started working for a national organization, the one that got Elizabeth Warren elected, traveled all over the country. I went to Amar Camp and a Jars race back when he was running in 2018, I went to AOC's office. I went all over the country. And then I started working for a fundraising firm based in D.C. called Left Rising. And I like to call them the secret weapon of the far left. Actually, they worked with Justice Democrats, Cori Bush, who you were just talking about. I worked for Abdul El Sayed, Jasmine Crockett. They were also behind Ilhan Omar and Jamal Bowman. And so, you know, not a lot of people really know about them because they're kind of in the shadows, right, as fundraisers. But, you know, I worked there for, you know, the final, like, four years of my career. And in 2022, I had a baby boy, and I decided to take some time off from politics. I saw a lot of crazy things when I was working in progressive politics that very much turned me off. I took some time off. I decided to just be a mom. And then in 2024, I went to the DNC. I was curious to go because of the disastrous debate, and I thought maybe it would be a chance for. For the Democrats to remake themselves. And I went, and instead, I just saw the coronation of Kamala Harris, as you probably saw, too. And at that point, after the DNC, I posted my resignation video online to my 60 followers on TikTok. And the next day, it had millions of views. And so ever since then, I've just been telling people my story. And so that's what's led me here.
- [25:25]
A
So you talk about in your writing how you feel like the Democratic Party. At one point, there were room for people like you who had some substantive disagreements with them, that it was the party of the big tent. What do you think was the catalyst for becoming more exclusionary and forcing people like you out of the party?
- [25:44]
E
I think the catalyst was them just trying to be so inclusionary that they became exclusionary. I write about this a lot in my book, but I think, you know, what I saw behind the scenes is it was just Democrats, progressives, constantly reacting to Trump and Then going more and more radical. In 2016, I had family members that had been lifelong Democrats and switched and voted to Donald Trump. And back then, I did not understand why. Now I completely understand why. It's because the Democrats have abandoned the social and cultural values of the American working class, and not just the white American working class, but pretty much all working class people. You know, I saw at the highest levels of the Democratic Party, I saw donor enforcement of DEI and just like these racial and identity and grievance politics. And at that point, it was just so toxic. I also briefly worked for Shaun King's organization, Real justice pac, and, you know, later saw how awful the policies were that they were promoting when I lived in San Francisco with a toddler. And also kind of. I also came around on immigration as well as an issue that I now understand is kind of a class issue. Actually, Bernie Sanders back in 2015 used to say that illegal immigration hurts the working class. And now he has a totally different opinion. And I think that's become. Or, sorry, I think that's because of the radicalization that we've seen on the left amongst the base of the party, but also the politicians, the consultants and the donors behind the scenes that are pushing these things.
- [27:30]
A
It's been remarkable to see some of the pushback you've gotten. And I know there have been a lot of folks who've agreed with you, have said, hey, I was on the left for years. I consider myself politically homeless now. But there have been people questioning, oh, well, she was some fringe outsider within the left. She wasn't ever really one of us. I'm hearing your credentials thinking that that sounds like some bona fides there.
- [27:50]
E
There's some bona fides, yeah.
- [27:51]
A
We've talked a lot on this show with folks on the left and the right about this rise of socialism and this what was once considered a more fringe element now undoubtedly becoming mainstream. In your view, you're a good person to ask, how should the Democratic establishment react to this rise?
- [28:11]
E
Yeah, I couldn't think of a more timely time for my book. Right. I'm like explaining in my book the rise of the progressive fringe left. And I think, you know, it's a complicated question to answer because truth be told, they did try to fight us, you know, back in. And I write about this in my book. I talk about instances where the state party, like the Democratic state party, would cut off the voter file weeks before the election to a Bernie endorsed candidate when she was running against a Republican. You know, if you couldn't believe It. Right. They thought it was more important to beat the Bernie candidate than the Republican. And then there was a blacklist where, you know, like, my firm was blacklisted. My resume was permanently tainted. But I think what happened is, is that all of that backfired. It actually forced the left, the far left, to become stronger. And so because of that, we ended up building our own consultant ecosystem, our own organizations. You know, we recruited our own donors, billionaire donors. And so now you've got this really strong far left ecosystem that I think is actually. And we'll find out tonight based on whether or not Abdul El Sayed wins his race is actually the new Democratic establishment. And so I think that that is what we are looking at in 2028. And I think Democrats, you know, moderate centrist Democrats, if they want to fight against it, they need to do two things. They need to disavow it. I think a lot of them are afraid to criticize people like Zoharan because they have their staff whispering in their ear telling them not to, telling them that they'll alienate young people. They also don't want to alienate donors that like him. But I think, secondly, establishment Democrats have to offer a real alternative. And I don't see what their vision is. You know, they need to actually become more like centrist, populist, almost to fight against it, because otherwise they just kind of look empty, and still I don't really know what they stand for.
- [30:11]
A
Yeah, I have one final question, Evan. At least one final one. I have time for. I have a million more questions. But we saw following President Trump's win in 2016, that anyone who wasn't on board with the MAGA movement, the Never Trumpers, they were kind of cast into the political wilderness. The party was completely transformed. Obviously, the ideology of the far left today is very different. But. But do you think there's a real possibility that the Democratic Party, from leadership on down, could end up seeing a similar transformation where anyone who's not on board is just gonna miss out?
- [30:43]
E
Absolutely. I think a lot of them will be pushed out of the party. They'll become independents like me. They might sometimes vote Democrat, sometimes vote Republican, or some of them might become more moderate Republicans. I think that we're looking at. If Abdul El Sayed succeeds tonight. I actually think a lot of people think I'm crazy for saying this, but, you know, I know him. He's. He's talented. He's. He's. He's a fierce fundraiser. He really is. He's a force. And if he wins tonight and he wins in November in Michigan in a swing state. Well, that's a huge indictment on the Democratic Party establishment. And I think he would definitely consider running for president in 2028. And if he were to win, or someone like him were to win, it would be a complete undoing of the Democratic Party as we know it now.
- [31:34]
A
Yeah, it does feel like a watershed moment. A very timely moment for us to have you on the show, Evan. We really appreciate your time. Thank you so much.
- [31:43]
E
Thank you.
- [31:44]
A
That was Evan Barker. You guys can go check out her new book, Nothing Left, Confessions of a Democratic Operative. Well, if you turn on the news this summer, there's a good chance that your screen has been flooded with images of wildfires raging in Canada and Europe and across the United States. And many in the legacy press say that wildfires are more common than ever and that climate change driven by carbon emissions are to blame. But our next guest says that they're actually missing the mark. Joining us now is Bjorn Lomborg, author, environmentalist, and president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center. Bjorn, thanks so much for coming on. Great to have you.
- [32:20]
F
Good to be out.
- [32:21]
A
So, as I just mentioned, the consensus in the media is that we're dealing with more wildfires than ever before. You study these numbers very closely. Is that accurate?
- [32:32]
B
No.
- [32:33]
F
So this is what's so weird, right? We're seeing constant exposure of fires. And remember, there are real and damaging fires in France, in Spain, there are also large fires in Canada. But global warming is a global phenomenon. You have to use global data. You can't just cherry pick the places where it burns. Of course, that's what a lot of media will do. But you're not well informed. It turns out that if you actually look at the numbers, and we do have numbers, since 2001, NASA satellites have circled the Earth 24 7, picking up on all major fires around the world. So we have a very good data set. And what we can see now is that 2026 so far is the lowest burn ever seen. It's very likely that it's the lowest burn that we've ever seen since 1900. So the reality is very, very different from what you're seeing on tv. Again, there are real problems, and we can probably get back to talking about how you should fix those and what it's caused by. But the fundamental point is, globally, we've never seen less fire.
- [33:45]
A
So do you think the media is intentionally giving people the impression that wildfires are on the rise? And if so, what is their motive?
- [33:52]
F
Well, there's certainly some intent in, in saying that. So again, remember, news media will always show you where it is burning. You never see a journalist saying, hi, I'm here, and there's nothing burning. Right? You just don't see that. So the point is we constantly see stuff that has a problem, but we're not well informed if we don't also have news media telling you. But actually this is somewhat of an exception in most of Europe. It's actually burning less in all continents. So the surprising thing is in Africa, in North America, in South America, in Europe, in Asia, in Oceania, all the six continents are below average right now. So we've seen less burn in all six of these continents. Yet the news media will continuously tell you, well, but here's a fire. So part of it is just simply because if it bleeds, it leads. But it's also, of course, because a lot of people want to tell you, oh, you should be really worried. We should do something about climate change. We haven't really talked very much about climate change for quite a while because it ended up being very expensive and people sort of got a little sick and tired of it. Now they're trying to take it back in. And of course that's wrong. Yes, climate change, all of the things equal, would make fire more probable. But of course, people don't like fire. And what we've seen over the last century and a quarter is that we've actually gotten better and better at avoiding fire, both because of increased agriculture, because of increased preparation, and simply because we're smarter and better and more well prepared. And that's why fire has dramatically reduced, reduced in global environment. That's why we're seeing some of the lowest numbers this year.
- [35:44]
A
You mentioned that one motive might be reminding people again of climate change. And as you said, it does seem like climate change has dipped when it comes to the number of mentions that we're seeing. I mean, 10 years ago, climate change was one of the leading issues with many on the Democratic Party. You could say that Alexandria Acosta Cortez was elected on her promise of a Green New Deal. That's not really the case these days. Do you think that they really have backed off or do you think the media is just covering it less? And if so, why?
- [36:14]
F
So it's very clear that two things, people got sick and tired of it. So there are many other issues. Remember, after the, the end of the Cold War, there was a sense of maybe climate change is really the only big problem left over. But now, of course, we're starting to realize there's inflation, there is war, there's problems with pension funds, all kinds of other problems. Education systems aren't working very well, healthcare issues around the world, we're realizing there are many other problems. And so climate change has lost this predominant and this exclusive sense. In Europe. I live in Europe. We've seen a dramatic drop from climate change being one of two issues that the European Union picked as one of their top things. 35% said that that was climate change. This spring, which is last time we have numbers for it was down to just 9%. People are just worried about a lot of other things. But of course, at the same time, you also started realizing that we were told, oh, it would be incredibly cheap. Solar panels, wind turbines, you'll be richer from this. And there's some truth, again, to the point of saying that solar panels can be cheaper than fossil fuels, but only when the sun is shining. When it's not shining, it is infinitely expensive power, because you can't get it. You need to buy lots of backup power and essentially have most of a secondary power system as a backup, which will mostly be natural gas. So you're essentially buying two systems. You're saving a little bit on fuel. That's right. But you end up with much more expensive power in this case. But in general energy. And that's why a lot of people have cooled in this conversation, both because they've realized there are other issues and because they've realized this is actually costing me a lot of money.
- [38:03]
A
Yeah. And on the topic of money, we've seen governments pour literally trillions of dollars into combating climate change. With all of that money, you would expect to see some enormous progress being made. How effective have these programs been?
- [38:20]
F
Well, so first of all, we've spent about $16 trillion, according to the Bloomberg New Energy foundation estimate. So $16 trillion is a lot of money. That's about. About 14% of global GDP over the last 20 years. That's a lot of money. But actually, if we're going to go net zero, we're talking about thousands of trillions of dollars over the many coming decades. So we're talking about it's only a small fraction. And it also turns out that it's very, very hard to make anything work. And this, of course, is because most people like what comes out of cheap and available energy, namely prosperity. And that's why, although you can get some rich Americans, some rich Europeans, cut a little bit of their carbon emissions, most of them will just switch to buying it from China. And of Course, China, and now increasingly India and Vietnam and other places will just want to get out of poverty and get more and more energy. And so what we've really seen is there was a large study in science a couple years ago that tried to look at pretty much everything we'd done to cut carbon emissions over the last 20 years. What they found was only a very small fraction of these programs had actually worked. And in total, they had cut about 1/4 of 1% of emissions. So literally, well, not nothing, but literally very close to nothing. We have seen very little movement in cutting carbon emissions. We've seen a lot of switching it over to, say, China and lately India and Indonesia and Vietnam and other places, but very little cutting. And that's because most people want prosperity before they want to deal with climate change.
- [40:01]
A
And you've written about the fact that many times in the west we can have this view of what what happens here is, what's happening everywhere. But you say, hey, we have to take into account what China is doing, or more importantly, what they're not doing, and what other countries, India, Indonesia. So even if the west does achieve a carbon neutral economy or environment, how much of an impact would that actually have on the global climate? And what are we seeing from China and others in the East?
- [40:29]
F
So the short answer is we would see very little outcome from all of the west going net zero by 2050. So remember, everybody tells you this is an absolute necessary thing for us to fix climate change. We need to all promise to go Net Zero by 2050. Most of the other countries are not going to do it. China, India, most other countries, they want to get rich first. Maybe eventually they will, but not anywhere close to 2050. But if the entire rich world, so the EU seems likely they will try to do it Canada, Australia, Japan, maybe the US with a different administration, but assume all of them go net zero. If you actually look at some of the scenarios out there run in the UN climate model, it turns out that the net result would be to reduce temperatures by the end of the century in the UN's foremost climate model by 0.18 degrees Fahrenheit. You would not be able to measure it by the end of the century. So we would literally be paying about 100 to 500 trillion dollars over the 21st century, and we would leave virtually no Martin. And of course, as you rightly point out, it is really about getting China, India and everybody else to switch. They're not going to switch because they want to get rich. But if we could innovate cheap green energy to be cheaper than fossil fuels. Everyone would switch. I don't have the solution. I don't think anyone has the solution right now. But imagine if fourth generation nuclear could be cheaper than fossil fuels. There's a possibility that could happen if we could drive that to happen so that it would be cheaper. Of course everyone would switch, not just because they're rich, well meaning Americans, but because it was cheaper. So the reality is the solution to climate change is not about forcing everyone to switch before they're ready. It's not about scaring people witless when they're worried about, for instance, fire. It's about innovation as it has always been. We've always solved big problems globally through innovation, not by scaring people witless.
- [42:34]
A
That is a fascinating conversation. I would encourage everyone to go read Bjorn's work. There's also great USA Today op ed you wrote recently, or LA Times op ed, I should say, on climate change, saying it's not taking food off your table. And you talk about China and the role they play. So again, I love following you on social media and seeing the way that you break all this down in layman's terms for us who are not environmentalists. And I'm really excited to have you on the show, Bjorn, and we'd love to get you back anytime in the future.
- [43:01]
F
Thank you.
- [43:03]
A
Thank you, Bjorn. That was Bjorn Lomborg, author, environmentalist and president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center. Guys, if you're watching Wired in live on the Daily Wire plus app, thank you. If not, that's where you should be. That's where you get push alerts when we go live, breaking news as it happens, and of course, the latest smart investigative reporting team. The Daily Wire plus app is, is free and available now on the App Store, Google Play, Apple TV, Roku, Samsung LG and more. Well, 30 years ago, President Bill Clinton transformed America's entitlement system with sweeping welfare reform. Our next guest says that today's Democratic Party, though, would repudiate everything that Bill mandated, but that voters nationally still support it. We're joined now by Jesse Arm, VP and pollster at the Manhattan Institute. Jesse, great to have you back, man.
- [43:50]
C
Hey, Cabot, thanks. Thanks for having me. Good to be with you.
- [43:53]
A
I find myself checking your latest work about weekly and I love this piece that you have right now in the City Journal. The title is Bill Clinton was right on Welfare. Tell us what you found.
- [44:05]
C
Yeah, well, we did a bunch of polling earlier this month at the Manhattan institute to see 30 years out from President Clinton's really landmark welfare reform, how Americans today think about the social safety net. And it turns out that they think the kind of compromise agreement that President Clinton was able to come to with congressional Republicans 30 years ago is a good model for the pathway forward. But the Democratic Party of today seems to think things like work requirements and demanding, you know, something short of an unrestricted cash assistance program, but instead trying to funnel, you know, resources for the people who are in need to go for programs specifically tied to food or to essential goods that people need is just a bridge too far and just something that is, you know, too centrist for the flavor of today's electorate. And they're being rewarded for that. In some of these Democratic primary contests where we're seeing people from this DSA faction, the socialist faction, ascending, but the American people are by and large not with them.
- [45:16]
A
So as you were looking through the numbers as this polling started to come in, were there any topics that surprised you? Anything where the American public was in a different spot than you expected them to be?
- [45:26]
C
Yeah, well, we didn't only poll on the social safety net and welfare reform and waste, fraud and abuse, where we found that, you know, voters are still, by and large, with this kind of mainstream consensus viewpoint. We also pulled about some of these new ideas that you're hearing more and more about from the socialist faction of the left. Abolition of police, prisons, borders. Suffice to say, I think you probably know where I'm going with this, Cabot. These are fringe ideas even among Americans who consider themselves to be very left leaning or weigh on solidly within the Democratic Party's coalition. These kinds of really subversive and transgressive ideas that are being advanced now from some of these candidates associated with the DSA faction are not, in fact, popular at all. Minorities within a minority are the people who support these views.
- [46:20]
A
We know that earlier this year, Republicans pushed pretty significant reform to SNAP and the food stamp program requiring work verification. Before we were giving handouts to people. But we haven't seen Republicans really campaign on that issue so far. Do you think that they're missing a window and that those topics are actually pretty popular if either party can capitalize on them?
- [46:42]
C
I do. I think the opportunity here is for a kind of Javier Millay style chainsaw, cutting through the bureaucracy and really going after any kind of unfair doling out of taxpayer funds. We saw a little bit of that with Doge early on in this administration, the Department of Government Efficiency that was headed up by Elon Musk, you know, clunky execution in Some ways, the project came to its own conclusion. DOGE sort of doged itself over time, but I don't know. I mean, I do think also that Republicans have a temptation to say, because they've done a really good job on securing the border and tying immigration enforcement to the broader agenda, that everything is an immigration and deportation issue. Right. That if you just remove certain ethnic enclaves within the United States, that suddenly the need to tackle waste, fraud and abuse goes away. I think that's a mixed message. It's not quite right. There's a lot of reform that we need to get done, a lot of money that is being spent on wasteful programs. And I think that there's a lot of fruit left on the branch to be plucked for Republicans on this particular issue.
- [47:55]
A
That is my kind of metaphor right there. A lot of fruit left on the branch to be plucked. I like that. I don't hear that one too often. That's why we bring you on.
- [48:03]
C
I don't think I came up with it.
- [48:06]
A
I would assume. I think I've heard it before, but I don't hear it nearly enough. And that's a good one. Jesse, let's get to another topic. You've written pretty extensively on the rise of socialism on the left. We've been talking about it all day. Because, again, it is important. I think years ago there was this idea that the rise of socialism was some little tiny fringe thing that Republicans were just trying to scare people with. And we're now seeing it is real and we are seeing it start to grow. But you wrote earlier about how this year has proven that it's not only succeeding thanks to big personalities like AOC and Mamdani, but that it's succeeding because of this institutional backing that it has and this. This actual infrastructure that's been built. Can you talk about that a bit more for us?
- [48:50]
C
Yeah. So in New York City, the DSA is a society unto itself. It gives people purpose and meaning in life. These are young, downwardly mobile elites who are, by and large discomforting or rather uncomfortable with their circumstances in life. They aren't where their parents were at in the same comparable point in their lives. And they're also less religious, they're less engaged community. Many of them are looking for that kind of a third place to be between their work and their home. Some of them are looking for a second place because they don't have a day job in the conventional sense. And the DSA has really provided that semblance of community for a lot of these people. And so when you're getting purpose, when you're getting community, when you're getting an entire network and a sort of sense of being from this kind of organization that is attached to radical politics, it can go a long way. And these groups have developed armies of door knockers who really understand the infrastructural elements associated with campaign politics. How you raise small dollars, how you go and mobilize voters ahead of an election. Many of them are on planes in the last 24 hours heading out to suburban Detroit and Michigan to turn out the vote for Abdul El Said, despite the fact that El Said, who is running in a purple state, has the good sense to say, I'm not quite a socialist, but this is really the game plan. Zoramdani is running into all kinds of hurdles and speed bumps with his implementing his radical far left agenda in New York City. But I think his agenda is actually to spread socialism such that it's not a dirty word anymore nationwide, such that a candidate like Abdul Al Said who is hard left across the board, can conceivably win in a purple state, even in a red state. Right. Mamdani and the DSA are deploying these kinds of, of prairie populist candidates. Okay? These are red coated candidates. They're not running as Democrats, actually, they're running as independents. Dan Osborne is an example of this in Nebraska. When you actually look down the issue list, everything he backs and supports is pretty much part and parcel copy pasted from the DSA platform, but it is coded differently and he speaks about the issues differently. And you know, he colors some of his ads in red to confuse the voters.
- [51:19]
A
It is just a remarkable turn that we've seen in the last few years. And as you said, the effort from a lot of these folks has been to simply normalize the idea of socialism in some of these deep blue cities. And it no doubt appears to be working at least with some portion of the electorate. Jesse, always great to have you on the show, man. We will have you back soon to break down some of these primary results as they continue to roll.
- [51:43]
C
Great to be with you. Thank you, Cabot.
- [51:45]
A
Absolutely, Jesse. Well, our next guest is a familiar face to many of you. It's Daily Wire host Reagan Conrad joining us in studio. Reagan, it's great to have you back.
- [51:54]
G
It's great to be here. Thanks for having me.
- [51:57]
A
I'm constantly amazed by your ability to continue all the great work you've been doing, despite being a new mother.
- [52:05]
G
It is a thing. It is, it's a lot.
- [52:07]
A
It is A lot. We were together in California at the Reagan Ranch a couple weeks ago, and it was the coolest thing seeing you up on stage. I believe your mom was there and your baby was there in the back, and everyone's waving at your baby.
- [52:17]
G
Yep, yep.
- [52:18]
A
What has that been like for you?
- [52:19]
G
It has been a whiplash in the best way. I mean, going from, obviously, this is my first. And so it's been. Everything is adjusted differently now. Everything that I got used to and, you know, all the norms that you have growing up, it suddenly just slipped on its head. In the best way, though.
- [52:32]
A
In the best way. And that kind of ties in with what I want to talk about, your new piece up on Daily Wire, the cultural lie that turned motherhood into a burden. Tell us about that.
- [52:42]
G
Well, I posted a video a couple days ago just simply in my son's nursery holding my baby and said, you know, this isn't oppression, and shame on anyone who sold it as that. And because there were many, many people for decades who did just that. And ironically, even though I didn't call out feminists, they came after me in the comment section. We never said that. First of all, I didn't say it was you guys, but now that you bring it up, actually you did. And so I kind of went off on showing how, especially in the 60s and 70s, feminists were simply saying, this is oppression. It's barbaric. I mean, the things that they called pregnancy and motherhood and, you know, stay at home moms, I mean, horrible things. And so I wanted to call them out and say, you did say this, and if you disagree with that now, great, but say so because that has affected a lot of lives for decades.
- [53:27]
A
You know, methinks the lady doth protest too much when they are saying, how dare you smear us?
- [53:33]
G
Yeah, like, okay, well, if you want to go there, let's pull up the feminist literature and show you, because, like, here it is. You know, it was fun to, like, go in a deep dive and show, like, yeah, it's everywhere.
- [53:41]
A
So do you think the people that were claiming feminists have never said that motherhood is oppressive? Do you think that they're ignorant to what feminists have said in the past, or do you think that they're trying
- [53:51]
G
to gaslight a little bit of both? I think there's absolutely an ignorance there, though. Sort of like a willful, like, they don't want to know what was said because, well, what they really meant was this. And I think now they try to cover up that. And I saw a Lot of women kind of take what they said. Well, actually, it meant this. They're saying that now. I mean, hindsight's 20 20, right. We're years later. They can kind of rewrite what was said. But, no, the words are out there. It's evident in the way that it has affected culture. So I do think it's funny that they're trying to twist it a little bit, and I think, because they probably know it was very radical and it's hurting women.
- [54:23]
A
It seems like a lot of the women who are the staunchest critics of motherhood are not actually mothers themselves.
- [54:30]
G
No, no.
- [54:30]
A
Do you think it's projection where there might be something deep down, of them feeling, well, I was lied to. I never had kids. And so now I'm bitter towards people
- [54:37]
G
who are moms 100%. I mean, even one of the biggest ones, Firestone, she's one of the famous feminists at the time, but she didn't have kids. She never married. She ended up having severe mental health. No one in gender studies talks about that part of her life that, you know, after her claim to fame, she suffered greatly and then never, like, you know, her life kind of ended, sadly. So. So they always avoid that. Well, you know, who is she to speak on motherhood? Who is she to speak on the most important thing that women can do? And so, yeah, I think it's a little bit of a lot of bitterness, I should say.
- [55:06]
A
What is the broader motive? Because there's no doubt. And you can. Even if people don't want to admit that they're being influenced by feminist ideologies, there is no doubt that there's been this rise, whether you see it in TV shows, in the media, what you hear from celebrities of this idea that, hey, motherhood's gonna ruin your life. Motherhood is bad. And you're kind of spitting on the sacrifices of feminists in the past. If you become a mom, especially a young mom, what is the motive for that?
- [55:32]
G
I think it's getting women to not want to desire it and to see any of the sacrifices that are inherent in motherhood as a bad thing and as proof of this concept of oppression. I mean, I know so many friends, even friends of mine, who are feminists now stepping into motherhood, saying, oh, man, I actually don't really want to go back to work. Or, man, I don't really. I don't mind if my husband provides. And I. But they feel guilty because they're like, but my feminist ancestors fought for this. Therefore, I feel bad. And I'm like, no, you don't have to. That's okay. You know, you're allowed to accept certain changes in your life and not filter it through the lens of these angry feminists. But unfortunately, it worked. And so many of us are in our late 20s, early 30s being like, well, we want kids, but, you know, now it's harder. And what they were trying to achieve worked. And now I think we as conservatives have to build back a narrative that says, actually, no, this is a great thing. This is a principle and a staple in motherhood. And not to demonize it and vilify it the way that it has been done for decades at this point.
- [56:25]
F
Yeah.
- [56:25]
A
One of the most fascinating things is when you look at the polling data on how women's view of the world and of politics and culture more broadly, how it shifts when they become parents.
- [56:36]
G
Yeah.
- [56:36]
A
And when they become moms, a lot of their views tend to become a little more conservative, 100%. And I can't help but wonder how much of this pushback is trying to keep women from having that awakening.
- [56:45]
E
Honestly, that's probably.
- [56:47]
G
If we really break it down. So that's probably what it is, because it is. I mean, everything that you would. All the biggest conservative issues, you filter it through the lens of a mother or a potential mother one day, you see things radically differently. I mean, almost it provides what I've been saying is, like, this intense clarity on certain issues that maybe I didn't care about or didn't really think about. Now I'm like, no, no. Oh, it matter. Like now, you know, the mama bear instinct. Like, no, no, no. These things really matter.
- [57:07]
A
Yeah. And in conversations with my wife, since she became a mom, she talks a lot more about our education system. She talks a lot more about immigration and the future culture that our kids are going to be raised in. I think it just forces you in a good way to think of those things. What about the role of abortion? Has that played a role in the view towards motherhood?
- [57:25]
G
I think it's the biggest thing that the feminists, they had to. Motherhood had to be oppressive to justify abortion. Right. You have to paint it as this horrific thing. Therefore, the kid, you have to allow that. And so I think that was probably the biggest motivating factor. Even today, when these women are seeing. Still fighting with me in the comment sections, they always bring it back to abortion. And so we can't have compulsory motherhood is what they keep saying. Like, well, that means abortion. Like, they're talking about abortion there and obviously fundamentally disagree with that idea and break that down. But, yeah, they had to bring in abortion, so they had to sell motherhood as a bad thing to allow that.
- [57:59]
A
I think that's a fascinating correlation there. You also have another piece up on the site that I want to get to, because I know I talk on the show a good bit about the. I'll say, the crunchy health mindset that my wife has ingratiated into me in our household. And I've loved it. I've never felt better than when I eat the real food that she brings into our household. You've got a piece on the site. You talk about how America's food system has turned us into lab rats.
- [58:26]
G
Yeah.
- [58:26]
A
What do you mean by that?
- [58:27]
G
Unintentionally, I think, at least I try to hope that it's not intentional. But there has been, over the last, I'd say about a century, this transformation in these additives and things added into our diet that we never agreed to. We never stopped and thought, you know, is this okay long term? And now, years later, we're starting to see the ramifications. And all these companies start to remove the chemicals and remove the seed oils and preservatives. Cause a lot of these things. From the dawn of time, we weren't eating, like, it's that simple. We were eating whole foods, and now all of a sudden, we're eating whole food plus list of ingredients that no one knows the name of. And so, yeah, I think people are starting to have this awakening. I am too, in my household, Adam, the same thing. He kind of been forced into some of this, and now he's like, wow, I feel better. I'm like, see, it actually works. And so, yeah, we just kind of dove into that and explored what was added, what's going on, and how we can change our diets to help ourselves.
- [59:13]
A
How do you change it? What's the starting point for someone at home who's like, if I go into my pantry right now, it's all ultra processed foods. It's all just crap in my freezer. How do I start making incremental changes? Like, what did you do and what should the average person do?
- [59:26]
G
I would say start with the seed oil. Because where there's seed oils, there's often all the other ingredients that we would also say is not good for you. So seed oils. That's what Adam and I did when we started this kind of rabbit hole and. Cause it took a couple years to really switch our diets, but we would identify seed oils and it would make us start to look at different brands or maybe look organic. And then very quickly now, we go through our pantry, and we're like, wow, actually, we did it. There's still processed food in there. It's not like you were solely living off of vegetables, but there are healthy alternatives to almost every snack food. Everything that you love, so you don't have to give and be like, oh, I eat healthy. No, it's still fun. And now that the movement has really taken, you know, taken up, like, it's starting to work now, brands are trying to accommodate for that. So even your favorite brands are trying to be like, well, actually, we don't have red dye 40 anymore. And it's like, great. That's what we want this to do, you know, so we don't have to forever give up. I don't know. Doritos, even though they're not that good.
- [60:15]
A
Well, hold on. I'm not gonna stand for Doritos slander. I'm an 8020 guy where 80% of the time, I will eat good stuff, but I still want my occasional Frosted Flakes bowl.
- [60:25]
G
And that's fine. You're not gonna die over that. But again, it's just the. The framework of how you view your food has to change.
- [60:31]
A
I will occasionally eat a Taco Bell taco if our crew brings it on set and forces me to eat it in the middle of a cyclospora outbreak. I'm fine, guys. Okay. It's been a month. I think almost a month, and I'm good. I have to ask you a question about a topic that I don't know if you're even ready to talk about.
- [60:46]
G
Okay. Okay.
- [60:46]
A
You posted on your Instagram story something that got my wheels turning about pigs. And you were saying, y', all, I went down the rabbit hole on pigs and eating pork. Is anyone else concerned? What are you talking about?
- [60:58]
G
Okay, well, I just learned this, so this is one of my future deep dives on the show, because this is a hot topic also to even, like, discuss anything like this. Cause I love bacon. I eat pork. Like, never thought twice about.
- [61:07]
A
I eat bacon the last three mornings.
- [61:08]
G
Yes, yes. But I have recently discovered that there are a lot more toxins in pork in general, kind of regardless of how they're raised, by the inherent way that pigs don't even, like, release their toxins. They don't sweat. There's certain elements of the pig itself that. That is dirty, regardless of everything. Didn't want to care about that, but kind of accidentally started reading about it, and I'm like, oh, shoot, maybe I shouldn't be eating pork. And there's a lot of people who actually believe that. And so I've started to go down that rabbit hole.
- [61:32]
A
Okay, parasites. Are you gonna go kosher?
- [61:34]
E
I don't.
- [61:36]
G
I can't envision a world where I don't have a bacon, egg, and cheese some mornings. But I am trying to reduce my bacon intake because of the potential parasite.
- [61:43]
A
Well, you were talking earlier about how eating the way that maybe our ancestors ate. I'm just gonna tell myself that my ancestors have been eating pigs for centuries. And, you know. Yeah, it brought us here. And I'm honoring my ancestral heritage by continuing to eat pigs.
- [61:58]
G
I respect that. Yeah, I respect.
- [62:00]
A
I'm putting my blinders on. I'm not. I will read and watch the content you put out.
- [62:05]
G
Great. Thank you.
- [62:06]
A
That's the support and that's the bond we have as daily wire hosts. However, I will not watch this one.
- [62:10]
G
Yeah.
- [62:10]
A
Because I don't want to know.
- [62:11]
G
Nope. That's what I think. Sometimes it's better not to know certain things. And I, like, want to reverse the rabbit hole that I've definitely.
- [62:17]
A
I don't wanna know. Before we let you go, what's the latest thing you're working on? Where can people find it? For those who are interested?
- [62:22]
G
Yeah, we're working on a fun piece. It's coming out next week on the Savannah Bananas, which is very fun. And that's over at regenconrad on YouTube and will be everywhere else as well where we stream. But, yeah, we're working on some fun kind of deep dives into the Internet sensation that is these Savannah Bananas.
- [62:36]
A
They are huge. I hope you didn't have to pay for a ticket. Cause they sell out very quickly. But they keep them cheap. I know intentionally cheap.
- [62:43]
G
But I was on a wait list for, like, three years, so we didn't get it.
- [62:45]
A
It's like getting into the Masters. Reagan, great to see you as always. Thank you for coming in.
- [62:49]
G
Of course. Thanks for having me.
- [62:50]
A
That was Raegan Conrad, and this was Wired In. Thank you guys all so much for watching. If you're on Apple or Spotify and you want the show to continue, head over to DailyWire.com subscribe and join our live chat, which we're gonna be getting to right now. Thank you guys so much for watching.